Attachment 7 - QA_PMOSS_20260616.pdf

Question # RFP Document, page number, and reference Question Answer

Attachment 4 Proposal Submission Instructions - Page 4 - L1.4

If one partner in a Joint Venture (JV) has achieved CMMC Level 2 Third-Party Certification, can the JV be considered certified as well, or must the JV obtain its own certification?

All members within the JV will have access to Federal Contract Information (FCI) or Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) during contract performance. Therefore, if the JV does not have its own CMMC certification, all members of the JV must meet the CMMC requirements.

Attachment 4 - Submission Instructions pg 4, L1.3

Will the government consider accepting CMMC Lvl2 self-certification? The Government has reviewed the CMMC requirement and has determined CMMC Level 2 Self- Assessment is acceptable. The RFP has been revised to reflect the change in CMMC Level requirements.

3 Att 1 SOW App B PD's

Minimum years of experience was not provided for any of the labor categories. Given the competitive nature of this procurement and an FFP type contract, can the Government provide minimum number of years of experience required for each labor category?

Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, Appendix B - Position Descriptions requirements is correct.

The Government does not require a minimum number of years of experience for the positions identified in Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work.

4 Att 4 Instructions Sec. L.3.3

Instructions state offerors shall use the Government provided estimated costs as ‘plug numbers’. Is the $2,000,000 the for CLIN 0002 provided in the Supplies and Services the number to use for the "plug number? Also, shouled this number be reflected in the Attachment 3 - Price Matrix? If so, how should Offerors include this number?

The Government estimated total costs for Travel for the 5 year contract period is $400,000. The RFP and Attachment 3 have been revised to reflect this.

5 SF 1449 page 3 & 4

The solicitation lists the Travel CLIN as Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP). Can the Government confirm that travel is intended to be priced as FFP and if so provide a format specifically for FFP travel to ensure all offerors apply the same logic and locations.

CLIN 0002 - J6 PMOSS Travel is FFP. As stated in Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, Volume IV - Price, "Offerors shall use the Government provided estimated costs as 'plug numbers'."

Offerors shall not propose individual travel costs.

6 Attachment 3 - Price Matrix

There is a disconnect between the labor categories, hours, and locations shown in the worksheet titled "TEP" and the "OP1 - OP 5". For example, Sr. Tech Writer and Tech Writer are listed in the "OP" worksheets, however, these labor categories are not present on the "TEP" worksheet. Can the Government update the Attachment 3 -Price Matrix such that these worksheets match?

Attachment 3 - Price Matrix is correct. The labor categories identified in the "Ordering Period" tabs are for pricing purposes to obtain FFP labor rates to be utilized to award Task Orders. The "TEP" tab will be utilized to calculate a TEP for evaluation purposes. The number of FTEs and hours identified in Attachment 3 are estimates for evaluation purposes only. Attachment 3 - Price Matrix ("TEP" tab) and Attachment 5 - Evaluation Procedures have been revised to provide additional clarification.

7 Att 4 Instructions, L0.4.3. pg. 1 Please confirm that government documents (e.g., SF30s, SF33s, or RFP document fill-ins (such as Reps and Certs)) should not be altered except to fill in required information.

Correct, RFP documents shall not be altered unless otherwise instructed (e.g. Attachment 3 - Price Matrix and Reps and Certs).

8 Att 4, L3 Will the Government please correct the Past Performance volume number to Volume III? Corrected

9 Att 5, M3.7.1 Will the Government please correct the numbering of the relevancy definition list in M3.7.1 to match the list in L.3.7? There are two #5s in the M3.7.1 list.

Corrected

10 Att 6, Part One, Section I, B.4 For ease of reading, will the Government allow Offerors to adjust the PPI template to use a single text box in place of separate lines of text in B.4?

Yes, Section B.4 has been revised to a single text box.

11 Att 6, Introduction

Can the Government please correct the name of the solicitation in the PPI Introduction? It currently states that the RFP is titled "Information Technology Management, Strategic/Operational Planning, and Technical Support Services."

Corrected

12 General Question

The solicitation requires proposal submission via email but does not specify an approved method for transmitting CUI?marked materials. Please provide the authorized method for submitting CUI documents with the proposal

RFP, Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, Sections L.0.6.2 has been updated to provide submittal instructions for CUI documents.

13 Att 4, pg 4, L2.1 In Section L2, references to ‘Volume I’ appear to refer to the Technical Volume. Will the Government please confirm these should be references to Volume II?

Corrected

14 Att 4, pg 7, L2.8 L2.8 Key personnel experience…. Will the Government please confirm that section L2.8 should be numbered L3.8?

Corrected

15 Att 4, pg 7, L3 VOLUME IV – PRICE Will the Government please confirm that L3 VOLUME IV – PRICE and subsequent paragraphs should be numbered L4?

Corrected

Att 6, Footer, PPI Att 6 "Past Performance Information” form provided in the solicitation is marked as CUI. Since this template must be sent to Government points of contact for past performance verification, we are unable to transmit it externally via email while it contains CUI markings. Could the Government please provide a version of the Past Performance Information without CUI markings, or advise on an approved method for distributing this form to external Government references?

CUI markings removed

SF 1449 Block 6 (Solicitation Issue Date); Att.

4 ¶L0.4.2 and ¶L0.9

The SF 1449 Block 6 (Solicitation Issue Date) is blank, yet Att. 4 ¶L0.4.2 requires a non-binding notice of intent "within 10 days of RFP issuance." Please confirm the official solicitation issuance/posting date that starts the 10-day notice-of-intent window. Separately, given the question cut-off of 15 June 2026 (12:00 PM ET) and the proposal due date of 6 July 2026 (2:00 PM EDT), will the Government consider extending the question cut-off and/or the proposal due date to allow adequate time to incorporate Q&A responses and any amendments?

The RFP issuance date is 5 June 2026. The proposal due date has been extended to 8 July 2026 as shown in Amendment 0001.

Sched. ¶5 (Pg 3); Att. 3 TEP note (row 51); Att.

3 OP1 tab header

The Schedule (Pg 3) lists five 12-month Ordering Periods (21 Sep 2026-20 Sep 2031), but the Att. 3 TEP note states Ordering Period 1 covers a 17-month POP across two task orders (2,762 hrs), while OP2- OP5 use 1,880 hrs (12 months). 17+12+12+12+12 = 65 months exceeds the 60-month contract POP.

Please reconcile the actual POP of OP1 and explain how the five Ordering Periods map to the 60-month/5-year contract period.

The contract Ordering Period is a five-year period. An Ordering Period is the time period in which a Task Order(s) may be issued which is different than an individual Task Order's Period of Performance. Please refer to FAR 52.216-22 regarding the performance completion dates for individual Task Orders.

Recommend performing additional research on the application of IDIQ contracts.

Att. 3 OP1 tab header vs. TEP note (row 51) The OP1 input tab header reads "Ordering Period 1: 21 September 2026 to 20 September 2027" (12 months), conflicting with the TEP note describing OP1 as a 17-month, two-task-order period (2,762 hrs). Please clarify whether offerors should price OP1 on a 12-month or a 2,762-hour/17-month basis, and describe the two task orders anticipated within OP1.

See answer to Question #18.

SOW ¶4.1; Att. 3 TEP "Transition Period" (rows 10-28)

The SOW establishes a 60-day transition-in period and Att. 3 prices a separate Transition Period (PM at 336 hrs, all other FTEs at 80 hrs). (a) Is the transition period a separately funded CLIN/sub-CLIN, or funded within the first OP1 task order? (b) Please confirm the 336/80-hour estimates are the required basis for pricing.

Please refer to Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, Section 4.0 Transition-In regarding the estimated hours. The Government anticipates including the Transition Period as part of the initial Task Order for Ordering Period 1; however, this is subject to change.

SOW ¶¶4.1-4.2; Att. 3 TEP Transition tab (PM 336 hrs; all other FTEs 80 hrs)

SOW ¶4.1 establishes a 60-day transition-in period; ¶4.2 requires the Program Manager in place by day 15 and 100% of fully qualified personnel in place by day 45. Attachment 3 funds the PM at 336 hours (42 work days) and each non-PM FTE at 80 hours (10 work days). (a) Are the day-15, day-45, and 60-day transition milestones measured in calendar days or work days? This materially affects the funded-hours calculation. (b) Program Manager: the PM must be in place no later than day 15 (¶4.2) and, to manage a 60-day transition, perform through its end, a minimum window of approximately 45 days (day 15 through day 60), and longer if the PM mobilizes earlier at the offeror's election. If measured in work days, even the minimum 45 work days equals 360 hours, exceeding the 336 hours funded (a 24-hour shortfall). (c) Non-PM FTEs: with 100% of personnel required in place by day 45, each non-PM FTE performs the ~15-day window from day 45 through day 60, approximately 120 hours if measured in work days, exceeding the 80 hours funded (a 40-hour shortfall); even as calendar days the working window (~88 hours) exceeds 80. Please confirm the intended funded transition hours for both the PM and non- PM FTEs, or confirm that offerors should price the actual required period of presence regardless of the 336/80-hour estimates.

As stated in Attachment 3 - Price Matrix, "TEP" tab, the number of FTEs and hours identified in Attachment 3 are estimates for evaluation purposes only. The Government calculated the estimated transition hours as working days accounting for estimated Federal holidays. As stated in Attachment 3 - Price Matrix, "TEP" tab, "INSTRUCTIONS: Offerors shall fill-in the cells highlighted in yellow only. No other cells shall be modified or edited."

SOW ¶4.2 (100% qualified personnel by day 45; "no interruption of mission")

SOW ¶4.2 requires 100% of fully qualified personnel to be in place by day 45 of the 60-day transition.

Onboarding 41.5 cleared non-PM FTEs (each requiring security crossover/visit requests, CAC issuance, network/system account provisioning, and Government roster/information updates) is a per-individual, sequential process; completing it for this volume of personnel within the transition window does not appear operationally feasible, particularly given that Att. 3 funds non-PM FTEs for only ~80 hours (the day-45-to-day-60 tail). Concentrating this onboarding near day 45 would also place the "no interruption of mission" requirement in ¶4.2 at risk. To ensure offerors correctly understand the requirement, please clarify: (i) whether "in place by day 45" permits phased onboarding across the 60-day transition, or requires all personnel to be fully operational at day 45; (ii) whether "in place" means physically reporting/badged or fully cleared and system-provisioned; and (iii) whether the Government will support or commit to the security-processing, CAC, and account-provisioning timelines necessary to achieve full operational capability for all positions within the required timeframe.

As stated in Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, Section 4.2 "The Contractor shall ensure 100% of fully qualified personnel are in place by day 45 of the transition-in period." In-place is defined as fully operational to perform the required services.

Att. 3 TEP tab, OP5 rows 120-133 On the TEP tab, the Ordering Period 5 rate cells reference the OP4 input tab (e.g., ='OP4'!D12) rather than the OP5 tab. Please confirm whether (a) OP5 is intended to use OP4 rates (no escalation from OP4 to OP5), or (b) this is a template error. If OP5 should use its own rates, will the Government issue a corrected Price Matrix?

Attachment 3 - Price Matrix has been corrected to reflect the correct formulas for "TEP" for Ordering Period 5.

CLIN 0002 (Pg 3-4); Att. 4 ¶L3.3; Att. 5 ¶M4.2.1; Att. 3 TEP G138

CLIN 0002 (Travel) is $2,000,000 and Att. 4/5 state the Government's estimated travel amount will be included in the TEP for evaluation. However, the Att. 3 TEP tab has no travel line and the TEP total (G138) sums only labor. Where/how should offerors reflect the $2,000,000 travel plug, and will the Government add a travel line or issue a corrected matrix?

See answer to Question #4.

Attachment 7 - H92415-26-R-E002 - J6 PMOSS Q&A - 16 June 2026

Att. 3 TEP staffing vs. OP input tabs (rows 12- 23)

The TEP staffing plan (42.5 estimated FTEs) omits three labor categories that the OP input tabs require offerors to price: Financial Analyst (non-Sr.), Technical Writer, and Sr. Technical Writer. Please confirm whether offerors must propose rates for all 12 labor categories on each OP tab (for future task-order ordering) even where they carry zero estimated FTEs in the TEP.

See answer to Question #6.

Att. 3 OP input tabs (cols D/G/J/M/P); Att. 4 ¶L3.2

The OP input tabs provide rate columns for all five locations (MacDill, Hurlburt Field, Camp Lejeune, Coronado, Ft. Bragg), but the TEP estimates FTEs at only three (MacDill, Ft. Bragg, Coronado). ¶L3.2 directs pricing "for all proposed positions at all required locations." Must offerors populate rates for Hurlburt Field and Camp Lejeune (zero estimated FTE), or only the three staffed locations?

As stated in Attachment 3 - Price Matrix, "TEP" tab, "INSTRUCTIONS: Offerors shall fill-in the cells highlighted in yellow only." Offerors shall provide proposed labor rates for all locations identified in the Ordering Period tabs.

Att. 3 OP tabs ("Average of Regular Work Hours" = 1,880); SOW ¶9.0

The OP tabs use 1,880 "Average of Regular Work Hours," while SOW ¶9.0 specifies 8 hours/day (~2,080 annual). Please confirm 1,880 productive hours is the basis for the FFP annual/monthly rate build-up, and that the contractor is responsible for providing leave/holiday coverage within the FFP without additional compensation.

The average of regular work hours identified in Attachment 3 - Price Matrix is correct. The Government calculated the average of regular work hours considering Federal holidays and estimated leave without additional compensation.

Contract Admin Data (Pg 8); SOW App. A, PRS #4

The Government may reduce the FFP for positions unfilled 30+ consecutive days, prorated at TO rates.

For an FFP IDIQ, please confirm the proration mechanism (e.g., monthly rate / available work hours x unstaffed hours) and how partial-month vacancies are credited.

The Government will reduce the Task Order FFP utilizing the Task Order contract rates for that specific FTE (e.g. hourly labor rates) multiplied by the number of hours in which the services are not performed.

Section H.1 (Pg 10); Att. 4 ¶L1.4 The OCI clause bars the prime, affiliates, and subcontractors from holding (or teaming with/subcontracting to any firm that bids for or holds) a USSOCOM prime contract where the ITMO (J6/G6/N6, etc.) "is the customer or plays a role in the contract in any way." (a) Does "plays a role in any way" extend to contracts where the ITMO is only a stakeholder/end-user but not the contracting customer? Please define the scope. (b) Does the restriction attach at proposal submission or only upon award?

a) Yes, any contract where the ITMO plays a role in any way. As stated in the Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, Section L.1.4, "Offerors shall identify all Prime contracts that it and its affiliates and subcontractors currently hold with USSOCOM." The Government will evaluate to determine if the ITMO plays a role in the identified contract.

b) The restriction is applicable at time of proposal submission and through the entire contract performance period.

Section H.1(c) (Pg 10); Att. 4 ¶L1.4 If an offeror, affiliate, or proposed subcontractor currently holds a USSOCOM ITMO prime contract, must that contract be completed, novated, or divested prior to J6 PMOSS award, or does the prohibition apply only to new awards during the J6 PMOSS performance period? Please clarify the expected remedy for an existing conflicting contract.

The restriction is applicable at time of proposal submission and through the entire contract performance period.

SOW ¶5.1; Att. 4 ¶L3.7(2) SOW ¶5.1 states "most" personnel require a TOP SECRET clearance, and ¶L3.7(2) defines relevant past performance as >=75% of positions holding TS with SCI. Please provide, by position and location, the required clearance level (Secret / TS / TS-SCI) for the base-contract estimated FTEs so offerors can accurately price clearance costs and assess labor availability.

This information is not releasable. All contractor personnel are required to have TOP SECRET clearances. Individual Task Orders will identify if TS/SCI is required. Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, Section 5.1 has been revised.

Att. 4 ¶L0.1.3 and ¶L3.7; Att. 5 ¶M3.7; FAR 11.002(a)(1)(ii)

The Past Performance relevancy definition combines several narrow criteria: at least 75% of positions at TS/SCI, at least 30 FTEs, at least 3 geographically dispersed locations, and support to USSOCOM.

¶L0.1.3 identifies the predecessor effort (H9240421D0001) as a "direct 8(a) award," that is, a sole-source award not competed among 8(a) firms. Because the USSOCOM-specific experience the relevancy definition rewards could realistically be obtained only by performing that uncompeted predecessor, the definition appears to favor a single incumbent and foreclose other eligible 8(a) offerors from a "Relevant" or "Very Relevant" rating, in tension with the full and open competition objective and FAR 11.002(a)(1)(ii). Please clarify: (i) whether comparable DoD or Intelligence Community program-management experience in a TS/SCI environment, of similar scope and magnitude, will be rated "Relevant" or "Very Relevant" even if not performed for USSOCOM; (ii) whether an active Top Secret facility clearance (¶L1.2) together with documented experience recruiting and onboarding TS and TS/SCI cleared personnel will be credited, and under which factor (Past Performance or Technical Staffing Experience, ¶M2.1.5); and (iii) whether the Government will broaden the relevancy definition so offerors with substantially similar cleared-environment experience are not foreclosed from a favorable rating.

Section L.3.7 clearly states what is considered as "Relevant".

SOW ¶4.2 and ¶5.1 Must all proposed personnel hold the required clearance (and SCI access, where applicable) at the start of performance (day 45 of transition), or may offerors propose cleared-eligible/in-process personnel?

This materially affects incumbent capture and recruiting assumptions.

As stated in Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, Section 4.2 "The Contractor shall ensure 100% of fully qualified personnel are in place by day 45 of the transition-in period." Fully qualified personnel is defined as individuals who meet the security requirements of the position.

Att. 2 (Draft DD254) The provided Att. 2 (Draft DD254) does not render readable content (the XFA form displays only a "Please wait" placeholder). Please reissue Att. 2 as a flattened/printable PDF so offerors can review the security classification specification, including the SCI, SAP, COMSEC, NATO, and CSfC requirements referenced in SOW ¶5.1.

Attachment 2 - Draft DD254 has been included as a printable .pdf.

SOW ¶5.1 vs. ¶¶3.2.8-3.2.16, 3.3.1-3.3.2, 3.4.x

SOW ¶5.1 states "Base Contract contractors will not require access to government computer systems," yet other SOW paragraphs require operating Government financial systems (SNaP-IT, GAFS/IAPS, MOCAS, WAWF), serving as super-module/GAM administrators, and building/maintaining Government portals. Please reconcile whether Government system access is required under the base contract or only under specific task orders.

The Base IDIQ contract will not identify specific FTEs. Any contractor supporting/administering the Base Contract (e.g. corporate/overhead functions) will not require access to government computer systems.

Individual Task Orders will be issued for FTEs which will require access to government computer systems.

SOW ¶9.0 vs. Sched. ¶9 (Pg 3) and Att. 3 location columns

SOW ¶9.0 identifies the primary places of performance as only MacDill AFB, Ft. Bragg, and Coronado, while the Schedule (Pg 3) and the Price Matrix list five locations (adding Hurlburt Field and Camp Lejeune). Please confirm the actual base-contract places of performance and whether any FTEs are anticipated at Hurlburt Field or Camp Lejeune.

As stated in Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work, "The primary place of performance shall be HQ USSOCOM (MacDill AFB, FL), USASOC (Ft. Bragg, NC), and NSW (Coronado, CA); however, other Government worksites may be required."

SOW App. B; SOW ¶11.0; Att. 4 ¶L2.1.3.3 SOW Appendix B designates only the Program Manager as Key Personnel, while SOW ¶11.0 states "Select positions will be identified as Key Personnel" and ¶L2.1.3.3 references resumes for "all proposed Key Personnel." Please provide the complete list of Key Personnel positions for which resumes must be submitted in Volume II.

The Key Personnel position(s) is the Program Manager, as identified in Attachment 1 - PMOSS Statement of Work.

Att. 4 ¶L1.3; clause 252.204-7021 (Pg 16-17) ¶L1.3 requires an active CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) certification at proposal submission, valid through the 150-day validity period. (a) Will a Conditional Level 2 (C3PAO) status (per DFARS 252.204-7021) satisfy this requirement, or is a Final status required? (b) For a Joint Venture or newly formed entity, how is the requirement satisfied: by the JV entity, the managing member, or all members?

See answers to Questions #1 and #2. Certifications shall be in a Final status at time of proposal submission.

Att. 4 ¶L1.2 ¶L1.2 requires the prime and all subcontractors performing work to hold an active TOP SECRET facility clearance at proposal submission. Please confirm whether this applies to every teaming subcontractor regardless of workshare, and how the requirement is satisfied for a subcontractor that will provide cleared personnel but does not itself hold/require a TS FCL to perform.

The Prime and all subcontractors, regardless of workshare, are required to hold an active TOP SECRET FCL to perform under this contract.

Att. 4 ¶L0.1.3 (predecessor H9240421D0001)

To support transition and incumbent capture, will the Government provide the current incumbent's name, the incumbent staffing roster by labor category/location, and current labor rates or salary ranges? If any of this information is not releasable, please confirm.

This information is not releasable. As stated in Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, "The previous contract (H9240421D0001)…"

SOW App. B; Att. 4 ¶L0.1.3 Please confirm whether any employee non-displacement requirement or right of first refusal applies to the successor contractor, and whether the Service Contract Act (SCA) applies to any positions, as the Appendix B position descriptions appear to be exempt professional roles.

The SCA is not applicable to this requirement.

CLIN 0001 Additional Descriptive Data (Pg 3);

Sched. ¶6; List of Attachments (Pg 19)

The CLIN 0001 descriptive data states task orders will be issued "in accordance with Attachment 4" (referring to the Price Matrix), while ¶6 and the List of Attachments identify the Price Matrix as Attachment 3 and Attachment 4 as the Proposal Submission Instructions. Please confirm the Price Matrix is Attachment 3.

CLIN 0001 has been corrected.

Att. 4 ¶¶L2.1, L3 (Past Performance), L3 (Price); Table L1

Att. 4 contains volume-numbering inconsistencies: ¶L2.1 references "Volume I" within the Technical (Volume II) section; Past Performance is headed "L3 VOLUME II"; and Price is headed "L3 VOLUME IV."

Please confirm the structure is Cover Letter + Vol I Compliance, Vol II Technical, Vol III Past Performance, and Vol IV Price as shown in Table L1.

Corrected

Att. 6 PPI (Part Two) In Att. 6 the Part Two introduction lists a four-level rating scale (Excellent/Very Good/Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory) while the Section II rating tables use a five-level scale (Excellent/Good/Satisfactory/Marginal/Unsatisfactory). Please confirm which rating scale POCs should use when completing the PPI.

Attachment 6 - PPI Template has been revised to include the definition for Marginal.

Att. 4 Table L1 and ¶L0.5.5 Table L1 limits Volume II (Technical) to 20 pages "excludes resumes." Please confirm that resumes, the transition timeline graphic, and the management organization chart are excludable from the 20-page count as front matter/illustrations, or specify which of these items count against the page limit.

As identified in Table L.1, the resume(s) are excluded from the page limit. The transition timeline graphic and management organization chart are considered illustrations for page count purposes.

Att. 4 ¶L1.3; DFARS 252.204-7021 and 252.204-7025

¶L1.3 requires the prime to hold a current CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) certification at proposal submission, but does not expressly state when proposed subcontractors that will process, store, or transmit FCI or CUI must hold their CMMC status. Please clarify at what point a proposed subcontractor must hold a current CMMC Level 2 status (or the level appropriate to the information flowed down per 32 CFR 170.23): at proposal submission, prior to subaward, or prior to performance.

See answer to Question #2. The Prime contractor is required to flow down the CMMC requirements to all subcontractors for performance under this contract.

Section H.1 (Pg 10); Att. 4 ¶L1.4 The OCI clause defines "affiliates" to include entities where one controls or has the power to control the other, whether or not control is exercised. Please confirm whether affiliates under common ownership that operate independently are subject to the same OCI restrictions in Section H.1, and how an offeror should treat such affiliates for purposes of the disclosure and eligibility requirements.

The Prime contractor is required to flow down the CMMC requirements to all subcontractors.

Att. 5 ¶M2.1 and ¶¶M2.1.1 through M2.1.5 ¶M2.1 indicates proposals containing strengths or significant strengths may be rated more favorably, and that the Government may incorporate areas determined to be strengths into the contract prior to award. (a) Beyond meeting the stated requirements, will the Government identify the discriminators, innovations, risk-reduction measures, transition approaches, or retention strategies it would view favorably when assessing strengths and significant strengths? (b) If a strength is incorporated into the contract prior to award, will it become a binding contractual requirement, and how will it be documented (for example, added to the SOW or a Section H clause)?

a) Attachment 5 identifies the evaluation procedures that will be utilized.

b) Incorporation into contract award means it will part of the contract and binding.

Att. 5 ¶M4.1, ¶M4.2, and ¶M4.2.4 (a) In addition to evaluating price for reasonableness, unbalanced pricing, and consistency with the Technical Management Volume, will the Government perform a price realism analysis, and if so, how would an unrealistically low price affect the evaluation? (b) Per ¶M4.2.4, please clarify the criteria the Government will use to determine when pricing inconsistencies, unbalanced pricing, or other pricing anomalies rise to the level of a weakness or significant weakness under the Technical Management factor.

Attachment 5- Evaluation Procedures identifies the evaluation procedures that will be utilized for Volume IV - Price.

Clause 5652.216-9004; Att. 1 SOW Appendix B

(a) May future task orders introduce labor categories not included in the awarded IDIQ, and if so, how will rates for new labor categories be established (for example, by negotiation against the awarded rate structure)? (b) May future task orders establish personnel qualification requirements that exceed those in the SOW Appendix B position descriptions accepted at the IDIQ level?

This RFP will result in a FFP IDIQ for the requirements identified in the RFP and accompanying documents.

Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions_PMOSS, Page 4, Section L 1.3

Given that CMMC Level 2 certification through a C3PAO is not currently required for all contractors handling CUI under existing DoD regulations, can the Government clarify the specific mission, cybersecurity, or risk-management considerations that necessitate a C3PAO-certified Level 2 assessment for this requirement?

See answer to Question #2.

Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions_PMOSS, Page 4, Section L 1.3

If there is no specific cybersecurity or risk-management consideration that necessitates a C3PAO Level 2 assessment, would the Government consider allowing offerors that maintain a Level 2 self-assessment with a current SPRS score and documented implementation of NIST SP 800-171 controls to be eligible for award, provided they achieve C3PAO certification within the first contract year?

See answer to Question #2.

53 Attachment 4, page 6, L.3.4

For an SBA-approved mentor-protégé JV competing as a small business, the Government generally cannot categorically ignore the experience and past performance of the mentor member. The applicable regulation is FAR 15.305(a)(2) and SBA's joint venture regulations. Confirming that the Government will allow past performance be provided from either party.

Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, Section L.3.4 has been revised. Past Performance for Joint Ventures shall be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(vi).

54 Attachment 4, page 6, L.3.4 Is it up to three Past Performances, or is an Offeror required to provide exactly three Past Performances.

As stated in Attachment 4 - Proposal Submission Instructions, Section L.3.4, "Submit a maximum of three past performance citations…" Offerors can submit up to, but no more, than three citations.

55 Attachment 4, page 5, L.2.1.3.3 Confirming that only the resume for the Program Manager is required, as it’s the only KP listed. Correct

56 Pricing Matrix

For Ordering Period 1, please clarify the methodology used to derive the 2,762 labor hours per FTE reflected in the Price Matrix, including any assumptions regarding productive labor hours, overtime, holidays, leave, or other staffing considerations.

As stated in Attachment 3 - Price Matrix, the estimated hours are calculated for two separate Task Orders issued during Ordering Period 1 for a total POP of 17 months. The Government calculated the average of regular work hours considering Federal holidays and estimated leave without additional compensation.

Sheet1