Final_Q&A_Responses_Revised.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

HC1047-18-R-4016

Attachment 1

Question # Questions / Comments RFP Reference Government Response

RFP

Change

Required (Y/N)

Location of Change

1 Is a Facility Clearance required prior to contract award?

Section C PWS - Section 12.1;

Section H12

Due to the nature of the requirement, the Contractor is required to hold a Secret Facility Clearance from the Defense Security Service Facility Clearance Branch at the time of contract award.

N N/A

Would the Government be willing to award this contract to a company without a clearance with the specific requirement that an interim clearance be obtained within a short number of days after contract award?

Section C, PWS - Section 12.1;

Section H12

Due to the nature of the requirement, individuals performing on the contract are required to hold an Interim or Final Secret Clerance, as specified in Section 12.2 of the PWS, when performance starts.

N N/A

Please provide the position descriptions for all applicable labor categories that have been mentioned in the PWS.

Please provide job description for all the key personnel positions.

Including the number of years’ experience, essential skills, roles & responsibilities, Education etc.

Can the Government please provide the education, experience, certification, and other technical requirements for the six (6) Key Personnel labor categories?

Section C PWS, 14d. Key Personnel

(pg. 52); Section L;

This is a performance-based requirement. The offeror is responsible for proposing personnel with the knowledge, skills, and abilities the offeror has determined to be capable of performing the requirement. The labor categories mentioned in the PWS have been modified and/or removed as appropriate.

Y Section C

PWS,

To ensure bidder responses lead to a fair and reasonable cost evaluation, please provide the estimated level of effort related to total labor hours and labor category breakdown for this effort.

N/A

This is a performance-based requirement and the cost-plus-fixed-fee portion of the requirement will be completion based. As such, the Government will not be providing a mix of labor categories and hours. The Government has only provided a list of Key Personnel and the associated position descriptions. It is up to the offerors to propose a mix of hours and labor categories, including but not limited to the Key Personnel, that they determine necessary in order to meet the requirements of the PWS.

N N/A

RFP Part I, Section C, PWS 14.b (Page 51) states “Due to the nature of work to be performed on this contract, no party performing as a prime or subcontractor can provide support to the GCCS-J Sustainment and Maintenance effort or the GCCS-J Enterprise effort.”

Will the Government consider deleting this statement given the guidance in RFP Part I, Section H4.a (Page 66) and H14 (Page 71) permitting the contractor to submit an Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest Mitigation Plan if a potential or actual conflict exists?

Section C, PWS 14.b (Page 51);

Section H4.a (Page

66) and H14 (Page 71)

The Government has determined that performance of both efforts results in an impaired objectivity Organizational Conflict of Interest. The Government will not be removing this language from the PWS.

The OCCI plan to be submitted in response to this solicitation addresses actual or potential conflicts that may result under this effort.

N N/A

Will Government consider relaxing the Price volume requirements (e.g. awarding to a contractor that does not have an approved accounting system)?

Please verify if DCAA approved accounting system is required before the proposal submission?

Section L6.0 (Page 124)

The requirements established in Section L6.0, Volume VI – Cost/Price, are designed to provide the Government with the necessary information in order to complete source selection. The C2 Portolio T&E requirement will include cost type CLINs.

Contractors proposing to perform this requirement will need to have the correct business systems

IAW DFARS 252.242-

7005, including an accounting system IAW

DFARS 252.242-7006.

These requirements are codified as federal regulations and as such the Government is not able to relax these requirements.

SECTION L sates that “Personnel substantiated by name and title rather than a generic labor category on the staffing plan and/or Organizational Chart, are highly desirable and may result in higher ratings.” Providing employee names for a higher evaluation would appear to encroach on personal services. What is the government’s reasoning for providing higher ratings for names if the stated requirements for each labor category are being met or exceeded by the submitted resume?

L4.2.2.3.6.

Subfactor 6:

Management / Staffing Approach.

Personnel substantiated by name and title rather than a generic labor category are to be proposed along with payroll verification or signed Letters of Intent (LOIs). This is highly desirable to the Government because it indicates that these employees are either already hired or are committed to working on this effort. This is preferable to generic labor categories that will need to be hired after award which increases performance risk.

N N/A

The application of a two week transition plan for similarly scoped C2 testing contracts in the DoD is rare. The challenge is not simply hiring but the reliance on government processes related to CACs, Campus Badges, and Clearances. Furthermore, with only ten business days to execute, contingent employees, and selected incumbent resources, would be forced to immediately resign without proper notice. Considering these elements, what would prevent the government from adjusting its transition requirements from a 2 week time period, to the more traditional 30 days?

L4.2.2.3.6.

Subfactor 6:

Management / Staffing Approach

The Government will adjust the transition period from 2 weeks to 30 days.

Y Section

L4.2.2.3.6 & M2.2.6

What is the level of clearance requirement for the below two key personnel? Database Administrator, Information Assurance Engineer

Page 52 & 53 of

RFP

Database Administrator – Secret Information Assurance Engineer – Secret

N N/A

10 Please provide the current work load data for scope of work. Refer to the response in Question #4. N N/A

11 Would you consider making both CMMI Level 3 and ISO 9001 certification mandatory?

6.1.1 Subtask 1 –

Project Management. (page 28)

The Prime contractor shall have at least 1 of the following certifications at the time of award: CMMI Level 3 or ISO 9001.

Y PWS 6.1.1

Subtask 1

12 What is the current task orders total value? N/A

The Government will not be providing the total values of the current task orders.

N N/A

13 Please verify if RFP page 68 Key Personnel shall be defined by Contractor is accurate. Section H (page 68)

The Government has revised Section H8 to remove the redundancy with "Key Personnel" on page 72 of the original RFP. "Key Personnel" has been removed from the RFP. In addition, the reference to "ID/IQ" in Section L7.2.1 has been removed.

Y

Section H8 Key

Personnel;

Section L7.2.1

14 Please verify if EPL is required to be submitted. If yes, please provide a template.

Requirement to Submit an Electronic Product List (Page 72)

An EPL does not need to be submitted at the time of award as products will not be delivered at the time of award. A copy of the EPL has been added as an attachment.

Y

Electronic Product List has been added as

Attachment L8

15 Are we required to submit letter of intent signed by key personnel?

If yes, will it be counted in the page limit?

Section L.6.2.2 (page 125)

Signed Letters of Intent shall be submitted for Key Personnel that are not substantiated by payroll verification. Letters of Intent do not count towards the page limit. There is no page limit to the Price Narrative.

RFP Part I, Section C, PWS 14.b (Page 51) states “Due to the nature of work to be performed on this contract, no party performing as a prime or subcontractor can provide support to the GCCS-J Sustainment and Maintenance effort or the GCCS-J Enterprise effort.”

In RFP Part I, Section C, PWS 5. Scope (Page 26), the PWS states the “the Government plans to use part of the SURGE CLIN to exercise GCCS-JE support once the Government becomes aware of the exact requirements” – given the GCCS-JE support requirements are unknown, will the Government consider deleting the restriction on prime or subcontractors supporting the GCCS-J Enterprise effort given the guidance in RFP Part I, Section H4.a (Page 66) and H14 (Page 71) and L2.1.8 (Page 116) permitting the contractor to submit an Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest Mitigation Plan if a potential or actual conflict exists?

RFP Part I, Section C, PWS 14.b (Page 51)

RFP Part I, Section C, PWS 5. Scope (Page 26)

RFP Part I, Section H4.a (Page 66), H14 (Page 71), and L2.1.8 (Page 116)

The Government has determined that performance of both efforts results in an impaired objectivity Organizational Conflict of Interest. The Government will not delete the restriction on prime or subcontractors supporting the GCCS-J Enterprise effort.

N N/A

The PWS Background section indicates the Global Combat Support System-Joint (GCSS-J) is one of four major programs subject to the IV&V requirements of this contract yet there is no specific tasking in the balance of the PWS for GCSS-J support. Can the Government please clarify the requirements for GCSS-J support to include the GCSS-J funding sources and anticipated test events per yearly period of performance?

RFP Part I, Section

C, PWS 3.

Background (Pages 25-26)

GCSS-J is one of the major pillar programs under the C2 Portfolio of programs.

However, GCSS testing is done entirely by government personnel and has no requirement for contract test support at this time.

The following deliverables for PWS 6.2.4, Cybersecurity and Information Assurance Compliance Support, appear to be products that would be provided by a capability developer:

Developer’s Secure Coding, analysis, remediation, and mitigation Process Developer cybersecurity self-assessments of GOTs Software (S/W) products and baselines Developer’s Cybersecurity Self-Assessment Summary report of GOTs S/W (per package) (CLASSIFIED) IA Artifacts (Annotated Systems Developer Security Technical Implementation Guide (ASD STIG) checklist and Fortify scan results (i.e. Workbooks &. fpr files)) (CLASSIFIED) Computer Software Product End Items

Can the Government clarify if these deliverables are required?

RFP Part I, Section

C, PWS 6.2.4,

Cybersecurity and Information Assurance Compliance Support (Page 34-35)

Yes, the Government requires these deliverables.

The contractor security team is required to perform security assessments and scans of delivered software to ensure compliance with DoD Information Assurance (IA) and Information Technology (IT) policy, directives, and cybersecurity requirements.

N N/A

The following deliverables for PWS 6.2.5, Reaccreditation Support via the Risk Management Framework, appear to be products that would be provided by a capability developer:

Developer’s Cybersecurity Self-Assessment Summary report (per package) (CLASSIFIED) IA Artifacts (ASD STIG checklist and annotated Fortify scan results) (CLASSIFIED)

Can the Government clarify if these deliverables are required?

RFP Part I, Section

C, PWS 6.2.5,

Reaccreditation Support via the Risk Management Framework (RMF) (Page 35)

Yes, the government requires these deliverables.

The contractor shall conduct and manage all Certification and Accreditation (C&A) activities and processes in accordance with DoD 8510 Risk Management Framework (RMF) requirements.

N N/A

The PWS 6.2.6.4, Contractor Training of Government Personnel, subtask description specifies a “preliminary and final Training Plan” which are not listed as a deliverable of this subtask. Can the Government add as a formal deliverable or delete the requirement from the subtask description?

RFP Part I, Section

C, PWS 6.2.6.4,

Contractor Training of Government Personnel (Page 37)

Training Plan has been added as a formal deliverable.

Y

Section C

PWS

6.2.6.4, PWS 7.0,

PWS 11.0

EVMS is appropriate for developmental programs. For a services program like DISA C2 Portfolio Test and Evaluation, there are no developmental items. Further, EVMS is very costly to procure and implement, which will increase the overall bid price on this proposal, for a capability that may not be needed. Will the Gov’t

RFP Part II, Section I, Contract Clause 252.234.7002 Earned Value

EVMS is required IAW DFARS Subpart 234.203.

As such, the Government cannot remove it from this requirement.

remove the requirement for EVMS, as this is a cost prohibitive process when implemented on service-type contracts?

Management System (Page 97)

In the cost instructions there is duplicated information, or very similar information, listed in L.6.2.1 Part A- Introduction and L.6.2.2. Part B – Price and Cost Narrative.

L.6.2.1 Part A- Introduction and L.6.2.2. Part B – Price and Cost Narrative

"The prime contractor shall also specify what type of contract (firm-fixed-price, cost-reimbursement, etc.) is proposed for each subcontractor." has been removed from Section L.6.2.1. The remaining language in L.6.2.1 has been moved to either L.6.2.2 or L6.3.3 as appropriate. Additional language has been added to Section L.6.2.1 for clarification.

Y

Section L, L.6.2.1, L.6.2.2, L6.3.3

L.6.2.3 Part C states that it is the spreadsheet, as shown the RFP excerpt.

However, there is also a subsection

L6.3. Estimating Methodology.

Some of these items have been addressed in L6.2.1 Part A and L.6.2.2 Part B.

Questions:

1) Please clarify if L6.3. Estimating Methodology (and its subsections) should be in this section.

2) If so, please consolidate where methodology should be described.

In Part A, B, or C?

3) If the sections below are required, should the content requested be in the Excel spreadsheet or in text in the cost proposal in Part C?

4) There are multiple statements for the contractor to provide evidence (see “**” below). Where should this evidence be in the proposal?

L.6.2.3. Part C – Price/Cost Summary Spreadsheet Offerors are required to use the Government-provided Microsoft Excel Workbooks to submit the cost and pricing data supporting its proposed price, Attachment 5.

L6.3. Estimating Methodology.

L6.3.1. Estimating System.

**Provide a summary description of the standard estimating system or methods.** The summary description shall cover separately each major cost element (e.g., Direct Material, Engineering Labor, Manufacturing Labor, Indirect Costs, Other Direct Costs, Overhead, and G&A). Also, identify any deviations from the standard estimating procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Indicate whether the Government has approved your system and if so, **provide evidence of such approval.**

L6.2.1 Part A, L.6.2.2 Part B, L.6.2.3. Part C - Price/Cost Summary Spreadsheet, L6.3. Estimating Methodology (and its subsections)

The spreadsheet is Part C, IAW Section L.6.2.3 of the RFP. Section L.6.3.4 has been removed. Per the Government's revision in response to Question #22, information regarding estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems is to be included in Part A along with evidence of Government approval of Estimating, Purchasing, and Accounting systems.

Y L.6.3.4

L6.3.2. Purchasing System.

Provide a summary description of the purchasing system or methods (e.g., how material requirements are determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provision is made to ensure quantity and other discounts). Also, identify any deviations from the standard procedures in preparing this proposal.

Indicate whether the Government has approved your system and if so, **provide evidence of such approval.**

L6.3.3. Accounting System.

Indicate whether the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) has determined your accounting system to be adequate and if so, **provide evidence of such determination.**

L6.3.4. Explanation of Estimating Methods Used.

**Explain the methodology used to estimate each cost element.** As a minimum, provide the following information for each cost element. If a portion of the required information is not applicable for a particular cost element, so state.

L6.3.4. has a statement to ‘provide the following information for each cost element.’ But there is no list of this required information.

Will the government provide this list or delete the requirement?

L6.3.4 The Government has removed Section L6.3.4 Y Section

L6.3

The section below references a transmittal letter. L7.1.1. Section A- Solicitation/Contract Form.

The Offeror shall state in their Transmittal Letter that its proposal is valid for no less than 180 days from the date of submission of its’ proposal response to the RFP

Question: May offeror’s submit a transmittal letter as a separate document along with the other volumes?

L7.1.1. Section A- Solicitation/Contract Form.

The Government has revised L7.1.1 to add - The transmittal letter can be a separate document submitted to the Government that will not count towards page counts.

Y Section L7.1.1

Section A

L7.1.7. makes reference in Section I - Contract Clauses (on page 74) to clause 52.204-7 entitled “System for Award Management.”

There is no 52.204-7 in the list. There is listed clause 52.204-13 System for Award Management Maintenance. That particular clause is incorporated by reference in RFP Section IV at the bottom of page 138.

Question: Will the government please clarify the correct clause or the pointer in L7.1.7 to Section IV?

L7.1.7. Section K - Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors. (page 128);

Section I - Contract Clauses, CLAUSES

INCORPORATED

BY REFERENCE

(page 74)

The Government has revised the RFP to clarify this.

Y RFP page

74 & L7.1.7

On page 128, L7.1.5. Section H - Special Contract Requirements, there is the statement “See RFP in addition to below.”

Question: Does “See RFP” refer to Section H - Special Contract Requirements on page 65? Starting on page 65 are H1 to H11. These would all be acknowledgments. Are we to include these sections and our acknowledgments in Volume V?

Question: was the phrase “(See RFP) in addition to below” supposed to refer to missing information that was below? Or does it refer to subsequent Sections I, K and L?

L7.1.5. Section H - Special Contract Requirements. (page 128); Section H - Special Contract Requirements (page 65)

The reference applies to H1-H11 & Sections I, K, and L. Responses to these should be included in Volume V.

N N/A

L.7.2.4. DD254 Security Classification. (Form DD254) is required as part of the Technical / Management proposal. If the DD254 is inserted into the technical management proposal, it will not be editable by the Gov’t.

revised L2.1.9. Offerors shall submit the DD254 within Volume V.

Y Section L2.1.9

DD254

L.7.2.4. DD254

Security Classification.

Questions: May offerors submit the DD254 as a separate file, so that it may be edited by the Gov’t? If not, may offerors include the DD254 as an appendix within the Technical Volume II?

The government has stated the key personnel in 14.d on page 52.

But, in Section H8 KEY PERSONNEL on page 68, there is this statement in area ‘a’ – ‘Key personnel will be identified by the Government based upon reviews of the Contractor’s Technical / Management proposal in response to the PWS requirements.’

And, also in Section H8 KEY PERSONNEL, there is this statement in area ‘b’ – ‘Key personnel shall be identified by the Offeror.’

Question: Would the government reconcile these statements, so they are consistent with the government having already determined the key personnel?

Question: If the 6 labor categories listed in 14d on page 52 are the Government designated key personnel, is it correct that there are only 6 key personnel total or that anyone proposed in those labor categories would be key?

14.d Other Pertinent Information or Special Considerations. Key Personnel (page 52);

KEY

PERSONNEL(page 68); H8.a; H8.b

Please refer to the Government’s responses to Questions #3 and #13.

30 Question: May we rearrange the top part of Attachment 2–PP Reference so that it takes up less space?

Attachment 2. PP Reference

The formatting of the attachment may be adjusted so long as all information originally contained in the attachment is still present.

N N/A

The government requests copies of the sent PPQs, but does not specify where to place them in the Past Performance volume.

Question: In the PP volume, can the PPQ copies be placed in an appendix or section that does not count to the page limit?

‘However, offerors should provide a copy of the sent questionnaires with their proposal.’

L5.4.2 Part B- Present and Past Performance Reference Sheets and Questionnaires.

(page 123)

The Government has revised RFP L5.4.2. The copies requested by the Government shall be included in Volume V and shall not count towards page limitations.

Y Section L5.4.2

Question: Can the DD 254 be placed in an appendix in Technical Volume II?

M2.2.1. Subfactor 1. The offeror shall submit a completed DD Form 254 with their proposal.

M2.2.1. Subfactor 1 Refer to Question #28 above N N/A

Table L1 in section L.2.2 lists the volume numbers I through V.

However, the Volume Numbers in other sections in Section L list the Volume numbers differently:

L.5.0 – Volume II Past Performance L.6.0- Volume VI – Cost/Price L.7.0 – Volume VII – Contract Documentation.

Please confirm that this a typographical error and the volumes should be numbered as shown in Table L1.

L.2.2 Table L1 and L.5.0, L.6.0, L.7.0

The Government confirms the typographical error.

The volume numbers will be corrected to reflect those in Table L1.

Y Section

L5.0, L6.0, L7.0

L.4.2.2.3.1 requires the submission of the DD254 in Volume I Executive Summary. In L.7.2.4 (Contract Documentation), the instructions state that the DD 254 should be submitted as part of the proposal. Please confirm that the DD254 should be submitted as part of Volume I only.

L.7.2.4 and L.4.2.2.3.1

Refer to Question #28 above N N/A

“Proposals shall be addressed to the KO with a copy to the CS at the following email addresses: quinton.a.smith.civ@mail.mil and alyssa.m.todaro2.civ@mail.milmailto:contract.specialist@mail.mil.”

Is contract.specialist@mail.mil an email address that we are required to include when sending in the response?

Para L.2.5, Page 120 of 138

There was a typographical error which has been revised.

Y Section L2.5

In previous GCCS-J and GCCS-JE sources sought(s), requests for information, and draft RFP responses, DISA indicated that offerors who support activities in other C2 portfolio work streams such as GCCS-J Operations and Maintenance (O&M), GCCS-JE Modernization, and Program Management Office would be precluded from bidding the Command and Control (C2) Portfolio Testing and Evaluation (T&E) Support Services due to conflicts of interest. Can the government please confirm that offerors who are currently executing GCCS-J O&M, PMO, or modernization activities as a prime or a sub will be excluded for consideration for C2 T&E and vice versa? Will offerors that prime or sub on C2T&E be excluded for consideration on the upcoming Joint (GCCS-J) Modernization and Architecture Analysis Support?

Refer to Questions #5 & #16 above. N N/A

At the DISA Industry day, government indicated that the GCCS-JE Modernization effort will eventually come out as a full and open opportunity under a traditional DISA contract vehicle such as SETI after the C5 OTA prototyping activities have concluded. Is it still the government’s intent to release GCCS-JE as a traditional competitive RFP and if so, will the successful offeror of the Command and Control (C2) Portfolio Testing and Evaluation (T&E) Support Services be precluded from submitting a bid for GCCS-JE?

Refer to Questions #5 & #16 above. N N/A

The government is requiring six key personnel resumes and also states that, “resumes of non-key personal are strongly encouraged but not required.” This seems to be a unique requirement of this solicitation when compared to other DISA RFPS. Can the government please clarify how they will rate non-key personnel resumes?

Refer to Question #59 below. N N/A

Will the government please provide the historical full time equivalent (FTE) count for the existing C2/GCCS-J contracts that support Testing and Evaluation activities?

Refer to Question #4 above. N N/A

Section L.2.1.8 requires an OCI statement. Into which volume should this statement be provided?

“If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position.”

Can the Government please clarify in which volume is the OCCI response required to be included?

Section L2.1.8 (pg.

116) revised section L2.1.8.

Volume I would be the location for submission for any OCCI responses.

Y Section L2.1.8

41 Section L.4.2.2.3 requires the offeror to address all tasks in Section 6 of the PWS. Please confirm that this includes the optional tasks. L.4.2.2.3

Offerors shall address all tasks in Section 6 of the

PWS.

N N/A

42 Section L.2.2.6 requires tab indexing. Please further define this requirement. L.2.2.6

The Government has revised section L2.2.6 to remove the tab indexing.

Y Section L.2.2.6

Would the government consider a two-week extension to 10 Sep 2018 for the due date (or two weeks from the posting of answers to the questions – whichever is later) of the Command and Control (C2) Portfolio Testing and Evaluation Support Services responses? Multiple HUBZone sources sought come out of DISA and other agencies, which do not actually go HUBZone; therefore, the ability to finalize teaming prior with larger partners to the RFP going final is limited. The extension will facilitate finalization of teaming and a higher quality proposal response from HUBZone companies for DISA.

The Government will assess the amount of time it took us to respond to all the questions and the proposal due date could be extended accordingly. The schedule is already very tight.

N N/A

In the 6th bullet under paragraph 6.1.1, subtask 1 – Project Management it states “The contractor shall be, at a minimum, Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Level 3 and/or ISO 9001 certified. Nothing in the evaluation criteria requires either of these certifications. Is the offeror required to have either of these certifications before award or may they be obtained post award?

C 6.1.1.1 Refer to Question #11 above. Y PWS 6.1.1

Subtask 1

Can the Government please clarify what is meant by “copy number”? Is the offeror required to submit multiple electronic copies of the proposal? Or are hard copies required?

Section L2.2.7 (pg.

119)

The Government has revised section L.2.2.7 to remove “copy number”.

Y Section L.2.2.7

“Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each.”

By “an explanation”, does the Government mean to spell out each acronym (e.g., AF = Air Force) or spell and define each acronym?

Section L2.2.8 (pg.

119)

Yes N N/A

“The offeror shall propose a Program Management Plan demonstrating the offeror’s ability to perform the tasks identified in this PWS throughout the lifecycle of the C2 Portfolio Test and Evaluation task order.”

Can the Government please confirm that a Program Management Plan (PMP) is required to be submitted as an attachment or appendix to Volume II? Is there a page limit for the PMP?

Section L4.2.2.3.6

(pg. 122)

Yes, a Program Management Plan is required with a 5-page limit and shall be included as an attachment to Volume II.

Y Section

L4.2.2.3.6 & M2.2.6

“The offeror shall propose a Transition Plan demonstrating the offeror’s ability to provide appropriate staffing levels on Day 1 to ensure continuity of services while ramping up to be fully staffed within the first two weeks of performance.”

Can the Government please confirm that an Incoming Transition Plan is required to be submitted as an attachment or appendix to Volume II? Is there a page limit for the Incoming Transition Plan?

Section L4.2.2.3.6

(pg. 122)

Yes, a Transition Plan is required with a 5-page limit shall be included as an attachment to Volume

II.

Y Section

L4.2.2.3.6 & M2.2.6

“Offeror shall submit no more than three (3) total recent past/present performance efforts for evaluation, and each cited past performance shall not exceed three (3) pages.”

Can the Government please clarify whether the Offeror (including subcontractors) is required to have performed work as a Prime or Sub for the past/present performance efforts?

Section L5.1 (pg.122)

Recent Past performance efforts can be work as a Prime or Subcontract.

Please review L5.3 for relevant contracts details.

50 Is the Offeror required to submit Letters of Intent (LOI) for proposed personnel who are not current employees?

Section L6.2.2 (pg.

125)

Personnel proposed by name and title rather than a generic labor category are to be proposed along with payroll verification or signed Letters of Intent (LOIs).

N N/A

Can the Government please clarify in which volume are the LOIs required to be included – Technical/Management Volume or Cost Volume?

Section L6.2.2 (pg.

125)

Price Narrative of the Cost Volume N N/A

52 In addition to Test events, can the government provide number of test plans/test cases being executed for each of these events? 5. Scope

Only major and minor release events defined in tables 5.1-5.3 require a test plan. However, the number of test cases executed depends on the size and complexity of the release.

IAVA and emergency release events do not require a test plan but require testing prior to release.

N N/A

While we understand this RFP is consolidating several programs, can government share the names of the current incumbents for each of the programs, where there are incumbents? Additionally, how many FTEs are currently engaged in each of those programs?

3. Background Refer to Question #4 above. N N/A

For a Joint Venture and Subcontractors, is the government requiring to submit DD254 of each of the JV members and proposed subcontractors?

L2.1.10/L2.1.9

Yes, the Government requires a DD254 for each JV member and proposed subcontractors.

N N/A

Page Limitation the paragraph is referring to OCCI Mitigation plan and Section 508 Compliance. Is the government requiring these and if so in volume?

L2.2.1 Page Limitation

Refer to Question #40 above for OCCI. For Section 508 Compliance, this should go into Volume V.

Are cross reference matrices expected in all volumes? If so, are they outside page limit? If not, in which volume should the single matrix be placed?

L.2.2.5

The offeror shall prepare a Cross Reference Matrix cross-referencing all RFP requirements to the location of the offeror’s responses in their proposal.

The Cross Reference Matrix provides reference information but is not evaluated. The offeror’s format is acceptable. The Cross Reference Matrix shall not count towards page limitations.

Y Section L2.2.5

57 How many levels of indexing is a must have to be compliant? L.2.2.6 Refer to Question #42 above. N N/A

Section L.2.2.2.1 states that proposals should be submitted in MS Word 2007 format. However, Section L.2.4 states that MS Word 2007 or 2010 may be used. Please confirm which editions of MS Word are acceptable.

L.2.2.2.1 and L.2.4

The Government will accept proposal volumes submitted in MS Word 2007, 2010, and 2016.

Y L.2.2.2.1, L.2.4

59 Resumes of Non-Key personnel are strongly encouraged. Can the government provide Labor Categories for the Non-Key personnel? L4.2.2.3.6

IAW Section L4.2.2.3.6 of the RFP, “The offeror shall provide a mix of labor categories and labor hours to meet or exceed the requirements of the PWS, Section 6.” This is a performance-based requirement. The offeror is responsible for proposing personnel with the knowledge, skills, and abilities the offeror has determined to be capable of performing the requirment.

N N

If the prime contractor on a team is not currently CMMI Level 3 and/or ISO 9001 certified but in process of certification and expecting certification to be complete by contract award, will a team member having CMMI Level 2 and ISO 9001:2015 certification satisfy this requirement until prime certification is complete.

Section C, Paragraph 6, Subtask 1 – Project Management, Last Bullet

Refer to Question #11 above. Y PWS 6.1.1

Performance Work Statement provides the following contract and task order numbers as Previous contracts/task orders (HC1028-08-

D-2022 – HC104718F0004, HC1028-08-D-2025-VC15, HC1028-

08-D-2025-VC20). Are these contracts IV&V/T&E Support type contracts or development (O&M) contracts? Is this new contract a true follow-on of same work or IV&V and test support for products developed under these previous contracts?

Section C, Performance Work Statement, Table at beginning of section

The previous contracts were IDIQ performance based contracts to satisfy Information Technology (IT) requirements which encompass a range of capabilities form old legacy systems to new, emerging net-centric technology.

The new contract is a follow-on to some but not all of the same work developed under these previous contracts.

N N/A

Would the Government please share any IAT certification level requirements (e.g., IAT Level 2, IAM Level 2, etc.), specifically for the Information Assurance related tasks?

PWS, 14. C., Page

All security personnel must be security plus certified.

Key security personnel must be a Certified Information Systems Security Professional

(CISSP).

N N/A

Will the government consider extending the Q&A period, so that bidders may have an opportunity to respond to the government’s answers?

RFP Q&A Period Refer to Question #43 above. N N/A

Considering that the genesis of many of these questions may relate to the Government’s omittance of critical information related to Key Personnel requirements, ultimately delaying the development of Cost and Management volumes (by a minimum of two weeks), will the Government consider extending the RFP due date an additional 2 weeks, as to match the valuable time lost?

RFP Due Date Refer to Question #43 above. N N/A

Would the Government please share any IAT certification level requirements (e.g., IAT Level 2, IAM Level 2, etc.), specifically for the Information Assurance related tasks?

PWS, 14. C., Page

Refer to Question #62 above. N N/A

66 Would the government please provide the historical contract value and FTE count that was proposed on the previous effort N/A Refer to Question #4 above. N N/A

67 Has there been a change of scope form the previous contract? PWS, 5

Previous test support for GCCS-J and JPES have been separate and distinct contracts. The scope of this contract combines these programs into a C2 Portfolio of Programs to capitalize on efficiencies of resources.

N N/A

Is it the government’s intention for us to include the past performance references template within the volume III or separately as an attachment?

PWS L5.0 Submitted in Volume III N N/A