SITEC ITSM Draft RFP Question Responses - Posted To FBO

A B C

Reference Question Response

Is the ITSM contract going to replace both the TACLAN contract with iGov Technologies and the EITC contract with L-3 Communications?

No. The ITSM will support the ITMO in managing the service delivery and governance requirements of all of the contracts awarded under the SITEC umbrella of contracts. The Service

Desk CLIN within the ITSM contract will replace both EITC and TACLAN Service Desks. All other requirements currently provided in the EITC and TACLAN contracts will be addressed in the other Service Area contracts under SITEC.

Will the Government provide further definition of the six Service

Areas, and/or any indication of the elements of the SOW and objectives?

Further definition will be provided with the release of the

Draft RFPs for each Service Area.

How are the six Service Areas contracted for today, and who are the incumbent(s) for each area?

The contracts currently supporting the efforts offered under the SITEC umbrella are being accomplished by L-3 and iGov.

What schedule will the Government pursue for the contracting actions that will support each of the six Service Areas

This information was provided in the Industry Day slides available on FedBizOps.

I was looking over the material in the DRFP and had a question on

Attch 3 Policy References. Is one able to get a copy of the SOCOM regulations listed? If so, how would you go about doing?

The Bidders Library will contain key policy references;

additional policies will be accessible to the awardee in the transition phase.

How can I obtain a list of the people that are signed up for the

Industry Days?

The attendee list has been published on FBO.Gov.

Can you confirm whether TACLAN will fall under SITEC or be a separate procurement?

TACLAN will fall under SITEC as a separate small business set aside contract.

Can you tell me what level of security clearance will be required for the SITEC program?

A majority of support personnel require TS-SCI clearances.

Is the Primary Support Software, BMC Remedy ARS v6.3 and ITSM v7.1 included in consideration for upgrade in this solicitation?

No - current operational solutions will be continued at the outset of SITEC.

Are the requirements under the EITC Contract which expires on

3/31/2011 being moved into the requirements of the ITSM RFP that is being released in Wave 1?

Some of the requirements currently being supported by EITC

(Service Desk) will be included in the ITSM RFP.

A B C

Reference Question Response

Who is the decision maker on what type of equipment is procured?

For instance, if there was a need for additional SAN storage capacity, would the decision on what brand / model / capability be made by the Data Center Services prime contractor, the ITSMP prime contractor, the ETI Office, or someone else?

The service provider will provide input, but the final decision regarding technologies rests solely with the Government.

Have you considered a government on-ramp program to support

ITIL education and training for the ITSMO? It seems that this would help the government meet the long-term independence goals of the office, but would not fall under the ITSMP contracts.

The Government is evaluating its ongoing training requirements.

The Tower limitation makes sense for the large businesses that decide to Prime; it does not make sense for those small businesses that choose to subcontract. One of the stated goals of SITEC is to increase small business participation in SOCOM. Limiting the number of awards a small business can have as a subcontractor goes counter to this goal, especially if the small business is consistently proposed as a minor subcontractor. As a small business owner seeking a minor subcontracting role on SITEC, I’d like to respectfully request that you reconsider this limit for small businesses in subcontracting roles.

The Government is considering all comments provided by industry regarding the award limitations. The final SITEC

RFPs will include the appropriate provisions and clauses to meet USSOCOMs intent consistent with applicable law and policy.

Sec H Clause H.6 Ordering Procedure" Observation: Only Bronze users can be upgraded to Gold as worded. Recommendation: Change wording to “…upgrade individual bronze or silver users to Gold under CLINs…” Rationale:

Silver users may also require upgrade to Gold.

Standard bronze level service will be provided for all users.

The Government may order upgraded service to the silver level or gold level for individual users. If an individual is changed from silver to gold status they will be removed from the silver service group.

Reference Question Response

Section B CLINs x006 Observation: As worked, we understand the Government to desire

ETI proposals and resultant task orders to be executed at cost.

While proposal preparation at cost is fair and reasonable, execution of any resulting task orders should be at other than cost.

Recommendation: Add a separate CLIN(s), either at the contract level or as part of the annual task CLIN structure, that can support

FFP or cost-reimbursable ETI implementation. FFP should be used where requirements and desired outcomes are well-defined, while cost-reimbursable should be used where requirements or outcomes are either undefined or require substantial refinement. Rationale:

Implementation activities such as ETI task orders are not normally accomplished at cost by contractors and are more appropriate to a more traditional cost structure such as FFP or cost-reimbursable.

Update: CLINs x006 have to do with hardware/software purchases per Industry Day.

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI will be accomplished as a separate contract under the SITEC acquisition umbrella.

Sec H Clause H.6 Ordering Procedure Observation: CLIN 7008 is not included in Section B. Transition Out services are included under CLIN 7009 of Section B.

Recommendation: Update reference in Section H.6.

CLIN 7009 will be changed to 7008 in the final RFP.

Sec H Clause H.7 CONTRACT INCENTIVES Observation: Ineligibility for subsequent award terms due to failure to obtain a previous award term is not necessarily in the best interest of the Government. Recommendation: Create a sliding timeframe for award term extensions and incentive cash awards that allow a contractor who meets minimum acceptable service levels but fails to meet award term criteria for a single year. In such cases, the contractor should retain eligibility for subsequent award terms should performance improve to a level exceeding minimum acceptable service levels. Failure to achieve the award term criteria for two subsequent years should render the contractor ineligible for future award term incentives, providing a strong rationale to the contractor to improve performance. Any year where the minimum acceptable service level is not achieved should render the contractor ineligible for future award term incentives. Rationale:

The Government is committed to the current incentive structure. The contract is structured to reward the contractor for performance well beyond minimum acceptable service levels throughout the contract.

Performance that meets or barely exceeds acceptable service levels will not be rewarded. It is also structured to allow adequate time to recompete the acquisition when the contract end date is determine.

Reference Question Response

Sec H Clause H.6 Ordering Procedure and

H.9 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

* Observation: H.6 indicates the contractor will submit a proposal for any approved Evolutionary Technology Insertion initiative. H.9 references a contractor-submitted Information Technology Plan.

The requirements for defining an execution work under the x006

CLINs is unclear. Recommendation: Clarify the process for defining, approving, proposing, and executing Evolutionary Technology

Insertion initiatives. Rationale: Clarity in this process now will ensure that activities under CLINx x006 can be conducted without confusion or opportunity for disagreement between the contractor and the Government.

ETI has been removed from the ITSM contract. Clause H.9 details the process for obtaining CIO approval to deploy hardware or software on the enterprise. Clause H.9 has been revised for clarification.

Sections B, F & L * Observation: The base term does not appear to align with the

CLIN structure or Section F. For example, CLIN 1003 incorporates 12 units of one month each while base term is defined in L.1.5 as lasting 30 months. Recommendation: Align CLIN structure, Section

F, Section L.1.5 and any other references to contract performance periods.

The Base Ordering period of the contract covers 30 months of effort and includes CLINs 0001-3007

Observation: The ITMO contractor will not be providing outsourced managed IT services. Recommendation: Preference is to remove the reference. An alternate recommendation would be to limit the type of outsourced managed IT services to those relevant to this procurement, i.e., Service Desk. Rationale: While this is a valid measure for performing tasks under the service towers, the ITMO contractor will be supporting the Government in managing the service towers and this measure has limited relevance in that scenario.

The Government will review subject annotation to ensure that Service Desk is documented.

Section L The cited CLINs do not align with Section B. Recommendation:

Update CLIN numbers shown here and later in L.1.14 I-E to align with Section B.

The Government will correct the error in the final RFP.

Reference Question Response

Observation: It is unclear why the Government is requiring an ITIL

Manager’s Certification in IT Service Management that was obtained within the last twelve months. Recommendation: Change requirement to require an ITIL v3 Managers Certification in IT

Service Management regardless of when obtained. Rationale: ITIL v3 is the current ITIL revision standard and it is not a standard that evolves between major releases in terms of obtaining certification.

There does not appear to be a value-add to the Government for having that certification obtained within the last twelve months.

The Government will correct the error in the final RFP.

Observation: The QCP appears to count against the 50 page limit for this volume. Recommendation: Exempt the QCP from the 50 page volume limit. Rationale: An adequate QCP will consume a significant portion of the 50 page volume limit, leaving the

Government with less information elsewhere within the volume with which to evaluate potential solution providers.

The Government will review page limitations and address in the final RFP.

Observation: It is unclear if the complete L.14.II-W Transition In

Project Plan is exempt for the volume page limits or only the Gantt

Chart. Recommendation: Clarification requested.

The Government will review page limitations and address in the final RFP.

Observation: The five past performance references will use the allotted 25 pages, leaving no room for the TOC and Summary Page.

Recommendation: Exclude the TOC from page counts and change the Volume III page limit to 26 pages.

The Government will review page limitations and address in the final RFP.

Observation: This cost evaluation criteria seem to indicate that

Technology Insertion CLINs (x006) will allow overhead and G&A to be applied while Sections B and H indicate that these CLINs will be cost-based CLINs. Recommendation: Clarify the basis for

Technology Insertion CLINs.

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI will be accomplished as a separate contract under the SITEC acquisition umbrella.

Reference Question Response

Observation: In Para 10.1- there is uncertainty of the required certifications required in the Transition phase. Recommendation:

Define the certifications required for the Transition phase

The Government has identified certification requirements for the contract in Section L.

Observations: Performance volume is not bounded for the

USSOCOM Service Desk. Recommendations: For the current 74,000 users, provide measure that scope out the level of effort of the

Service Desk.

The estimated service desk support requirement is for

56,000 users. Offerors will be required to pride range pricing for 45,000-99,999 users in accordance with Section J

Attachment 1 Service Desk Pricing. Detailed information regarding performance volume will be included in the

Bidder's Library.

Reference Question Response

Observations: The Government’s desire to develop accountability for the various Service Areas through the SITEC vehicle, and understand that the SITEC Contractor plays a pivotal role in ensuring the ITMO receives optimized, flexible, and scalable services.

Rationale: SLAs, depending on the final weighting factors, hold the

SITEC Contractor responsible for services outside of its control. This creates a situation where the SITEC Contractor could be financially penalized for Service Areas being provided by another contractor.

This could lead to offerors including additional management costs in their proposals, leading to increased pricing for the Government.

Recommendation: (A) excluding these SLAs from the monthly performance score, and including these SLAs and corresponding incentives and disincentives with each IT Service Area Provider

(ITSMP) individually; or (B) reflecting the lack of control over these

SLAs by using a greatly reduced weighting factor commensurate with the SITEC Contractor’s management control. Following are the

SLAs we have identified that cut across frameworks, potentially presenting governance concerns:

- A1-4 Service Improvement Plan -Dependent on ITSMP input for milestones and action items.

- A1-5 Incident Monitoring - Dependent on ITSMPs for implementing lessons-learned at the Service Desk. SITEC Contractor can share knowledge, but each ITSMP ultimately executes the action plan.

- A1-6 Transition Management - Dependent on ITSMPs for tower-level transition execution.

- A2-1 End User Support Request - Dependent on ITSMPs to exceed target SLAs.

The Government is committed to ensuring that each individual vendor as well as all vendors combined are successful in delivering IT services to Command. It is essential that all vendors to work together and will be measured accordingly.

Reference Question Response

Section L Page 152 The draft RFP for the ITSMP identifies key personnel as a

Contract/Financial Manager, Program Manager, Transition

Manager, Integration Manager, Service Desk Manager, and also includes key personnel as technical points-of-contact for each of the identified service areas (Service Desk Services; Data Center Services;

Network Services; Desktop and Distributed Computing Services;

Application Management Services; Specialty Services; and IT

Production Services). Page 152 of the draft RFP states that support for the service areas will be obtained through individual contracts

The ITMO will include Government IT Service Delivery

Managers for each of the identified IT Service Areas. We expect that the ITSM bidders will have an understanding of contractor support required to support the Government's management of IT service delivery.

Tower: C4I Production (aka TACLAN)

Will the government please confirm that the TACLAN production contract will contain systems integration work?

Systems Integration is a key component of all IT Production efforts.

Tower: C4I Production (aka TACLAN)

Will the government please identify the expected percentage of services work within the TACLAN production? What is the historical cost (percentage) and projected cost (percentage) of value-added services within the total TACLAN contract relative to the historical and projected costs of the overall program?

The TACLAN acquisition strategy has not been finalized.

TACLAN requirements will be detailed in the TACLAN RFP.

Tower: C4I Production (aka TACLAN)

The TACLAN support package depicted in the industry day slides appears to contain only data devices (laptops) and networking equipment. Industry understands that converged IP solutions with voice, data and visual information services is the future with data-only being the past. Industry also understands that wireless capabilities in deployed locations is rapidly becoming available with

MARFORPAC already operating wireless SIPRNET packages. Will the

TACLAN production solicitation require the systems integration of voice, data and visual information services into a single converged-

IP solution? Will the TACLAN production contract require the systems integration of JITC-approved and deployable wireless capabilities into the TACLAN package?

The TACLAN acquisition strategy has not been finalized.

TACLAN requirements will be detailed the TACLAN RFP.

Reference Question Response

Tower: C4I Production (aka TACLAN)

Is there a requirement for the contractor’s TACLAN production facility to be located within any specific geographic region?

The TACLAN acquisition strategy has not been finalized.

TACLAN requirements will be detailed the TACLAN RFP.

Tower: C4I Production (aka TACLAN)

Are there any special facility security requirements for the contractor’s TACLAN production facility other than normal facility security to prevent illegal activities (break-in, theft)?

The TACLAN acquisition strategy has not been finalized.

TACLAN requirements will be detailed the TACLAN RFP.

Tower: Data Center

Information technology professionals realize that control of the customer’s wiring closets are critical to maintaining configuration control and high availability of circuits and infrastructure to support the IT infrastructure and end-user service. Allowing access and configuration abilities across multiple “towers” could be disruptive.

Should the Data Center “tower” require internal cabling moves, adds, changes, will that “tower” perform those tasks and have access to the wiring closets, or will all infrastructure moves, adds, and changes be the responsibility of the Distributed Computing

“tower”?

All WAN/LAN engineering and infrastructure requirements will be addressed under the Enterprise Network Service Area contract.

Tower: Distributed Computing

Information technology professionals realize that control of the customer’s wiring closets are critical to maintaining configuration control and high availability of circuits and infrastructure to support the customer’s IT environment and end-user service. Allowing access and configuration abilities across multiple “towers” could be disruptive. Will the Distributed Computing “tower” be responsible for all cabling projects and moves, adds, and changes across the supported locations with support provided to other “towers” codified in the Associate Contractor Agreements?

All WAN/LAN engineering and infrastructure requirements will be addressed under the Enterprise Network Service Area contract.

Reference Question Response

Tower: Specialty Services

Information technology professionals realize that control of the customer’s wiring closets are critical to maintaining configuration control and high availability of circuits and infrastructure to support the customer’s IT environment and end-user service. Allowing access and configuration abilities across multiple “towers” could be disruptive. Will the Specialty Services “tower” be responsible for all cabling projects and moves, adds, and changes across the supported locations with support provided to other “towers” codified in the

Associate Contractor Agreements?

Vendors supporting the Specialty Services Service Area will be responsible for providing all requirements in the other

Service Areas (exception Production) to the affected and defined organizations.

Section: B - Supplies or Services and

Prices

Clause:

Paragraph: Contract Minimum and

Maximum; CLIN 1006

Page: 2, 5 of 167

Comment: The contract maximum is stated as $175M but does not clarify what is included. For example, discussions during Industry

Day indicated that the $40M annual estimated cost for Technology

Insertion [as stated in Volume IV-Cost/Price Proposal, Part IV-E

Overhead Rates] may be in addition to the contract maximum ceiling.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the CLINs included in the $175M maximum ceiling price, and specifically if the $40M technology insertion costs are excluded?

The Contract Maximum is the maximum dollar amount for the base period which will include CLINs 0001- 2007 and

7008. The ceiling amounts may be increased if incentives are earned in accordance with Section H Clause H.7 entitled

"Contract Incentives"

Section: C-PWS

Clause:

Paragraph: 3.4 Deployment of

Contractors

Pages: 29 of 167

Comment: PWS section 3.4 identifies that contractor staff may be required to travel to OCONUS locations, including war zones.

Inclusion of additional related clauses will facilitate contractor insurance carrier coverage in the unlikely event of a claim.

Question: Will the following clauses be applied in the final RFP and on a Task Order basis?

• FAR 52.228-3, Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base

Act)

• FAR 52.228-4, Workers’ Compensation and War Hazard Insurance

Overseas

The final RFP will include FAR 52.228-3, Workers’

Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) in accordance with current guidance.

Reference Question Response

Section: C/PWS

Clause:

Paragraph: 4.0 Capability or Performance

Page: 29 of 167

Comment: Section 4.0 Capability or Performance refers to Section J

Attachment 7 entitled “Roles and Responsibilities” as the guide the

“Contractor” for providing management and support services as specified in the PWS. Attachment 7 contains a series of Roles and

Responsibilities matrixes for the Contractor and Government that include work scope of all contract areas across the SITEC work scope. It is unclear whether the “Contractor” in all cases applies to the ITSM contractor or to the Service Area contractors in service area related requirements.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the meaning of the term “Contractor” in this context? Does Contractor refer to the provider of the service being transitioned or to the ITSM contractor in all cases?

The Government will clarify responsibility within each of the

RFPs.

Section: C/PWS

Clause:

Paragraph: 3.1.1 Contractor Security,

11.0 Services Desk Management Services

Page: 28, 57-61 of 167

Comment: The PWS does not specify location of the USSOCOM

Service Desk, and PWS section 3.1.1 states that the contractor will require access to NIPRNET/SIPRNET computer systems at government and contractor facilities.

Question: Will the Government be providing all facilities required by the Service Desk, or is it acceptable for the contractor to propose use of cleared off-site contractor facilities?

The government will provide facilities for the IT Service Desk capability.

Section: C/PWS

Clause:

Paragraph: 11.0 Services Desk

Management Services

Page: 57-61 of 167

Comment: The Services Desk Management Services section does not provide performance information on current services desk services to enable offerors to properly size the requirements.

Question: As part of the Bidder’s Reference Library contents will the Government be providing current SPOC Service Desk performance information, for example:

• Historical count of calls over the last 365 day period to include peak times, call duration, and call volume?

• Types of calls supported (i.e., hardware/software, single customer/multi-customer, outage/service need)?

• Quantities of all hardware and software supported?

The Government will provide available IT Service Desk data in the Bidder's Library.

Reference Question Response

Section: H, B, and F

Clause:

Paragraph: H.6, CLIN 0001

Page: 2, 71 and 78 of 167

Comment: Section H.6 Ordering Procedures appears to conflict with Section B Supplies/Services and Section F Deliveries or

Performance regarding CIO Support IOC. Section H.6 states that task orders for ITMO and CIO Support IOC under CLIN 0001 will be issued at the time of award, whereas Section B lists only ITMO IOC under

CLIN 0001 and lists CIO IOC as CLIN 1002. Further, Section F states that CIO Support IOC CLIN 1002 period of performance as 01 Oct

2011 to 31 Mar 2012, almost a year after projected contract award

[Section L.1.6—15 September 2010].

Question: Would the Government please clarify:

• Scope of CLIN 0001

• Period of performance of CIO Support IOC CLIN 1002?

A transition period is not required for CIO support. The

Government will revise the final RFP to reflect a 1 APR 2011-

31 Mar 2012 period of performance for CLIN 1002.

Section:

B-Supplies or Services;

C- Descriptions and Specifications;

H-Special Contract Requirements;

L- Instructions

M-Evaluation Factors

Clause:

Paragraph: CLIN 1006; PWS 1.0, 4.7, and

13.0; H-6; L.1.14; M.1.5.2

Pages: 5, 27, 33-34, 67, 78, 150, and 166 of 167

Comment: The draft RFP contains several minor inconsistencies, as follows.

There are subtle differences in item nomenclature within and across

RFP sections. Of main interest are specifically:

• Desktop and Distributed Computing Management Services [PWS

4.7] vs. Distributed Computing Management Services [PWS 1.0]

• C4I Production Support Services [PWS 4.7] vs. IT Production

Support Services [PWS 1.0] and Production Services [L.1.14, Part II-

O].

• Enterprise Technology Insertion (ETI) [PWS 13.0] vs. Evolutionary

Technology Insertion (ETI) [PWS 13.0 and Section B]

Section H.6 Ordering Procedures contains two references that don’t appear to match with related sections:

• Paragraph 17 of Section C/PWS for Evolutionary Technology

Insertion vs. paragraph 13.0

• CLIN 7008 for ITMO Transition-Out Services vs. CLIN 7009

Section M.1.5.2 Probable Cost (PC) contains references to incorrect

CLINs and non-existent paragraphs:

• CLINs listed under the Technology Insertion Cost CLINs include

The Government will address the inconsistencies in the final

RFP.

Reference Question Response

Section: F, H, L

Clause:

Paragraph: F CLIN 0001, H.6, L.1.6

Page: 71, 78, and 144 of 167

Comment: Section L.1.6 states the estimated date of contract award as 15 September 2010, whereas elsewhere in the solicitation the contract start date is given as 15 October 2010. Also, Section

H.6 Ordering Procedures states that task orders for ITMO and CIO

Support IOC under CLIN 0001 will be issued at the time of award, which appears to conflict with Section F Deliveries CLIN 0001period of performance start date of 15 October. Because of differences between the terms and dates for “award date” and “start date” it is not clear when the contract will be awarded and when work will be started.

Question: Would the Government please clarify award date and start date?

The Government will provide clarification in the final RFP.

Section: I

Clause: 52.216-18 and 5652.201-9002

Paragraph: 52.216-18 (c)

Page: 92, 128 of 167

Comment: The second sentence of paragraph (c) of clause 52.216-

18 Ordering reads “Orders may be issued orally, by facsimile, or by electronic commerce methods only if authorized in the Schedule.”

During Industry Day several government presenters made specific reference to ensuring proper authorization from the government before the contractor performs any work. Additionally, the paragraph covering clause 5652.201-9002 which states that contractors shall not comply with orders unless in writing seems to contradict the wording in 52.216-18 (c).

Question: Would the Government please clarify the statement about orders issued orally and the apparent discrepancy with clause

5652.201-9002?

FAR 52.216-18 calls out procedures that allow the government to issue oral task or delivery orders. The clause does not authorize oral change orders in accordance issued in accordance with 52.243-1 and 52.243-2. Change orders must be by written direction in accordance with 5652.201-

9002.

Section: I

Clause: 52.216-18 Ordering

Paragraph: 52.216-18 (a)

Page: 92 of 167

Comment: The Ordering clause states that orders may be issued from Contract Award through 31 March 2013. That is considerably shorter than the contract performance period stated in Section F.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the ordering period?

The Ordering clause includes the base ordering period of the contract. This period may be extended if the contractor earns the term incentives in accordance with Section H

Clause H.7 entitle "Contract Incentives"

Reference Question Response

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.13, Formats

Page: 147 of 167

Comment: The format requirement for font size allows for no less than Times New Roman 10 for spreadsheets, tables, and graphics.

Times New Roman is typically a font type of choice for use when content is mainly text. It applies well for tables. It does not present as well for spreadsheets and text in graphics. The use of Arial font for spreadsheets (numeric) and text in graphics improves appearance and readability.

Question: Would the Government consider a standard graphics font—Arial 9—as an acceptable, equivalent-sized Times New Roman

10 replacement for graphics text and spreadsheets?

The Government will consider the alternative font size recommendation and publish the font size requirement in the final RFP.

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14, I-A

Page: 147 of 167

Comment: Volume I – Qualifying Criteria/I-A Offeror Profile and

Performance Capabilities requires offerors to submit “Locations in the USA” and “International Locations,” but doesn’t specify the level of detail desired.

Question: Would the Government please clarify if City and State and number of offices per city is sufficient information for US, and similarly City and Country for international locations?

The city and state or city and country location will suffice.

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14

Page: 148 of 167

Comment: The Volume II Technical/Management Proposal page count of 50 pages does not appear to allow sufficient pages to properly address the requirements set for the volume, especially considering the format requirement for one and one half spacing on a page. There are 23 Section L requirements (II-A through II-W) in

Volume II that include: (i) more than 60 separate bulleted sub-requirements, (ii) more than an additional 80 referenced PWS sub-element requirements, and (iii) 90 pages of Roles and

Responsibilities matrixes.

Question: Would the Government raise the Volume II page count to

75 pages to enable offerors to comply with Section L requirement to address L.1.14 content and be specific, detailed, and complete?

The Government will review page limitations and address in the final RFP.

Reference Question Response

Section: : L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14 I-E

Page: 148 of 167

Comment: Volume I – Qualifying Criteria/I-E Small Business

Subcontracting contains requirements that are unclear and different from statements made during the recent Industry Day presentations:

• Small business goal of 75% of technology insertion “materials” seems less manageable than a goal of 75% of technology insertion

“dollars”

• Small business goal of 75% doesn’t specify if that is for the total of all technology insertion or for 75% of subcontracted technology insertion

• Socioeconomic small business categories and goals appears inconsistent with information released during Industry Day that suggested Socioeconomic goals would only be established for the

Service Area (Tower) contracts.

• CLIN series X008 is listed instead of X006 used elsewhere in the

RFP in reference to Technology Insertion.

Question: Would the government please consider modifying item I-

E requirements to:

• Change the small business goal to 75% of technology insertion dollars?

• Clarify if the 75% goal is for total of subcontracted effort in accordance with FAR 52.219-9?

• “Clarify if the socioeconomic category goals are subsets of the small business 75% technology insertion goal or total small business

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI

Reference Question Response

Section: : L, M

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14 I-E, M.1.5.2

Page: 155 and 166 of 167

Comment: The technology insertion CLINs are identified as material costs that allow for material overhead and G&A rates. Technology insertion areas may require management or oversight of the material acquired under this CLIN. It is unclear if there is any direct labor associated with technology insertion that would be required and delivered as direct labor hours either by the ITSM contractor or the small business technology insertion providers.

Question: Would the Government please clarify:

• If the intent is to acquire more than equipment under this CLIN, for example to acquire specialized services or capabilities?

• If so, will the Government consider a CPFF or CPAF structure?

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI will be accomplished as a separate contract under the SITEC acquisition umbrella.

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14, Part II-T

Page: 152 of 167

Comment: The last sentence of Part II-T Key Personnel Resumes states “Note: At least one of the above resumes must include an individual who has received, within the last twelve months, an ITIL

Manager’s certification in IT Service Management”. “Manager” is an ITILV2 certification level. ITILV3 certification levels are:

Foundation, Intermediate, Expert and Master.

Question:

Will the Government accept an ITILV3 Intermediate certification in the V3 Lifecycle Stream as an equivalent to ITIL Manager’s certification in IT Service Management (ITILV2)?

The Government will clarify this requirement in the final RFP.

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14, Part II-W Transition

Planning

Page: 153 of 167

Comment: Section L.1.14 Part II-W Transition Planning does not identify its related PWS requirements. There are two transition related PWS areas: 9.0 ITMO Transition and 10.0 IT Service Area

Transition.

Question: Would the Government please clarify if the Part II-W

Transition Planning section refers to 9.0 ITMO Transition work scope and that detailed project planning of 10.0 IT Service Area Transition activities will be post-award work effort not subject to a Part II-W proposal response?

The Government will clarify this requirement in the final RFP.

Reference Question Response

Section: L

Clause:

Paragraph: L.1.14, Part IV-C

Page: 155 of 167

Comment: For pricing IT Service Desk Operations, Section L.1.14

Part IV-D for Bronze IT Service Desk Operations CLINs specifies using

Section J Attachment 1 Service Desk Pricing along with the notation

“Use provided pricing matrix.” Part IV-C Silver and Bronze CLINs has the same notation “Use provided pricing matrix,” but there is no corresponding pricing matrix attachment. Attachment 1 contains only Bronze tables.

Question: Would the Government please clarify the maximum number of users offerors are to price for Silver and Gold Service

Desk operations?

May offerors assume Attachment 1 Service Desk Pricing may be used for both Silver and Gold IT Service Desk Operations, with tailoring of increments in accordance with Part IV-C instructions for

Silver and Gold?

The Government will identify the maximum number of users in the final RFP. The maximum in the RFP and contract will reflect the maximum number of user months that can be ordered during a year. A user month will equal 1 month of service for 1 user. Bronze service will have separate prices with different unit prices for different ranges of users. Silver and gold upgrades will have a constant unit price to upgrade bronze service.

Section: M, L

Clause:

Paragraph: M.1.5.2, L.1.14 Part IV-E

Page: 155, 166 of 167

Comment: Section M Probable Cost (PC) paragraph for Travel Costs

CLINs does not include a statement regarding material overhead and G&A rates similar to that for Technology Insertion CLINs and as also required in Section L.1.14 Part IV-E Overhead Rates: “…provide material overhead and General and Administrative rates…”.

Question: Would the Government please clarify if material overhead and G&A rates are to be applied to Travel Costs CLINs?

The Government will only allow travel costs incurred in accordance with the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR) to be reimbursed under the contract. Material Overhead and G&A will not be reimbursed under the CLIN unless allowed in accordance with the JTR.

Section: Industry Day

Clause: N/A

Paragraph: N/A

Page: N/A

Comment: During the Industry Day Q&A session on Day 2, a question was asked about specific existing EITC Task Order support to several SOCOM Programs of Record (SOJICC and other were mentioned). The government indicated that the work in these task orders would be assumed by the ITSM Partner.

Question: Will the government provide a mapping of existing EITC task orders to the SITEC service area contracts that will assume the work?

No. The Government has over 100 active task orders under

EITC. Many of these task orders will cross over SITEC IT

Service Areas. Since the approach to both vehicles differ significantly, there is no direct alignment between current

Task Orders and future work under SITEC.

Reference Question Response

Section: Industry Day Presentations Day

1, Clause: N/A

Paragraph: N/A

Page: PowerPoint Slides: 25-30

Comment: Industry Day presentations laid-out the timeline for

USSOCOM’s follow-on acquisition strategy to the current EITC contract. There appears to be some risk for the government and

ITSM contractor in executing a successful transition of multiple efforts in a near simultaneous fashion.

Question: Would the government consider adjusting the timeline for Wave 2 and Wave 3 contracts, either by delaying the Wave 2 and Wave 3 schedules by 90 days across the board, by delaying

Wave 2 by 60 days and Wave 3 by a further 60 days (i.e. 120 days in total) or by potentially staggering each service area (tower) contract schedules so they are not all transitioning at the same time?

The Government intends to work towards the publish schedule. Final projected award dates will be included in the

RFPs for the individual IT Service Areas.

DRFP /

Section B

CLINs X003 IT Service Desk Operation

(Bronze)

pp. 4, 7, 11, 14, 18, 22

Unit of measure is “Each per Month” with a quantity of 12 per year.

Unit price is defined as “Service for one month for all SIE users priced in accordance with and Section J Attachment 1…”. The referenced attachment requires unit pricing for several different quantity bands. Is there a specific “band” unit price that should be used to populate Section B?

The offerors shall provide CLIN X003 prices in accordance with Section L in the format prescribed in Section J

Attachment 1 Entitled “Service Desk Pricing.” No Section B inputs are required for these CLINs.

DRFP, Section B, CLINs X004, pp.

4,8,11,15,18,22 The X004 CLIN series - IT Service Desk Operation (Silver) - identifies the unit of measure as upgraded service for one month for 500 users with a maximum quantity of 1,200 per year, which translates into 100 orders for 500 user upgrade (50,000 user max). Should offerors include a "per user" price adjustment factor for situations where upgrade requirements do not equate to multiples of 500?

The RFP as been revised to require offerors to provide per user silver service prices.

DRFP /

Section B

All CPIF CLINs

Are there upper and lower limits to the cost sharing ratios in the

Incentive Fee CLINs? Do we assume that the lower limit should be zero?

The Government is considering including share ratio limits in the RFP. If the Government decides to implement share ratio limits they will publish them in the final RFP.

DRFP /

C.4.0

, p. 29

Regarding contractor-provided management support, does this include on-site resources at all locations specified, and if so, will the

Government provide adequate workspace?

The Government will provide workspace at all locations specified for on site personnel.

Reference Question Response

DRFP /

C.3.3

, p.29

Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.4.6

,p. 32

Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.4.6

,p. 32

Regarding the need for the Service Desk to forward IMAC requests to the appropriate fulfillment group, please provide a list of all current fulfillment groups?

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.4.6

,p. 32 para 2

Regarding the requirement, “The Service Desk shall handle all incoming IT related service issues (e.g. incidents, problems, and service requests),” Please provide the volumes of backlog tickets

(average per day, week and month) for incidents, problems and service requests (IMACS/Projects)?

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.8.2 p. 36 Please provide a list of the GFE application software/tools and version numbers?

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.10.0 p. 39 Please provide a graphic or narrative overview of the current EITC model that will be replaced by enterprise-wide end-user single-point-of-contact?

An overview of the current EITC model is not available. The

Government desires offerors to propose approaches consistent with the SITEC model without regard to the existing contract model.

DRFP /

C.10.5.10 p. 43 Please define “Compliance Management.” For example, the term

“Compliance Management” appears to address compliance generally. Does it also cover compliance with security “laws, regulations, mandates, and contractual requirements?”

The Government will clarify in the final RFP.

DRFP /

C.10.5.10 p. 43 Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /, p. 45

C.10.6.2 Regarding the statement, “USSOCOM applications, associated infrastructure and Voice Communications Services will receive DR

Services according to USSOCOM’s Business Continuity Plan,” please provide a copy of this Plan.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

Reference Question Response

DRFP /

C.10.6.9 p. 48 para 1

Regarding the statement, “The contractor shall develop and document the policies, procedures, and documentation for creating or modifying the testing and production environments of any IT service or system,” Please identify the current testing and production environments including number of systems by O/S

(including current release level), Manufacturer, and Model. Please provide a copy of the current policies, procedures and processes.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.10.7.9 p. 53 Please provide an understanding of the current knowledge management lifecycle for knowledgebase content, if/as imposed and/or negotiated through government for approval?

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.10.8.4 p. 55 para 1

Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.11.0 p. 57 Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.11.1 p. 59 Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.11.4 p. 60 Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.11.5 p. 61 Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.12.1 p. 62-63 Regarding “The Contractor shall support the following:…” five items are then listed. Items 1-3 are treated in Sections 12.1.1-12.1.3, but items 4-5 (Host-Based Security System Support Services and IA

Portal Engineering Support Services, respectively) are not mentioned again in the PWS. If the Contractor is required to support items 4 and 5, please provide additional information and requirements regarding support of these items?

The Government will provide clarification in the final RFP.

Reference Question Response

DRFP /

C.12.1.2 p. 64 Item # 13 states: “Perform annual network architecture review to assess the effectiveness of sensor placement.” Please identify the type(s) of sensor.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.12.1.3 p. 65

#3

Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.12.1.3 p. 65

#4

Please provide a list of all government furnished equipment, software, source code, data, and process documentation.

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.12.1.3

pp. 64-65

“The Contractor shall:…1. Perform all actions associated with proper

Certification and Accreditation of information technologies for all

USSOCOM systems” (a) How many such systems are there? How many individual C&A packages? (b) Which C&A standards were used, for how many systems? (c) How many USSSOCOM systems are there for each mission assurance category-confidentiality level pair? (d) When were the systems last accredited, by year, and when are they due to be reaccredited? (e) Are there any C&A activities that the ITSM Contractor will assume at transition?

The Government will provide available data in the Bidder's

Library.

DRFP /

C.12.1.3

p. 64 para 1

Regarding the statement, “The Contractor shall support the J6/CIO

Certification and Accreditation functions, tasks, and activities…” Are

ISO 20000, ISO 9001, ISO 27000, or CMMI (Development or

Services) certifications part of the J6/CIO Certification and

Accreditation functions, tasks, or activities?

The Government's requirement for certification are identified in Section L. "Certification and Accreditation" are related to Information Assurance Activities and not industry standard certifications.

DRFP /

C.13.0

p. 68

Is the Evolutionary Technology Insertion meant for hardware acquisition only, or are services part of this requirement? If services are included, what is the line of demarcation between “ETI” services and other technical services such as “architecture” and “system engineering”?

What is the scope of ETI services performed by the ITSM contractor

vs. the other SITEC Service Area contractors?

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI

Reference Question Response

DRFP /

H.6

p. 78

RFP H.6 states that: “… the contractor shall submit a proposal for approved Evolutionary Technology Insertion recommendations.

The proposal shall be on a cost basis. If the proposal is acceptable the Contracting Officer will issue a task order for the effort under

CLINs 1006, 2006, 3006, 4006, 5006, or 6006.”

Please confirm that this Evolutionary Technology Insertion proposal is to be submitted by the ITSM contractor after contract award, and not as part of initial ITSM proposal response.

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI will be accomplished as a separate contract under the SITEC acquisition umbrella.

H.7 p.78 Are the 5% incentive amounts for Items 5 and 6 fixed amounts, or are these subject to negotiation in either direction?

The final RFP will contain dollar amounts for the incentives based on Government estimate.

DRFP /

H.12

L.1.12 , Vol. l-E

p. 82

p. 148

Section H.12 makes reference to a 75% subcontracting mandate for the Evolutionary Technology Insertion for CLINS 1006, 2006, 3006, 4006, 5006 and 6006. However, in Section L, Vol. I-E, there is reference to the 75% Technology Insertion for materials acquired under CLINS 1008, 2008, 3008, 4008, 5008, and 6008. Question:

Are both references for the same Evolutionary Technology

Insertion, or are these two different tasks? There is no reference to

CLINS 1008, 2008, 3008, 4008, 5008, and 6008 in the B Tables;

please clarify.

The ETI effort has been removed from the ITSM tower. ETI will be accomplished as a separate contract under the SITEC acquisition umbrella.

DRFP/

H.12

DRFP /

L.1.14 , Vol. I-E

Industry Day comments p. 83 para 1

p. 151

H.12 indicates that the “Contractor shall subcontract seventy five percent of the cost incurred for Evolutionary Technology Insertion to Small Business.”

Section L requires a Small Business Subcontracting Plan and shows four Socioeconomic categories.

During Industry Day, SOCOM indicated that the 75% small business requirement for ETI was the only such requirement.

Please clarify whether there are any small business goals other than the 75% Small Business target for ETI.

As a result of the removal of the ETI effort large businesses will now be required to have small business subcontracting plan goals that exceed the minimum goals contained in section L of the RFP. The goals will be based on subcontracted dollars only.

Reference Question Response

DRFP /

Clauses Incorporated 5652.237-9001 Key

Personnel p. 133

Are there any specific location requirements for the Key Personnel? The Government will provide workspace at all locations specified for on site personnel.

DRFP /

L - Clauses Incorporated. 160 Regarding sections 52.215-20, Requirements For Cost or Pricing

Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data, 52.215-20

ALTERNATE I, 52.215-20 ALTERNATE III and 5652.215-9010 Cost and

Pricing Data Not Required.

Please clarify what, if any, cost and pricing data is required. Please confirm whether SOCOM wants Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408. This is an unusual requirement and does not add to the information otherwise required in Section L.

Offerors will provide other than cost and pricing information in accordance with section L. When proposing cost estimates offerors are expected to use the format in Table

15-2 of FAR 1.408.

DRFP/

Sec. L, Vol. II, II-R, II-S, II-V, II-W p. 148, 150,151, 152, 153

The page limits for the Technical/Management Proposal is stated at

50 pages. Per the stated requirements, the Technical/Management response must include a detailed Management Plan, Staffing Plan, Quality Control Plan and Transition Plan. To include the detailed plans as part of Volume II and stay within the 50 page limit does not allow adequate space to respond in sufficient detail. Would the

Government exclude the detailed Management,…