Q-As - Amendment 1.pdf

H9821026RE002 | DANTES | AST | QUESTIONS | RESPONSES

Posted 18 Mar 2026

1) Scope & Requirement | Clarify the specific academic skills and levels (basic through pre-college) that the course must address. Are there any priority areas (e.g., math, English, science)?

Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The course must address cognitive (math, English, science), metacognitive, and non-cognitive skills from basic through pre-college levels. These skills are critical for college placement, reclassification, and military advancement.

a. Further Clarification Needed: Priority areas or specific gaps identified in previous programs are not explicitly mentioned.

Response: The needs of each military learner will vary. Therefore, there are no specific priorities for each of the skills to be addressed.

2) Expectations for personalized learning paths: How detailed and adaptive should they be?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The course must create personalized learning paths that identify knowledge and skill gaps and empower students to address their individual needs. However, the level of detail and real-time adaptability is not specified.

Response: Course content adaptability should be based on assessment results described in section

4.1.2 and 4.1.3.1. Results of lower than 50% correct responses in a topic area should cause the course to adapt to feature and emphasize that topic area. Conversely, results that are greater than 80% correct responses should cause the course to de-emphasize that more successful topic area.

For assessment results between these percentages should cause the course to adapt accordingly.

3) Standards or frameworks (e.g., Common Core, military-specific standards) the course content must align with?

a. Not Answered: No specific standards or frameworks are mentioned in the documents.

Response: There is no single educational standard or framework associated with this requirement. However, the guidance in PWS section 4.1.1 applies.

4) Expectations for video tutorials: Should they be custom-developed or can they include third-party resources?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The course must integrate open-source and/or contractor-developed videos to support instruction and remediation. It’s unclear if third-party resources are acceptable.

Response: Third-party media resources are acceptable. Any media subcontractor information and approach shall be made part of the proposal.

5) Technical Specifications | Technical requirements for the web-based platform, including compatibility with existing military systems and security protocols?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The platform must be accessible 24/7, worldwide, and accommodate remote locations. However, compatibility with existing military systems and specific security protocols is not detailed.

Response: The training course shall be hosted on a commercial cloud hosting service, separate and independent of any Government networks. The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) clause 252.204-7012 applies which mandates compliance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-171. PWS Section 9.3 has been rewritten to address these matters.

6) Requirements for the mobile app (e.g., offline functionality, data storage, synchronization)?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The mobile app must operate with limited connectivity and provide offline access. Specific details on data storage or synchronization are not provided.

Response: A new PWS section 4.1.6 Offline Course Access has been added.

7) Specific requirements for diagnostic, formative, interim, and summative assessments?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The course must include these assessments to measure academic knowledge and skills. However, specific formats or reporting capabilities are not detailed.

Response: For diagnostic assessments, achieving less than 50% correct answers indicate that the user must take that course module. For formative assessments, greater than 50% but less than 80% correct answers indicates that the user must review the specific portions of a course module that led to that score. Interim assessments shall gauge what specific content area is keeping the user from reaching an 80% score and direct practice to that content area. The summative assessment shall indicate the mastery level of the entire course module with a score of 80% or higher.

8) Learner and Workforce Support | Details about the proactive early warning and response system?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): The system must monitor attendance, engagement, and academic performance to identify at-risk learners. Specific metrics or triggers are not fully detailed.

a. Response: When there is no engagement with the application for more than 10 days for attendance, and/or a 10% or greater decline in academic performance as demonstrated by the interim assessments should trigger an attendance or academic warning, respectively.

The warning should be sent to the student user and the associated administrator account.

This has been added to PWS section 4.1.4b. “The system shall generate an early warning notification when no engagement with the application is detected for a period exceeding 10 consecutive days for attendance, or when a 10% or greater decline in academic performance is identified based on interim assessment results. These warnings should be sent to the student user and the associated administrator account.”

9) Level of detail expected in learner progression reports and administrator dashboards?

a. Not Answered: The documents do not specify the level of detail or preferred formats for reports and dashboards.

Response: The level of detail and formats for reports and dashboard data will be determined by the contractors’ proposed commercial solution.

10) Process for issuing electronic/printable certificates of completion?

a. Not Answered: No specific process or design requirements for certificates are mentioned.

Response: The resulting certificate should take the form of a downloadable print document file (pdf). ‘Academic Skills Training,’ ‘Certificate of Completion,’ ‘the user’s name,’ and the ‘completion date are required fields.’ Other appearance elements will be determined by the contractors’ proposed commercial solution. The Government may request custom certificate elements to suit the needs of stakeholders, but these modifications will be minor.

11) Accessibility and Scalability | Anticipated number of Service members who will use the course annually? Projections for growth?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 5 (Past Performance Questionnaire): Over 40,000 new users enrolled in FY24. Growth projections are not provided.

Response: This figure is unknown. The program was slated to end in June 2026 causing a significant decline in enrollments. However, as awareness is increased among the Services, the Government expects enrollments to climb. For planning purposes, a return to the 2024 figure of 40,000 enrollments with a 20% increase year over year is the goal.

12) Challenges or considerations for providing access to Service members in remote or classified locations?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): Offline functionality and mobile app provisions are required, but specific challenges or considerations are not detailed.

Response: Service members working in downrange locations often do not have access to internet. The proposed solution requires a downloadable mobile application (while the service member does have internet access) that can be used and store course data until the internet can be accessed. When the internet becomes available, the mobile application shall have the capability to synchronize the user’s course data with the online application. See PWS 4.1.6.

13) Restrictions or limitations on the use of third-party tools or platforms?

a. Not Answered: No restrictions or limitations are mentioned in the documents.

Response: Third-party tools or platforms resources are acceptable. Any subcontractor information and approach shall be made part of the proposal.

14) Compliance and Security | Specific security requirements for the platform, mobile app, and data storage (e.g., DoD cybersecurity standards, FedRAMP compliance)?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): Contractors must obtain DoD credentials for access to federally controlled facilities and systems. Specific cybersecurity standards are not detailed.

Response: See response to question 5.

15) Expectations for handling classified or sensitive data, particularly in offline environments?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 1 (PWS): Offline functionality is required, but specific protocols for handling classified or sensitive data are not provided.

Response: This requirement is UNCLASSIFIED. Aggregated PII is limited to name, email, and duty station. See response to question 5.

16) Additional compliance requirements beyond Section 508 and general DoD standards?

a. Not Answered: No additional compliance requirements are mentioned.

Response: No. See response to question 5.

17) Contractual and Budget Details | Anticipated budget range for this contract?

a. Not Answered: Budget details are not provided in the documents.

Response: This requirement is a firm fixed priced acquisition, and each offeror’s proposed price should ensure it covers all requirements to fully meet the PWS and Contract requirements outlined in the entire solicitation.

18) Proposal and Evaluation Process | Mandatory certifications, past performance requirements, or other qualifications?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 2 (Instructions to Offerors): Offerors must be registered in SAM and provide past performance information. Specific certifications are not mentioned.

Response: Past performance is outlined from the solicitation, attachment 2, and attachment 5 with no mention of certifications needed. Proposals shall be composed in accordance with the solicitation and attachments.

19) Can CPARS be used instead of Past Performance Questionnaire as some CORS and Contracting Officers are no longer with the Government and some programs no longer exist.

Response: IAW with The Solicitation Attachment 2, Instruction to Offerors, at Volume III:

Factor 2, Past Performance, "The Government may utilize the Federal CPARS application in addition to the information submitted in the offeror's past performance proposal to determine the quality and relevance of the Offeror's past performance."

20) Opportunity for a pre-proposal conference or Q&A session?

a. Answered in Attachment 2 (Instructions to Offerors): Questions must be submitted by March 5, 2026, but no mention of a pre-proposal conference is made.

Response: There is no Pre-proposal Conference for this acquisition.

21) Agency Priorities and Expectations | Challenges or pain points with the current or previous solution?

a. Not Answered: No specific challenges or pain points are mentioned.

Response: There are no specific challenges or pain points.

22) Alignment with broader Defense Department education and training initiatives?

a. Partially Answered in Attachment 5 (Past Performance Questionnaire): The program aligns with DoD VolEd Strategic Plan and other directives, but broader alignment is not detailed.

Response: The broader alignment is described in the first paragraph of PWS sections 1.0 & 2.0.

23) Collaboration and Communication | Level of collaboration and communication expected during development and implementation?

a. Not Answered: No specific expectations are mentioned.

Response: A numerical level of collaboration cannot be described. The Government expects both the incumbent and awarded contractor to fully cooperate to achieve the requirements in PWS section 4.3.

24) Specific reporting or meeting requirements during the contract period?

a. Not Answered: Reporting or meeting requirements are not detailed.

Response: Reporting and meeting requirements are sufficiently described in PWS section 4.2.5.

Other additional meetings may be required at the request of the COR.

25) Does the agency envision this program expanding or evolving in the future?

a. Not Answered: No information on future expansion is provided.

Response There is potential for program expansion in the future, however, each offeror should propose based on the requirements of the PWS.

26) Opportunities for ongoing updates, maintenance, or enhancements?

a. Not Answered: This is not addressed in the documents.

Response: Updates and maintenance to the product are expected as a natural part of this requirement. Within scope enhancements may be requested, within reason, based on feedback from stakeholders. This is identified in the PWS at 4.1 and 4.2.1.1.

27) How does the agency plan to measure the long-term success of this program?

a. Not Answered: No success metrics are mentioned.

Response: The Government is still defining long term metrics of success related to recruitment, retention, and advancement of service members in relation to this specific program.

28) Is the ask for a web-based integrated platform, or will you also require us to create and deliver educational content as well?

Response: The online platform is what is being solicited. There is no requirement for creation or delivery of live educational content.

29) Does the Government classify DANTES AST learner data as Covered Defense Information (CDI) under DFARS 252.204-7012 requiring FedRAMP Moderate cloud authorization or as Federal Contract Information (FCI) allowing commercial cloud hosting with NIST SP 800-171 compliance? Please specify cloud hosting cybersecurity requirements for the LMS. Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: "In addition to DFARS 252.204-7012, the Contractor shall notify the DMDC Incident Response (IR) team…"; Section 9.2: IS security protections;

Section 9.3: PII and CUI restrictions.

Response: Yes. See response to question 5.

30) The incumbent (Petersons LLC, H9821021C004) has operated the current AST platform on commercial (non-GovCloud) hosting. Does the Government consider commercial cloud hosting with NIST SP 800-171 compliance acceptable for the follow-on contract, or does the new contract require migration to a FedRAMP-authorized environment? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: DFARS 252.204-7012 reference; Attachment 2 – Instructions to Offerors, Para. 5 (Acquisition History: Petersons LLC, H9821021C004)

Response: See response to question 5.

31) Does the Government require cloud hosting to be exclusively within the continental United States (CONUS), or are international AWS/Azure regions acceptable for performance optimization given the global distribution of Service members? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 3.0: "fully accessible to Service members located worldwide"; Section 8.2: U.S. citizenship requirement for contractor personnel with access to DHRA-sponsored resources

Response: Provided that the multiple site hosting meets NIST 800-171 standards, that approach is acceptable. See response to question 5.

32) Does the Government require a formal Disaster Recovery plan with specific Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO) targets? If so, what are the Government's minimum acceptable RTO and RPO thresholds? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.2: "Contractor shall provide minimum system availability 98% of the time reported monthly"; Section 16.2 PRS – System Availability: "98% system availability" threshold — no explicit RTO/RPO specified

Response: No and none. This requirement is not critical to national security. Therefore, this benchmark will be monitored by the COR and will be subject to feedback from administrators and users. For all intents and purposes, the service needs to be fully available 24/7, 365 days per year.

33) Does the Government require dedicated single-tenant cloud infrastructure, or is multi-tenant SaaS hosting with logical data separation acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.2:

IS security protections appropriate for confidentiality, integrity, and availability; Section 9.3:

Government information and PII protections no single/multi-tenant specification

Response: See response to question 31.

34) Does the Government require the contractor to submit a NIST SP 800-171 self-assessment score (under DFARS 252.204-7020) prior to contract award? What is the Government's minimum acceptable score threshold? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: "In addition to DFARS 252.204-7012…" (DFARS 252.204-7020 applies per DFARS)

Response: Per DFARS provision 252.204-7019, in order to be considered for award, the Offeror shall have a current assessment for each covered contractor information system that is relevant to the offer, contract, task order, or delivery order. Please reference solicitation updates to the Instructions to Offerors and Basis for Award for additional information regarding NIST requirements.

35) Does the Government require annual third-party penetration testing by a certified 3PAO, or may the contractor conduct internal penetration testing with results provided to the COR?

Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: Cyber Incident Reporting, DFARS 252.204-7012; Section 9.2:

IS security protections — no annual pen testing frequency or 3PAO requirement specified

Response: No. See response to question 5.

36) For the offline mobile app, does the Government require locally stored learner data to be encrypted using FIPS 140-2 validated encryption? Does the Government require a remote wipe capability if a device is lost or stolen? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.2: IS security protections;

Section 9.3: system "shall be maintained completely free of any PII"; Section 3.0: mobile app with limited connectivity

Response: PWS section 9.3 has been rewritten. See response to question 5.

37) Does the Government require Single Sign-On (SSO) integration with any DoD identity system (e.g., CAC/PIV, DMDC, DS Logon, Login.gov), or is a standalone contractor-managed username/password registration system with email verification acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 8.10: DODM 1000.13 compliance for logical access to DoD networks; Section 9.3: PII-free system requirement no learner SSO requirement specified

Response: This solicitation is for a stand-alone solution. No DoD system integration will be required. PWS section 9.3 has been rewritten. See response to question 5.

38) PWS Section 9.3 states the system shall be "completely free of any PII" including names, SSNs, and DoD ID numbers. However, the system must track individual learner progress and provide personalized learning pathways. How does the Government reconcile the no-PII requirement with individual learner record tracking? Does the Government require a tokenized/anonymized learner identity system? The current incumbent allows name/email for registration — will this be acceptable for the upcoming contract? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.3: "The system shall be maintained completely free of any Personally Identifiable Information (PII), which includes but is not limited to, names, Social Security numbers, DoD Identification Numbers, or any other data that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity. Any breach of this clause… will be treated as a cyber incident."

Response: PWS section 9.3 has been rewritten. See response to question 5.

39) PWS Section 16.2 specifies content module distribution thresholds (Math 40–50%, English 30–40%, Science 10–20%, Metacognitive/Non-Cognitive ≤10%). Does the Government require a minimum total number of learning modules, or is the percentage distribution the only structural requirement? Is 50 total modules acceptable, or does the Government expect 100, 200, or more? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 16.2 PRS – Cognitive Skills: "Math 40–50% of content modules; English 30–40%; Science 10–20%; Metacognitive and Non-Cognitive – no more than 10% of entire course curriculum."

Response: The percentage distribution is a structural requirement. Since this solicitation is for an existing commercial platform and not for development of a new product, the number of modules to meet the requirement should already be determined in the contractor proposal.

40) Does the Government require the Science content (Section 4.1.1.3), covering six disciplines (Earth/Space, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Electronics, Physics, Anatomy/Physiology), to include dedicated learning pathways and assessments per discipline, or may science content be delivered as a single integrated track? Attachment 1 (PWS), Sections 4.1.1.3.1–4.1.1.3.6: Earth and Space Sciences; Life Sciences; Physical Sciences; Electronics;

Physics; Anatomy and Physiology each listed as discrete subsections

Response: The science content must be individual dedicated learning pathways.

41) PWS Section 4.1i requires at least 50% of instructional examples to incorporate military-relevant topics. Does this 50% threshold apply to each individual subject area separately, or is it measured as an aggregate across the entire course? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1i: "At least 50% of the instructional examples will incorporate topics designed to be engaging and relevant to Service members."

Response: This 50% threshold is measured as an aggregate across the entire course.

42) PWS Section 4.1.1.2.5 requires English as a Second Language (ESL) content. Does the Government require a full standalone ESL course track (reading, writing, speaking, listening), or is ESL supplemental support integrated into existing English modules sufficient? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.1.2.5: "English as a Second Language (i.e., English Language Use, English Writing, Speaking, Listening, Reading, etc.)"

Response: A full stand-alone ESL course track is required.

43) Does the Government have a minimum item bank size requirement per subject domain to support randomization and prevent item exposure across repeated test attempts (e.g., a minimum of 200 items per domain)? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.2: "The online learner evaluations shall include a range of diagnostic, formative, interim, and summative assessments"; Section 4.1.2g: practice tests for ASVAB/TABE no minimum item bank size specified.

Response: No

44) PWS Section 4.1.2h requires a GT-like predictor test with 95% confidence in estimating ASVAB GT scores. Will the Government provide historical ASVAB GT data from prior test-takers to support predictor model calibration and validation? Without historical data, achieving 95% confidence is extremely difficult to demonstrate at proposal stage. Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.2h: "Development of a GT-like predictor test, so that with 95% confidence Service members could estimate their scores when taking that test for math and English."; Section 16.2 PRS – Assessments: "Assessments shall be a minimum of 95% predictive of course content learner competency."

Response: The Government understands that this specific in-contract requirement will take current supportive data and time to implement. Only the proposed approach to this element will be considered.

45) Does the Government require the assessment item bank to be continuously refreshed throughout the contract period to prevent score inflation? If so, what is the minimum number of new validated items required per year per subject area? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.2:

Assessment requirements; Section 4.1.5: "Contractor shall review and update all outdated video content on a yearly basis. All new/updated content should be live by month 4 of each successive Option Year." (No explicit item refresh cadence specified)

Response: Not continuously, but periodically. There is no minimum number of validated items required. However, the Program Manager/COR will review monitor content based on their own surveillance and feedback from the Services to ensure the assessments and content are pedagogically sound.

46) PWS Section 4.1l requires normalized pre and post-test scores to show a minimum 20% improvement. Is this 20% improvement required at the individual learner level, or as a program-wide average across all learners? What is the consequence if the program average falls below 20%? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1l: "Normalized pre and post-test scores should show a minimum improvement of 20% in scores."; Section 16.2 PRS – Assessments: performance threshold language

Response: This is a program-wide goal. PWS section 4.1l. has been updated.

47) Does the Government permit the use of AI or machine learning models trained on historical ASVAB data to power the GT predictor test, or does the Government require a traditional psychometric approach (Item Response Theory or Classical Test Theory)? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.2h: GT-like predictor test at 95% confidence; Section 4.1: "leverage the multidisciplinary best and emerging practices from across developmental education, learning science, computer adaptive learning" — AI methodology not restricted

Response: The use of AI machine learning models is permitted.

48) The incumbent's current solution operates the web platform and mobile application as two separate products with no synchronization, requiring Service members to restart their learning pathway when switching platforms. Does the Government consider this acceptable for the follow-on contract, or is cross-platform synchronization a mandatory requirement? Will two separate solutions be acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 3.0: "Provisions shall accommodate Service member access in remote locations via a mobile app that can operate with limited connectivity"; Section 4.1k: customized learning pathways; Section 4.1.3.1: "self-paced computer adaptive customized learning modules organized into learning pathways"

Response: Any platform proposed must meet the requirements identified in the PWS. Two independent non-synchronized platforms will not be acceptable.

49) If a Service member completes their pre-test and begins their personalized learning pathway on the web platform, does the Government require that the exact same pathway state, progress, and assessment history be immediately accessible when switching to the mobile app (including in offline mode)? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1k: customized learning pathways from pre-test results; Section 4.1.3.1: self-paced computer adaptive customized learning modules; Section 3.0: mobile app with limited connectivity

Response: Yes.

50) If a Service member completes assessments and learning modules while offline on the mobile app, does the Government require that this activity data, including assessment scores, completion status, and pathway progression automatically sync to the web platform and administrator dashboard when connectivity is restored? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.1a:

Administrator dashboard for learner enrollments, academic progression, engagement, and reporting; Section 4.2.5.1.2: "Program Analysis and Usage to include detailed data and analysis on the mobile app from the App stores"

Response: Yes.

51) Does the Government require that Service members be able to complete assessments and quizzes while offline on the mobile app, with results syncing to the LMS upon reconnect? Or are assessments required only in the connected web environment? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.2: full assessment requirements (diagnostic, formative, interim, summative); Section 3.0:

"previous provisions included courseware on a downloadable CD for offline usage for spaces that are classified"

Response: See response to question 6.

52) PWS Section 4.1.3.1 requires a computer-adaptive learning pathway. True real-time adaptive testing requires a live server connection. Does the Government consider a pre-computed adaptive pathway (calculated at last sync, followed offline, re-optimized upon reconnect) as technically compliant? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.3.1: "Provide an asynchronous, self-paced computer adaptive customized learning modules organized into learning pathways";

Section 3.0: mobile app with limited connectivity requirement

Response: Yes.

53) PWS Section 4.1.5 requires video in at least 50% of learning modules. Does this 50% requirement apply equally to the offline mobile experience, or is a reduced video threshold acceptable for offline delivery given device storage constraints? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.5: "Video content shall be included in at least 50% of the learning modules to support content instruction and remediation"; Section 3.0: mobile app offline provision

Response: The 50% requirement does apply to the mobile application with consideration of the answer to question 54 below.

54) For offline video delivery, does the Government define a minimum acceptable video resolution that balances quality with storage limitations (e.g., 480p minimum), or does the Government require full-quality video both online and offline? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.5: "The Contractor shall ensure that video content is engaging, formatted in sufficient resolution quality, and relevant." (No specific resolution standard stated)

Response: Sufficient resolution in this case means a method that is appropriate to view the intended lesson. For example, if the video contains explanation without a visual element, a lower resolution is acceptable. Conversely, if the video contains detailed steps of completing a math problem with demonstration, it may require a higher resolution. An auto-resolution feature, akin to how YouTube works when connectivity speed varies, is suggested.

55) PWS Section 4.1.5 permits open-source video (such as Khan Academy). Many open-source platforms prohibit offline downloading per their Terms of Service. Does the Government require open-source third-party video to be available offline, or may open-source video be connectivity-dependent while contractor-produced video is available offline? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.5: "The Contractor shall secure necessary agreements to leverage open-source video content (i.e., Khan Academy, Massive Open Online Courses [MOOC], etc.) if used."

Response: The contractor shall not violate any third-party terms of service agreements. See new PWS section 4.1.6 and adjust accordingly.

56) Does the Government require a full-course download option (all modules at once) or is selective module download (learner downloads only their assigned pathway modules) acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 3.0: "previous provisions included courseware on a downloadable CD for offline usage"; Section 4.1.3.1: self-paced customized learning modules

Response: No, selective downloading is acceptable provided the progress data can be synchronized with the online course platform.

57) If a Service member watches a video module while offline, does the Government require that video completion tracking (percentage watched, time spent, completion event) be captured offline and synced to the LMS and reporting dashboard upon reconnect? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.5.1.2: "Program Analysis and Usage to include detailed data and analysis on the mobile app from the App stores"; Section 4.2.5.1.8: lesson completion and student progression metrics

Response: No, addressed in new PWS section 4.1.6.

58) What is the Government's historical or projected monthly tutoring session volume? This is required to accurately price tutor staffing levels and platform capacity. Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.4e: "Tutor Support" the contractor shall be capable of providing tutor support to higher-needs learners whenever it is reasonably apparent that the user needs it"; Section 4.1.4.4:

monthly satisfaction survey results — no historical volume data provided

Response: In 2025 there were 547 tutoring sessions used. We expect this level of usage to increase by 20% over the next year and another 10% over each successive year.

59) PWS Section 4.1.4e requires live tutoring 24/7. Does the Government acknowledge that live tutoring cannot function in zero-connectivity environments, and that the 24/7 availability requirement applies only when connectivity is present? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.4e:

"This support is expected to be available 24/7, except on Federal holidays"; Section 3.0: mobile app for limited connectivity environments; Section 4.1.4.1: "interactive, online classroom environment"

Response: Yes, acknowledged. Tutoring can only take place in a connected environment.

60) Does the Government require a specific named administrator role structure e.g., (1) DANTES Super Admin, (2) Service Branch Admin, (3) Installation Counselor, (4) Individual Counselor or does the contractor propose an administrator hierarchy for COR approval?

Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.1a: "Administrator dashboard to enable education counselors or education program managers to see learner enrollments, academic progression, engagement, and reporting"; Section 4.2.1: "VolEd workforce professionals at more than 250 military base locations"

Response: The proposed contractor hierarchy is an acceptable approach.

61) What is the Government's estimated total number of active administrator accounts across all 250+ installations? This figure is critical for LMS licensing and performance capacity planning. Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.1: "Ensure functionality for VolEd workforce professionals at more than 250 military base locations"

Response: The Government expects approximately 300 active administrator accounts at any given time.

62) Does the Government require ad hoc reporting to be a self-service function within the LMS (counselors build their own reports independently), or is it acceptable for ad hoc reports to be generated by the contractor and delivered within a defined SLA? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.1b: "Administrator access to include standard and ad hoc reports on learner engagement, progression, and predictive outcomes (i.e., course completion scores on summative assessments in relation to ASVAB GT scores or introductory college-level course placement)."

Response: A self-service reporting function is required.

63) Does the Government require mobile app usage reported separately from web platform usage in the Monthly Status Report, including App Store download metrics and active mobile vs.

web user counts? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.5.1.2: "Program Analysis and Usage to include detailed data and analysis on the mobile app from the App stores"

Response: The mobile app data does not necessarily need to be reported in the MSR separately, but the ability to discern mobile app usage via the dashboard is required. This data will inform the future state of the requirement.

64) Does the Government require real-time COR access to the administrator dashboard at any time via a read-only Government login, or is data access limited to formal monthly and quarterly report deliverables? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.5.1: Monthly Status Report requirements;

Section 4.2.5.2: Quarterly Status Reports; Section 5.1.1: "Deliverables provided under this requirement shall be submitted to the Government COR"

Response: The COR requires real-time access as needed.

65) PWS Section 4.2.5.1 requires monthly reports. For Service members who are offline and have not yet synced activity data, does the Government require: (a) exclusion of offline/unsynced learners from monthly metrics until their data syncs, or (b) a separate "connectivity-limited learner" category showing last known progress state and sync status? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.5.1: Monthly Status Report; Section 4.2.5.1.3: "Registrations – New registrations by cohort groups"; Section 4.2.5.1.8: "Student Progression" and "Completed – Percentage of required lessons on customized path completed"

Response: The Government does not expect offline/un-synched data to be included in the metrics.

66) Does the Government classify DANTES AST learner data as Covered Defense Information (CDI) under DFARS 252.204-7012 — requiring FedRAMP Moderate cloud authorization — or as Federal Contract Information (FCI) — allowing commercial cloud hosting with NIST SP 800-171 compliance? Please specify cloud hosting cybersecurity requirements for the LMS. Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: "In addition to DFARS 252.204-7012, the Contractor shall notify the DMDC Incident Response (IR) team…"; Section 9.2: IS security protections; Section 9.3: PII and CUI restrictions

Response: Yes. See response to question 5.

67) The incumbent (Petersons LLC, H9821021C004) has operated the current AST platform on commercial (non-GovCloud) hosting. Does the Government consider commercial cloud hosting with NIST SP 800-171 compliance acceptable for the follow-on contract, or does the new contract require migration to a FedRAMP-authorized environment? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: DFARS 252.204-7012 reference; Attachment 2 – Instructions to Offerors, Para. 5 (Acquisition History: Petersons LLC, H9821021C004)

Response: Yes, see response to question 5.

68) Does the Government require cloud hosting to be exclusively within the continental United States (CONUS), or are international AWS/Azure regions acceptable for performance optimization given the global distribution of Service members? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 3.0: "fully accessible to Service members located worldwide"; Section 8.2: U.S. citizenship requirement for contractor personnel with access to DHRA-sponsored resources

Response: Provided that the multiple site hosting meets NIST 800-171 standards, that approach is acceptable. See response to question 5.

69) Does the Government require a formal Disaster Recovery plan with specific Recovery Time Objective (RTO) and Recovery Point Objective (RPO) targets? If so, what are the Government's minimum acceptable RTO and RPO thresholds? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.2: "Contractor shall provide minimum system availability 98% of the time reported monthly"; Section 16.2 PRS – System Availability: "98% system availability" threshold — no explicit RTO/RPO specified

Response: This requirement is not critical to national security. Therefore, this benchmark will be monitored by the COR and will be subject to feedback from administrators and users. The service should be available 24/7, 365 days per year.

70) Does the Government require dedicated single-tenant cloud infrastructure, or is multi-tenant SaaS hosting with logical data separation acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.2:

IS security protections appropriate for confidentiality, integrity, and availability; Section 9.3:

Government information and PII protections — no single/multi-tenant specification

Response: As long as the hosting meets NIST 800-171 standards, that approach is acceptable.

See response to question 5.

71) Does the Government require the contractor to submit a NIST SP 800-171 self-assessment score (under DFARS 252.204-7020) prior to contract award? What is the Government's minimum acceptable score threshold? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: "In addition to DFARS 252.204-7012…" (DFARS 252.204-7020 applies per DFARS)

Response: Per DFARS provision 252.204-7019, in order to be considered for award, the Offeror shall have a current assessment for each covered contractor information system that is relevant to the offer, contract, task order, or delivery order. Please reference solicitation updates to the Instructions to Offerors and Basis for Award for additional information regarding NIST requirements.

72) Does the Government require annual third-party penetration testing by a certified 3PAO, or may the contractor conduct internal penetration testing with results provided to the COR?

Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: Cyber Incident Reporting, DFARS 252.204-7012; Section 9.2:

IS security protections — no annual pen testing frequency or 3PAO requirement specified

Response: Internal testing is acceptable. See response to question 5.

73) For the offline mobile app, does the Government require locally stored learner data to be encrypted using FIPS 140-2 validated encryption? Does the Government require a remote wipe capability if a device is lost or stolen? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.2: IS security protections;

Section 9.3: system "shall be maintained completely free of any PII"; Section 3.0: mobile app with limited connectivity

Response: No and no. PWS section 9.3 has been rewritten. See response to question 5.

74) Does the Government require Single Sign-On (SSO) integration with any DoD identity system (e.g., CAC/PIV, DMDC, DS Logon, Login.gov), or is a standalone contractor-managed username/password registration system with email verification acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 8.10: DODM 1000.13 compliance for logical access to DoD networks; Section 9.3: PII-free system requirement — no learner SSO requirement specified

Response: See response to question 5.

75) PWS Section 9.3 states the system shall be "completely free of any PII" including names, SSNs, and DoD ID numbers. However, the system must track individual learner progress and provide personalized learning pathways. How does the Government reconcile the no-PII requirement with individual learner record tracking? Does the Government require a tokenized/anonymized learner identity system? The current incumbent allows name/email for registration — will this be acceptable for the upcoming contract? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.3: "The system shall be maintained completely free of any Personally Identifiable Information (PII), which includes but is not limited to, names, Social Security numbers, DoD Identification Numbers, or any other data that can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity. Any breach of this clause… will be treated as a cyber incident."

Response: See response to question 5.

76) Attachment 4 confirms Section 508 compliance under WCAG 2.0 Level AA is required for all software and electronic content. For the mobile application, does the Government require WCAG 2.0 Level AA for the native mobile app (iOS and Android), or does the Government accept Apple (APCA) and Google (Material Accessibility) mobile standards as equivalent?

Attachment 4 – Section 508 Determination: E207.2: "User interface components, as well as the content of platforms and applications, shall conform to Level A and Level AA Success Criteria and Conformance Requirements in WCAG 2.0"; E205.4: WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA for electronic content

Response: Attachment 4 requirements apply.

77) Does the Government require the contractor to submit a Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) for the proposed LMS and mobile application as part of the proposal, or is a commitment to deliver Section 508 compliance post-award sufficient for evaluation purposes?

Attachment 4 – Section 508 Determination: E202.7 Best Meets and E202.7.1 Required Documentation; FAR 39.203–39.205

Response: Section 508 compliance is assumed for all proposed solutions and will not be part of the evaluation.

78) For video content (PWS Section 4.1.5), Section 508 requires closed captions at WCAG

2.0 Level AA. Does the Government require closed captions for all video content including open-source third-party video (e.g., Khan Academy)? If a third-party video lacks compliant captions, is the contractor required to add them or replace the video? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1.5: open-source video (Khan Academy, MOOCs) permitted; Attachment 4 – Section 508 Determination: E205.4: WCAG 2.0 Level AA for electronic content including video;

E205.2: public-facing content conformance requirement

Response: Yes, and yes.

79) The PWS does not explicitly mention Artificial Intelligence (AI). Does the Government permit or encourage AI features Including AI-driven adaptive engines, predictive at-risk analytics, or AI tutoring chatbots in the platform? Are there any prohibited AI applications the Government wants to explicitly exclude? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.1: "leverage the multidisciplinary best and emerging practices from across developmental education, learning science, computer adaptive learning"; Section 4.1.3.1: computer adaptive learning AI not explicitly addressed or restricted in any solicitation section

Response: The use of AI is permitted.

80) If AI is used, does the Government require disclosure of which AI tools, models, or third-party providers are used? Does the Government require AI processing to occur within U.S.-based data centers only? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 9.1: DFARS 252.204-7012; Section 9.2: IS security protection

Response: Yes, and yes.

81) PWS Section 16.2 PRS states: "Assessments shall be a minimum of 95% predictive of course content learner competency." How does the Government define "predictive of learner competency"? Is this a psychometric criterion validity standard (95% correlation against ASVAB/TABE), or does it mean assessments must cover 95% of course content learning objectives? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 16.2 PRS – Assessments: "Assessments shall be a minimum of 95% predictive of course content learner competency"; Section 4.1.2h: "95% confidence" GT predictor test; Section 4.1.2f: summative assessments "used to certify learning in terms of predictors of ASVAB GT scores"

Response: This benchmark is intended to gauge ASVAB GT scores. The table in PWS section

16.2 has been updated.

82) If a new contractor wins the award, will the Government facilitate transfer of learner data, active enrollments, and in-progress learning pathways from the incumbent's platform? What cooperation is the Government requiring of Petersons LLC during transition? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.3.4: "The new contractor shall coordinate with the existing contract service provider to facilitate the turnover of technical and management support"; Section 4.3.4.4:

incumbent cooperation plan; Section 4.3.4.2: "ensure transfer and access to all current and previous student data records"

Response: Yes, maximum cooperation during transition is expected and is required under the current Academic Skills Contract, H9821021C0004.

83) Does the Government require uninterrupted service continuity for currently enrolled learners during platform transition (zero gap in access), or is a defined maintenance blackout window of limited duration acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.3.4: "phase-in transition period that shall not exceed one month"; Section 4.3.4.4: "allowing no more than 90 days for these Service members to complete the course they have enrolled"; Attachment 2 – Instructions to Offerors, Element D: "The online product must be ready to use upon award or no later than the end of the transition phase-in period of one month."

Response: Integration of the incumbent system data shall take place during the one-month transition period. The intent is for a newly awarded contractor to have their proposed platform fully operational while the incumbent platform continues to operate. Cutover will happen at the end of the one-month transition period. PWS section 4.3.4.4 has been updated to reflect 30 days for Service member users to complete courses on the incumbent platform.

84) PWS Section 4.2.3 requires a Post-Award Conference within 7 business days of award.

Does the Government expect the full platform to be operational at contract award (requiring an existing live platform), or is a reasonable configuration and go-live period provided before full platform availability is required? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 4.2.3: "Post-Award Conference within seven business days after contract award"; Section 4.3.4: "phase-in transition period that shall not exceed one month"; Attachment 2 – Instructions to Offerors, Element D: one-month transition phase-in language

Response: The planned contract award start date is one month prior to the end of the current contract. It is expected that the platform be fully operational at the end of the one-month transition period stated in PWS section 4.3.4. This is not a development contract, which is why the Government is soliciting an existing similar platform that requires only minor modifications to meet the need.

85) PWS Section 12.0 requires the contractor to deliver a Quality Control Plan (QCP) within 30 calendar days of contract start. Does the Government provide a required QCP template or minimum content outline, or is contractor format acceptable? Attachment 1 (PWS), Section 12.0:

"The contractor shall implement and maintain a Quality Control Plan (QCP)… The QCP shall, at a minimum, provide a method for performing inspections, identifying, correcting and preventing problems/defective Service, addressing customer complaints, and improving quality over the life of the contract"; Section 5.1.2: QCP due not later than 30 calendar days from contract start

Response: Contractor format is acceptable.

86) Attachment 3 states that "parroting of the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect understanding." Does the Government expect offerors to propose specific named platforms, tools, and vendors in the Technical Volume, or would naming a specific platform create a contractual commitment that limits flexibility after award? Attachment 3 – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2: "Offerors are cautioned that parroting of the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect understanding of the requirement or capability to perform"; Element A Technical Approach: "The Government will evaluate the extent of the Offerors capabilities based on depth and thoroughness of the proposal"

Response: The Government has named this educational program Academic Skills Training. The name of the platform or vehicle by which it functions does not matter, within reason and with respect to industry copyrights.

87) Will submitting a functional demo be acceptable as part of the Technical Volume, or as a separate supplemental attachment? If the Government determines discussions are necessary, would a live platform demonstration be requested? Attachment 3 – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2:

"The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions";

competitive range determination language; Attachment 2 – Instructions to Offerors, Volume II:

50-page limit for Technical Capability

Response: No, functional demos will not be considered.

88) Course Requirements Does the government anticipate a catalog of courses…