H98210-10-R-0002-00001.doc

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0003

The CLIN description has changed from Interfaces to Interfaces - Air Force.

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 4.00 from 5.00 to 1.00.

CLIN 1002

The CLIN description has changed from Interfaces to Interfaces - Army.

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 4.00 from 5.00 to 1.00.

CLIN 2002

The CLIN description has changed from Interfaces to Interfaces - Navy.

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 3.00 from 5.00 to 2.00.

CLIN 3002

The CLIN description has changed from Interfaces to Interfaces - Marine Corp. (CLEOC).

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 4.00 from 5.00 to 1.00.

CLIN 4002

The CLIN description has changed from Interfaces to Interfaces - Marine Corp (SAIRD).

The pricing detail quantity has decreased by 4.00 from 5.00 to 1.00.

CLIN 2004 is added as follows:

FFP

FOB: Destination

ESTIMATED

NET AMT

CLIN 3004 is added as follows:

ESTIMATED

CLIN 4005 is added as follows:

ESTIMATED

The following have been added by full text:

DSAID Solicitation Questions and Answers Q1. The requirements documents mention a need for trend analysis capabilities within the solution. Does the Government intend this to include Business Intelligence capabilities (i.e. heuristic trend identification) or will predefined reports and queries suffice for identification of trends?

A1: Yes. Reference DSAID Requirements Package Overview and Supplemental Requirements Baseline v1.3 Draft.pdf, FEAT5.4 “DSAID must contain business intelligence”, documents SAPRO’s intention to include business intelligence capabilities to reports and queries. The export capability for the resulted data is also required to facilitate additional trend analysis in other tools, such as SPSS.

Q2. The solicitation mentions the use of a suite of tools to facilitate and manage Requirements, Defects, Changes, and Design. What suite of tools is being considered for this effort?

A2: SAPRO will continue to manage technical requirements and the change request process using the IBM suite of tools. Compatibility to SAPRO’s IBM suite of tools is desired, however, it is up to the offeror to determine the selection of a tool suite to capture the development effort.

Q3. Does the Government prefer that development occur in its facilities or at the contractor’s location?

A3: At the contractor’s location.

Q4. Is the system intended to support DIBRS reporting interfaces currently or in the future?

A4: No.

Q5. If the solution proposed meets the requirements listed in the solicitation, will it meet the DIBRS compatibility requirement?

A5: Yes, at this time.

Q6. Does the Government already have tools to support performance testing of the SAPRO application? If not, who will purchase those tools?

A6: No. SAPRO will conduct performance testing with a developer-independent source and determine the appropriate tools at that time.

Q7. Reference the Sample Task Order - Does the scope of the base year IOC include all requirements in the solicitation or a subset?

A7: The scope of the sample task order is clearly defined. Reference 2.1 of Attachment C.

Q8. Does the scope of the sample task order include all reporting requirements or a subset?

A8: Yes, it includes all reporting requirements.

Q9. If the sample task order scope is limited to a subset of the reporting requirements, which requirements are included in its scope?

A9: The sample task order scope is not limited to a subset of the requirements.

Q10. Regarding the 90 minute oral presentation, the solicitation states that “there will not be a question-and-answer exchange during the presentation”. We have found that a question-and-answer period following oral presentations gives Government evaluators the opportunity to ask clarifying questions and gain a better understanding of the offeror’s recommended solution.

Would the Government be amenable to adding a question and answer period after the presentation where the Government can ask questions about the presentation and demo?

A10: No dialog between offeror’s and the Government will be permitted during the presentation; however, there may be a need to ask clarification questions after the oral presentation. See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q11. The 90 minute oral presentation includes five major sections:

· An overview of the proposal (i.e. an executive summary).

· An explanation of the technical approach.

· A demonstration of the proposed technical solution, which should include the technical approach throughout

· The Implementation Plan

· The Program Management Plan

The solicitation currently limits the orals to two participants. Increasing the number of participants would give the Government the opportunity to meet more members of the proposed project team (solution architect, project manager, technical lead, executive sponsor) and allow the team to present the solution in their specific areas.

Would the Government consider permitting up to 5 people to participate in the presentation to allow better coverage of technical and management aspects of proposed solutions?

A11: Unfortunately, space only allows for 2 people.

Q12. Item number 0001 is described as “COTS CMS software package”. Additional software tools may be required for the solution, such as third party reporting tools, testing tools, etcetera. Does the Government intend for all non-labor items to be included under Item 0001?

A12: Yes, excluding all non-labor items covered by other CLINs.

Q13. Item numbers 0003, 1002, 2002, 3002 and 4002 are described as Interfaces. Are “interfaces” firm fixed price labor components, or do they include both labor and materials (software)?

A13: Firm-fixed price labor components.

Q14. Can the Government clarify what is meant by a contract type of FFP/IDIQ?

A14: Please reference FAR Part 16.2 & 16.5.

Q15. What process workflow products are currently in use by SAPRO systems?

A15: None at this time.

Q16. What portal products are currently in use by SAPRO systems?

A16: None at this time.

Q17. What relational database products are currently in use by SAPRO systems?

A17: TRIM Context.

Q18. What operating systems are currently in use by SAPRO systems?

A18: Windows XP.

Q19. What Office automation products (i.e. MS Office) are used on SAPRO workstations?

A19: Microsoft Office 2007.

Q20. What authentication capabilities (i.e. Single Sign On, CAC, Active Directory, LDAP, etc.) are currently in use by SAPRO users?

A20: Common Access Card (CAC).

Q21. What solutions are in place for user identity management?

A21: See A20.

Q22. What solutions are in place for directory services (LDAP, Active Directory, etc.)?

A22: Microsoft Exchange.

Q23. How are SAPRO users currently authenticated?

A23: See A20.

Q24. Does SAPRO currently use, or plan to use, SharePoint Portal Server?

A24: No.

Q25. What tools were used to create the requirements artifacts within the proposal? (Example – IBM Rational® RequisitePro®)

A25: IBM Rational RequisitePro, IBM Rational SODA, and IBM Rational Rose.

Q26. If the Government does have an existing tool suite for use on this effort, will the Government provide licenses for the I&D team?

A26: No, the I&D team will have to purchase licenses.

Q27. If the Government does have an existing performance testing tool, what is the product and version and will the Government provide licenses for use by the contractor?

A27: SAPRO does not currently have an existing performance testing tool. SAPRO will conduct performance testing with a developer-independent source and determine the appropriate tools at that time. The contractor is responsible for providing the tools and licenses to conduct the testing for which they are responsible.

Q28. What organization provides information technology infrastructure support to SAPRO?

A28: Washington Headquarter Services (WHS).

Q29. We understand that Booz Allen Hamilton was selected to assist the Government in gathering the requirements for DSAID and will assist the Government in managing the awarded contract. Given the potential for a conflict of interest, is Booz Allen Hamilton precluded from bidding on this solicitation?

A29: Yes.

Q30. Reference SF1449, Item 0001, COTS CMS software package

a. Does the cost of the COTS CMS software package on this CLIN allow for individual or site license cost?

b. If no, will the government add a separate CLIN to address?

A30: If there is a cost associated, offerors may propose an alternate Schedule.

Q31. Reference SF1449, Item 0003 Interfaces. The number of Item 0003 lists 5 as the estimated Quantity. Reference Paragraph 3.2 lists Military Criminal Investigative Organizations’ (MCIO) and Offices of the Judge Advocate General (OTJAG) systems. Reference 6.1.4 is identifies “multiple Service systems”. Does the number listed for the estimated quantity (5) take all of these interfaces in to account?

A31: Yes, at this time. See revised CLIN structure.

Q32. Will GOTS CMS software with the same functionality required be considered equivalent to COTS CMS software for this solicitation.

A32: Yes, as long as the GOTS CMS software has been successfully implemented and is not a “ground-up” development effort.

Q33. Will the development server also be government furnished?

A33: No.

Q34. What is the preferred or expected method for the final product to receive data maintained in other systems to DSAID? FTP, web services?

A34: Web services is the preferred method, however, the final solution must be compatible with the existing Service systems involved in the interface(s).

Q35. Is there a requirement for a specific operating system, i.e. Windows, Unix

A35: No, however, Windows is preferred.

Q36. Is there a requirement for a specific DBMS, i.e. Oracle, SQLServer

A36: No.

Q37. Is there a requirement for a specific web application, i.e. ASP .NET, JSP

A37: No.

Q38. Is there a requirement for a specific programming language, i.e. C#, Java

A38: No.

Q39. What is the Period of Performance of the sample task order? One year or multiple as it impacts the CLIN numbers used?

A39: The Period of Performance of the sample task order is 6 months.

Q40. Where is the completed SF1449 to go? One would assume the Price Proposal but it is addressed before section 3d under Instructions to Offerors which states “Offerors price proposal shall include…”

A40: See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q41. Is it the Government’s intent to issue FFP orders only or on ordering basis use T&M, FPLOE, FP?

A41: FFP orders only

Q42. Please confirm that the contractor who developed the technical requirements cannot bid on this RFP.

A42: See A29

Q43. How many copies of the Price proposal and other sections are required? (only the technical proposal has requirements listed)

A43: See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q44. Pricing – Please clarify what is to be included in the Price proposal. Specifically, what are the government’s expectations around Configuration and Customization CLINs (0002, 1001, 1002, 1003 and 1004) and Interface CLINs (0003, 1002, 2002, 3002 and 4003)? The RFP states that “All items listed in the Schedule must have a price” but there is no basis of estimate particularly for the out years. Should the offerer simply bid the NTE value in the out years?

A44: Configuration and Customization CLINs shall reflect the NTE ceiling amounts shown in the Schedule. See the revised CLIN structure for pricing Interfaces.

Q45. Where will hosting take place? What hardware and software platforms will be used or should the offeror specify the hardware / software and government will procure it?

A45: Development will be hosted at the contractor facility. Production will be hosted at government on-site. Dell PowerEdge Server 2850, Server 2003 are the current platforms. Offeror may recommend other hardware/software for government procurement.

Q46. Can we see a list the Agency’s approved software and hardware list?

A46: A list of the software and hardware will be posted on SAPRO’s website at www.sapr.mil under “Technical Exhibit”.

Q47. Does SAPRO of WHS currently hold any software licenses or hardware that could be utilized for the development of this system?

A47: No.

Q48. Please confirm all end user hardware (PCs, etc.) will be provided by the government.

A48: Confirmed, all end user hardware will be provided by the government.

Q49. CLIN 0001is for a COTS CMS package. Is the government open to proposals for solutions not based on a COTS CMS package?

A49: See A32

Q50. Please confirm that the development environment is the responsibility of the contractor and will not be provided by the government.

A50: Yes.

Q51. Approximately how many demonstrations will be required each year? Will all demonstrations be local to the Washington, DC area? Will demonstration be required prior to final development of the system?

A51: It is unknown how many demonstrations may be required. Vendors will not participate in the demonstrations but may be asked to assist SAPRO in the preparation thereof.

Q52. DSAID will be a web-based system. Will DSAID be accessed via the SAPRO web site? Based on the “Requirements Package Overview and Supplemental Requirements” document, it appears that system access will be managed at the Service level (“*Only SAPR Service Program Managers have the authority to grant access and permissions to Service System Mangers for DSAID.” – Page 7, foot note in Table). Please confirm.

A52: DSAID will not be accessed via the SAPRO website. Access and permission levels for each user of DSAID will require approval by either DoD SAPRO or a Service Program Manager, depending upon the user roles; Reference DSAID Requirements Package Overview and Supplemental Requirements Baseline v1.3 Draft.pdf, SUPP 8.1 through SUPP 8.7 requirements.

Q53. The RFP does not state a requirement for clearances. Is there a nationality requirement for personnel working on this effort?

A53: No.

Q54. The RFP allows the offeror to propose the development schedule. Full implementation could stretch into the second year of the contract. Is there any core functionality or interfaces that are required in the first year?

A54: Reporting, data entry, Air Force data interface, case management, and certain business management functions are high priorities and preferred to be delivered in the first year. It is imperative that the developer propose a phased approach that allows the completeness of the DSAID functionality and interfaces as quickly as possible.

Q55. What is the required frequency of data exchange per each interface?

A55: To be defined on each Task Order.

Q56. The CLIN structure indicates that 5 interfaces will be built in the first year of the contract. Are they required to come online at the same time or can they be implemented in a phased approach?

A56: The interfaces are not required to come online at the same time and can be implemented in a phased approach.

Q57. Are there any limitations on how an offeror can propose to accomplish end user training? (i.e., centrally vs locally)

A57: End user training is not within the scope of this solicitation.

Q58. Can the Agency share its system development and approval process?

A58: Please elaborate on the question and site the specific section of the solicitation you are referring to.

Q59. The RFP provides information on the number of concurrent users, etc. Will the number of user increase if all the Services adopt and use DSAID?

A59: The number of concurrent users accounts for the increase in users if all the Services adopt and use DSAID so the number not expected to increase.

Q60. Will the system reside on an unclassified network?

A60: Yes.

Q61. Has the method of data transfer between the various external systems been defined?

A61: No.

Q62. Does each of the external systems have a method to consume the interface data provided to them?

A62: The communication method between DSAID and the Service systems may vary, however, pushing DSAID data into external Service systems is not anticipated.

Q63. Do the data exchanges between the various systems need to be real time or can they be batch?

A63: They can be batch, however, the frequency of the batch processing is yet to be determined.

Q64. Are there any official approval processes or structured workflows involved?

A64: See A58.

Q65. Would the government consider hosting a bidder’s conference?

A65: Not at this time.

Q66. Other than the PIA data (SSN, Name, etc…) captured in the system, do you foresee any additional data needing to be secured or encrypted?

A66: Yes. DSAID must be in compliance with DoD Directive 8510.01, DoD Information Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process (DIACAP).

Q67. Please confirm that the demonstration of the proposed technical solution translates into a mock-up or working system. Please see - Addendum to 52.212 – Instructions to Offerors paragraph 4.

A67: Confirmed.

Q68. Please confirm that data flows are 1 way vs 2 between the input systems and DSAID.

A68: Confirmed.

Q69. End User Interface –

· Does the system have on-line “help” requirement? – (e.g. instructions)

· Please identify the user training plan requirements.

A69: See A57.

Q70. Reference SOW paragraph 5.1, Post Award Conference - It is unclear how this program level deliverable (i.e., not a Task Order Deliverable) is to be priced and ordered, given that Schedule B does not appear to identify a FFP CLIN. Is it the Government’s intent for contractors to propose an alternative Schedule B including an explicit CLIN for this deliverable? Please clarify.

A70: See A30.

Q71. Reference SOW paragraph 5.3, DSAID Data Dictionary - It is unclear how this program level deliverable (i.e., not a Task Order Deliverable) is to be priced and ordered, given that Schedule B does not appear to identify a FFP CLIN. Is it the Government’s intent for contractors to propose an alternative Schedule B including an explicit CLIN for this deliverable? Please clarify.

A71: See CLIN 4004 for the Data Dictionary.

Q72. Reference SOW paragraph 5.4, DSAID - It is assumed that this deliverable represents the COTS CMS Software package, and therefore maps directly to CLIN 0001. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

A72: DSAID refers to the completed database.

Q73. Reference SOW paragraph 5.5, Demonstrations - It is unclear how this program level deliverable (i.e., not a Task Order Deliverable) is to be priced and ordered, given that Schedule B does not identify either a FFP or (more appropriately) T&M CLIN. Is it the Government’s intent for contractors to propose an alternative Schedule B including an explicit CLIN for this deliverable? And if so, can this CLIN be T&M? Please clarify.

A73: See A30. Alternate CLINs must be firm-fixed price.

Q74. Reference Schedule B, Customization and Interfaces CLINs, (i.e. 0002, 0002 for Base Year, and N001 and N002 for Option Year N) - It is assumed that prices for performance of services and products for these CLINs will be negotiated on individual task orders in accordance with rates set forth in the submitted Price Proposal. Is this assumption correct? If not, please clarify.

A74: Yes

Q75. Reference Addendum to 52.212-1, paragraph 3.d, Price Proposal - Bullet two requires “labor categories proposed for this contract and provide fully burdened labor rates.” Given this is a multi-year ID/IQ procurement with a base year and four option years, is it the Government’s intent for labor categories and burdened labor rates be specified for each contract year? Please clarify.

A75: Yes. See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q76. Reference Addendum to 52.212-1, paragraph 3.d, Price Proposal - Bullet three requires “pricing and labor categories for the sample task order in Attachment C.” If yearly labor rates are to be provided (see previous question), are we to assume this Task Order is to be executed in the base contract year? Please clarify.

A76: No, the Sample Task Order is for Option Year 1.

Q77. If a team of multiple contractors is proposed, are past performance references for each team member required, or only for the prime contractor?

A77: If multiple contractors are proposed, references shall be provided for both prime and subcontractors. See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q78. Addendum to 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors, Section 3(d) - The section specifies that Offerors shall submit “completed Representations and Certifications of Offeror (FAR Clause 52.212-3 Alt I and DFARS Clause DFARS 252.212-7000).” However, there are at various places in the Solicitation also other certifications. The subject matter of all of these other certifications is, however, already covered within the Certifications specified in the Instructions to Offerors section. Please confirm that only the certifications specified in the Instructions to Offerors section must be submitted.

A78: No, all certifications and applicable clauses shall be completed and submitted as a part of the proposal even if they duplicate the Representations and Certifications. See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q79. Will the Technical, Past Performance and Pricing be organized in three separate volumes? If so, do the one (1) original and five (5) apply only to the Technical Volume?

A79: Yes. See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q80. Reference Attachment A, paragraph A.1 (Criteria for Factor 1, Technical).The evaluation criteria specifies page limits for this factor, but the solicitation does not appear to specific formatting constraints. Recommend formatting constraints be specified, similar to the following:

“The printed page size shall be 8 ½” x 11”. All pages shall have a 1” minimum margin on all sides. All text, except that used in graphics, figures and tables, shall be a minimum of 11 point. Text used in graphics, figures and tables, shall be a minimum of 8 point. All pages shall be in single column format. Page numbers, company logos, and headers and footers may be within the page margins ONLY, and are not bound by the 11-point requirement. Pages that exceed the margin, font or total page limits will be deleted and will not be evaluated. Pages deleted due to violation of the margin or font restrictions will not count against the page limitations. Cover pages, table of contents, acronym lists, and compliance matrices shall be excluded from the stated page count limitations.”

A80: See amended Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors.

Q81. DSAID Requirements Package Overview and Supplemental Requirements Baseline v1.3 Draft, Section 3 Project Approach – second paragraph - “In addition, the requirements and development efforts will be contained within a suite of tools that provide consistency in deliverables and allow for better change control to baseline requirements and/or system development. Specifically, the suite of tools will provide life cycle management and control of software development assets; the ability to track defects and changes; a central console for test activity management, execution, and reporting; electronic management of the requirements; and documentation of the software development process from start to finish.”

Has the government selected a suite of tools or can the contractor choose?

A81: SAPRO will continue to manage requirements and the change request process using the IBM suite of tools. Compatibility to SAPRO’s IBM suite of tools is desired, however, it is up to the offeror to determine the selection of a tool suite to capture the development effort.

Q82. Will the system be physically hosted in one central location?

A82: Yes.

Q83. Is data backup the responsibility of the vendor since they will not be hosting the application? If vendor supported, is this covered by a support contract and will the vendor have access to the hosting infrastructure?

A83: Offeror will be required to collaborate with the hosting agency and their support contractor once the database is in production.

Q84. DSAID Requirements Package Overview and Supplemental Requirements Baseline v1.3 Draft, Section 6.4 - The section states that "DSAID shall provide access to real-time data," does this include viewing the real time data via reports?

A84: Yes.

Q85. What is meant by “compatible” in the statement "DSAID shall be Defense Incident Based Reporting System (DIBRS) compatible"? Please clarify.

A85: DSAID will reuse valid values defined by DIBRS for certain data elements available in both DSAID and DIBRS. However, as DSAID is not a DIBRS reporting system, certain data elements will have valid values slightly different from what is given by DIBRS.

Q86. Does the Government currently have a records management system for SAPRO?

A86: No.

Q87. Does the Government currently have a document management system for SAPRO?

A87: TRIM Context.

Q88. What is the user distribution across roles?

A88: The majority of DSAID users will have a SARC user role. It is expected that only a small amount of users will have other user roles.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. NOTES TO OFFERORS: OFFERORS SHOULD NOTE THE FOLLOWING IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING PROPOSAL SUBMISSION FOR DSAID:

· The DSAID Requirements Package: The DSAID Requirements Package posted on the website (www.sapr.mil) is not the final version. It is expected that minimal changes, if any, will be made to the package between issuing the solicitation and contract award. Offerors are to provide their technical proposal based on the current DSAID Requirements Package posted on the above website. Upon contract award, the awardee will receive the final baseline requirements at the Post Award Conference.

· Alternate Schedule: Keeping with the contract type, offerors may propose an alternate Schedule to the one listed in this solicitation.

· Licenses/Maintenance: Software Licenses and Maintenance/Upgrades are not included in the current Schedule. Should any of these item(s) be required, offerors shall propose an alternate Schedule which includes the appropriate item(s).

2. Communication with the Contracting Officer: Solicitation information and amendments will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website at www.fbo.gov. Offerors may email written questions requesting clarification of the Request for Proposal (RFP) to the Contract Specialist, Melanie Thornsbury, at: melanie.thornsbury@osd.pentagon.mil. No information concerning this solicitation or requests for clarification will be provided in response to telephone calls. Questions will be received up to 2:00 PM Eastern Standard Time (EST) on January 22, 2010. Questions received after this time and date may not be answered.

3. Proposal Submissions: All proposal submissions in response to this solicitation must be received no later than 2:00 PM EST on February 17, 2010 to the following address:

DHRA PSO

Attn: Melanie Thornsbury DSAID Solicitation # H98210-10-R-0002 4040 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 120

Arlington, VA 22203

Proposal: Offerors proposal shall be separated into the following three (3) volumes. Each volume shall be submitted in individual folders:

A. VOLUME I – Business Proposal: Offerors shall submit one (1) hard copy of Volume I. This volume shall Include:

a. Signed copy of the Standard Form 1449, with blocks 17 and 30 completed.

b. Signed copy of the Standard Form 30 of any amendments issued against this RFP.

c. Completed Commercial Item Small Business Subcontracting Plan (See Attachment B).

d. Completed Representations and Certifications of Offeror (FAR Clause 52.212-3 Alt I and DFARS Clause DFARS 252.212-7000).

e. All completed clauses that require an offeror’s response.

f. Past Performance References. Offerors shall submit 3-5 relevant Past Performance references (for both prime and subcontractors, if applicable). All references shall address current projects or those completed within the last three years. The Past Performance reference information shall include the following:

· Name, email, and telephone numbers for points of contact

· Project Name

· Date of Contract

· Type of Contract

· Dollar Value of Contract

· Period of Performance

· Description of services/supplies provided

· Description of the relevance to the current requirement being solicited

Should the offeror possess no relevant past performance, a written statement shall be provided by the offeror so indicating. In the case of an offeror without a relevant past performance or for whom information is not available, the offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and will be assigned a neutral rating.

B. VOLUME II – Technical Proposal: Offerors shall submit one (1) original and five (5) hard copies of Volume II addressing each Element under Factor 1, Technical, in Attachment A of the solicitation.

This volume shall be formatted as follows:

· Page limitation in accordance with Attachment A.

· Page size shall be 8 ½” x 11”with 1” top/bottom/side margins, single spaced, and numbered.

· All written text shall have a font size no smaller than 11 point.

C. VOLUME III – Price Proposal: Offerors shall submit one (1) hard copy of Volume III. This volume shall include:

i. A completed Schedule for the Base and all Option years. The Schedule shall reflect per unit pricing by CLIN. All items listed in the Schedule must have a price, or be marked “NSP” for “Not Separately Priced” or “NC” for “No Charge.”

ii. As supporting documentation to the prices proposed in the Schedule, offerors must provide labor categories and rates for the Base and all Option years. Offerors shall clearly define the labor categories proposed for this contract and provide fully burdened hourly labor rates.

iii. Sample Task Order pricing. Offerors shall submit pricing and labor categories for the sample task order in Attachment C. The task order is just a sample and the pricing provided will be used to evaluate offerors understanding of the requirement and compare pricing.

4. Oral Presentations: Offerors shall present a 90 minute presentation addressing their technical approach to designing, developing and implementing DSAID. The presentation should include:

· An overview of their proposal (i.e. an executive summary).

· An explanation of their technical approach.

· A demonstration of the proposed technical solution, which should include the technical approach throughout (Reference Element 1 of Attachment A).

· The Implementation Plan (Reference Element 2 of Attachment A).

· The Program Management Plan (Reference Element 3 of Attachment A).

a. Date: Oral presentations are tentatively scheduled for the period of Monday, February 22, 2010 through March 5, 2010 (Monday – Friday). The Contract Specialist will notify offerors of their assigned oral presentation time. Offerors shall be prepared and in attendance on the date, time, and location designated. The Government reserves the right to reschedule any Offerors presentation.

b. Time Limit: Each Offeror’s oral presentation shall not exceed 90 minutes. A Government employee shall be designated as the exclusive timekeeper of the oral presentations. There will not be a question-and-answer exchange during the presentation. If needed, clarification questions may occur after the oral presentation.

c. Location: The oral presentations will be held in Arlington, VA. The exact location is to be determined.

d. Offeror’s Personnel: Attendance is limited to a maximum of two people.

e. Media: There are no limitations on the media used to present information during the oral presentation; however, the Offeror is responsible for providing, setting up, and removing any media/equipment used. Setup and removal time shall not count against the oral presentation time. Offerors are asked to arrive 15 minutes ahead of their scheduled time to setup their presentations. Handouts will be allowed.

5. Summary of Important Due Dates:

(End of Instructions to Offerors) (End of Summary of Changes)