Attach 30 QA DRFP_12032020.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 74 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Defense Enclave Services (DES) RFP
- Solicitation number
- HC104720R0014
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This document provides details about the Defense Enclave Services (DES) solicitation. DISA intends to issue a single award IDIQ contract with a 10-year ordering period and $11.2 billion ceiling to unify common IT systems and functions for 22 Defense Agencies and Field Activities within the Fourth Estate. The DES effort will modernize infrastructure and network architecture to deliver combat support capabilities. The minimum small business participation requirement is 25% of the ceiling value. Responses are due in Q1 FY2022. DISA will evaluate factors including technical approach, past performance, and price in a best value tradeoff to select the awardee. The incumbent contractors were not identified.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 73 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Solicitation # HC1047-20-R-0014 | |||||
| Defense Enclave Services | |||||
| QUESTION & RESPONSE TEMPLATE | |||||
| Question # | Questions / Comments | RFP Reference | Government Response | RFP Change Required (Y/N) | Location of Change |
| 1 | The objectives described in paragraph 7 appear to be a combination of Government -owned and contractor-owned objectives. To provide bidders with clear lines of responsibility, please delineate which objectives are owned by the government and the DES Program Contractor. | DRFP, P. 13, Paragraph 7 | IDIQ SOO Section 7: added: "DES is a Government Owned Contractor Operated service model." Offerors are advised to propose their best commercial approach to meet the acquisition requirements. | Y | IDIQ SOO Section 7 |
| 2 | For the objectives described in paragraph 7 that are directed at DES offerors, please quantify baseline metrics or qualify the objectives for "improving," "reducing," or "enhancing" service or experience factors. | DRFP, P. 13, Paragraph 7 | No change. Offerors are advised to propose their best commercial approach to reduce contract overhead costs. | ||
| 3 | The first sentence states an objective to "Reduce contract overhead through the consolidation of multiple support contracts." If this objective is specifically directed to the DES contractor, please provide a complete inventory of the existing support contracts across the 4th Estate. | DRFP, P.14, Paragraph 7.B. | No change. Offerors are advised to propose their best commercial approach to reduce contract overhead costs. | ||
| 4 | Section F.4. Place of Performance appears to contradict itself. The first two sentences suggest that Place of Performance will be specified in task orders. The last sentence states that one should refer to the IDIQ SOO for specific place of performance information. Please clarify. | DRFP, P. 25, Section F.4. | Place of performance will be specified in each individual task order. A list of potential places of performance for all task orders is included in Attachment 11. | Y | See revised section F.4 |
| 5 | The link in Section H.4. Mandatory Training does not appear to work and appears to be an internal DISA website. Please provide a working link or complete list of mandatory training courses, anticipated duration, and frequency. | DRFP, P. 36, Section H.4. | Unfortunately, the link requires a CAC Card needed for viewing mandatory training. The training is available online and virtually. The length of the training varies slightly depending on the year. The current list of contractor required training is below: 2020 - CY20 Annual Security Awareness Training |
2020 - CY20 COOP Annual Awareness Training 2020 - CY20 Derivative Classification Training 2020 - CY20 Records Management Training 2020 - DoD OPSEC Campaign Mandatory Course Insider Threat Awareness 2020 - DoD OPSEC Campaign Mandatory Course Introduction to Information Security 2020 - DoD OPSEC Campaign Mandatory Course Operations Security 2020 - DoD OPSEC Campaign Mandatory Course Secretary of Defense Video 2020 - DoD OPSEC Campaign Mandatory Course Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information for DoD and Industry 2021 - FY21 Annual Counterintelligence and Insider Threat Awareness Training 2021 - FY21 Cyber Awareness Challenge 2021 - FY21 Identifying and Safeguarding Personally Identifiable Information (PII) 2021 - FY21 Phishing Ver 4.0 Training
| N | N/A | |||||
| 6 | The section states "Page sizes shall be 8.5x11 inches, not including foldouts." Please confirm that tabloid foldouts (11x17 inches) are considered to be one page? | DRFP, P. 74, Section L.2.2.2.1 | Only 8.5X11 pages are permitted. No 11x17 foldouts are permitted. | Y | L.2.2.2.1 | |
| 7 | The requirements for the Executive Summary include "addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features;" defining "direct lines of control, responsibility, functional relationships, and authority among the organizational elements, including proposed teaming partners, subcontractors, and joint venture arrangements;" and may include an organization chart - all of which should tie to Section M evaluation factors/subfactors. Section L.2.2 specifies that the Executive Summary is limited to two pages. This is insufficient to address all content requirements of the Executive Summary. We recommend the page limit be expanded to 5 pages. | DRFP, P. 78, Paragraph L.4.2.3 | Page limit for the Executive Summary was increased to 5 pages. | Y | L.2.2 Table 1.1-Proposal Organization | |
| 8 | The section starts by stating "The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal" however, no factors or subfactors are listed. This section appears to be incomplete. Please clarify if this reference is meant to refer to the factors and subfactors as listed in Section M.2. | DRFP, P. 79, Section L.4.2.4 | Revisions were made to Section L.4.2.4 | Y | L.4.2.4 | |
| 9 | The last sentence of the section states "Offerors who are rated as “Unacceptable” in any of the “Acceptable / Unacceptable” evaluation criteria may not be further evaluated under Step Two." Please elaborate on the conditions under which a proposal could reach Step Two of evaluation when receiving an "unacceptable" rating. (Note - M.2.1 states that ANY unfavorable rating removes the proposal from consideration.) | DRFP, P. 79, Section L.4.2.4 | Sentence revised to: "Offerors who are rated as “Unacceptable” in any of the “Acceptable / Unacceptable” evaluation criteria will not be further evaluated under Step Two." | Y | L.4.2.4 | |
| 10 | The first paragraph states in part "... Offeror’s proposal shall include their planned approach to successfully coordinate Assumption of Responsibility (AOR) for handling 100% of the required Defense Enclave Service operations from the incumbent contractor(s) ...." (also referenced in M.2.1.1.e). Please clarify the "incumbent contractor(s)" to which this is referring. Is this the prospective contractor for DoDNet Services? Are other contractors involved today with respect to the Day 1 required DES services? | DRFP, P. 90, Section M.2.1.1 | While DES is a new requirement, parts of this requirement were already competed under DoDNet Generation 1. The transition of the work between the DoDNet Gen 1 is critical to the success of DES. Additionally, as other agencies are being migrated into DES, existing contractors with legacy networks will have to transition work into the DoDNet. A list of contracts is not available as they would have to be merged into a new network "DoDNet". So legacy contracts are not applicable. | N | ||
| 11 | By "Transition Plan" does the Government mean the plan to establish contractor's PMO and Day 1 operations infrastructure and staffing (as opposed to any transition efforts required as part of an agency migration effort)? | DRFP, P. 91, Paragraph M.2.1.1.e | See SOO Section 6 and Factor 1, Subfactor 1. Per the IDIQ SOO, the transition period is 90 calendar days. | |||
| 12 | Is TO #001 the contractual mechanism through which the DES contractor will establish and and pay for the IDIQ PMO and associated IDIQ deliverables and costs for the duration of the DES contract? | DRFP, P. 94, Section M.2.2.5 | Funds will only be obligated at the task order level. Two task orders will be evaluated at time of award: one with the work listed on task order 1, another one covering the minimum guarantee covering the kick off meeting expense, and the contract level small business contract level reporting requirement. The list of deliverables in the base IDIQ SOO is the overarching list of deliverables, which may or may not be requested in task order 1. Only the deliverables included in each task order will be required to be delivered. | N | ||
| 13 | This requirement begins with a statement that the Government will evaluate "The Offeror’s proven approach to improve network operations and enterprise management through industry best practices and toolsets" but subsequently seems to focus on "the toolset" exclusively. Please clarify what the Government is seeking with this specific requirement. Is this intended to address the offeror's proposed OSS? | DRFP, P. 93-94, Paragraph M.2.2.4.a | The Offeror shall propose the proven approach to improve network operations and enterprise management. This should be reflected in the Offeror’s approach with regard to proposed Operation Support Systems (OSS). | |||
| 14 | The first sub-bullet in this section requires discussion of "total lifecycle costs." Please confirm that bidders should NOT discuss specific costs in Volume II Technical/Management and clarify the information desired by the Government. | DRFP, P. 93-94, Paragraph M.2.2.4.a | Revised. Please see M.2.2.4 | Y | M.2.2.4 | |
| 15 | Table 1.1 states that the page limit for the IDIQ PWS is 35 pages. Given that approximately nine pages of the Attach 14 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template are pre-populated, please increase the page count to 45 pages to accommodate the pre-populated information. | DRFP, P. 74, Table 1.1 | Page limit for the IDIQ PWS was increased to 45 pages. | Y | L.2.2 Table 1.1-Proposal Organization | |
| 16 | Table 1.1 states that Volume II Part C is dedicated to Acceptable/Unacceptable Factor. It also states that Volume 5 Small Business includes the Small Business Participation and Commitment Plan, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and the Small Business Subcontracting Review Checklist. However, section M.2.1.3 on page 91 lists Small Business Participation and Commitment as one of the subfactors under the Acceptable/Unacceptable factor. Please clarify if Volume V as written is to be submitted but will be evaluated in conjunction with the other subfactors in Volume II Part C. | DRFP, P. 73-74, Table 1.2 | Section L.4.2.4 has been revised, also Table 1.1 has been revised. | Y | L.4.2.4, Table 1.1 in section L.2.2 | |
| 17 | Section L.4.2.4 includes instructions and information of each of the Parts of the Technical/Management Volume, except "Part D: BVTO Factor, excluding the IDIQ PWS and the task order 1 PWS documents." This area of Volume 2 is a significant part of the evaluation criteria. Please provide the associated instructions for this crucial element of the proposal. | DRFP, P. 79, Section L.4.2.4 | See revised Section L.4.2.4 which now includes parts C and D. | Y | L.4.2.4 | |
| 18 | Please confirm that bidders may expand the PWS beyond the listed performance areas, deliverables, and performance requirements? | Attach 14 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template | Offerors are expected to meet the objectives and performance requirements listed in the RFP as well as the page limitations stated in Section L. Offerors are responsible for completing Section 6 Performance Requirements (Tasks/Subtasks/Deliverables) and Section 11/11.2 parts in blue italicized font. | |||
| 19 | Paragraph two of this section states that an SCRM plan is required to be submitted as part of the technical proposal. However, there are no requirements in Sections L or M for such a plan. Please clarify if an SCRM is required. | Attach 14, | ||||
| P. 13, Paragraph h Supply Chain Risk Management | SCRM Sections have been added to the RFP. | Y | L.4.2.4 and M.2.1.4 | |||
| 20 | Do offerors have the latitude to establish their own sequencing of agencies and sites as part of their Survey and Migration Support approach? If not, please provide the order, groupings, and timings for the subsequent migration for the DAFAs/sites. | DRFP, P. 92, Section M.2.2.2 | As of this time we do not have an exact sequencing of sites, and sequencing will be based on agency readiness. | |||
| 21 | The first paragraph of Section L.5.1 includes a parenthetical statement "(Note: Individual task orders under an ID/IQ contract are each considered to be one (1) past/present performance effort.)" However, Section L.5.2 includes a bolded note as paragraph 3 "Note: IDIQs or BPAs may be submitted as one past performance reference if all Task/Call Orders are described and presented. IDIQs, BPAs, and GSA Schedule contracts without any associated Task/Call Orders will not be considered in the past performance evaluation." Please confirm that the statement in Section L.5.1 refers to multi-award contracts. | DRFP, P. 79-80, Section L.5 | Section L.5.2 was revised | Y | L.5.2 | |
| 22 | The listing of Attachments in Section J appears to have omitted SOO Appendix A: Solicitation HC1047-20-R-0014 Services Summary. Please confirm that Appendix A embedded within Section C (page 23) can be considered this attachment? | DRFP, P. 64, Section J |
| DRFP P. 23, Appendix A | SOO Appendix A: Solicitation HC1047-20-R-0014 Services Summary is included in Section C. | N | |
| 23 | Block 9 on the SF 33 requires sealed offers in original and 1 copy, however Section L.2.4 states "In order to respond to this solicitation, electronic proposals are to be submitted in lieu of paper copies." Please confirm that only a single copy of the electronic proposal shall be submitted? | DRPF, P. 1, SF33 |
| DRFP, P. 75, L.2.4 | Confirmed, electronic proposals are to be submitted in lieu of paper copies. | Y | Block 9-change to 0 copies | |
| 24 | Section 3 states "Twenty-two (22) 4th Estate agencies have been identified to be included in this Fourth Estate Network Optimization (4ENO) effort," however the Phase I and II Agency tables on page 12 have 23 agencies listed. Please confirm that DISA-HQ and DISA-Field Sites are separate? | DRFP P. 11-12, Section C | DISA is considered as one agency overall to include both HQ and Field Sites | |
| 25 | Posting on beta.sam.gov states “Update: the Industry day video stated that the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) was going to be evaluated as part of the acceptable / unacceptable criteria. However since the standards for CMMC are still in development, the Government has decided to remove this criteria from Factor 1.” Page 21 of the DRFP states "The contractor shall be required to meet or exceed Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Services (CMMI-SVC) Level 3 certification and Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Development (CMMI-DEV) Level 3 once the standards are available." We recognize the importance of corporate certifications and the value to the DES. We recommend that the Government to consider modifying this section to include desired corporate certifications including: CMMI-SVC Level 3, CMMI-DEV Level 3, and CMMC Level 3 or higher? | beta.sam.gov Notice ID 621913271 |
| RFP, P. 21, Section C | See response to question 260 | |||||
| 26 | Please confirm that the information following paragraph 17 on page 21 that includes references to appendices and includes embedded Appendix A, is reference information as part of Section C. | DRFP, P. 22, Section C | Refer to question 22 response. | N | ||
| 27 | Please confirm that section D is intentionally omitted and no clauses are applicable to this solicitation. | DRFP | Yes, this is correct. | N | ||
| 28 | L.2.2.3 Pricing Information has been omitted. Please provide these details? | DRFP, P. 74, | ||||
| Section L.2.2.3 | Refer to Section L.6 Price Volume for detail. | Y | The title for section L.2.2.3 has been changed to "Reserved". | |||
| 29 | L.2.2.4 Indexing states "Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections." Can you confirm that this is not applicable to an electronic submission? | DRFP, P. 74-74, | ||||
| Section L.2.2.4 | Tab indexing is not applicable to electronic submission. | Y | The title for section L.2.2.4 has been changed to "Reserved". | |||
| 30 | Cell A78 on the CLIN Structure IDIQ tab of the CLIN Structure excel spreadsheet is listed as "Total Evaluated Price." To better reflect Section M, which states TO 1 will be used for "Total Evaluated Price" please change the title of cell A78. | Attach 08 DES clin structure | The CLIN structure has been revised. | Y | Attachment 8 DES CLIN Structure | |
| 31 | Draft Section L.2.2 states, "each volume may contain a glossary" L.2.2.6 states that the glossary shall be provided in the executive summary. Please confirm that the glossary in the executive summary is excluded from the page count. | |||||
| DRFP, Section L.2.2, P.73; L.2.2.6, P. 75 | See L.2.2: "Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes." | N | ||||
| 32 | Is the Transition Plan intended to be incorporated into the IDIQ PWS, TO #0001 PWS, or both? | DRFP, P. 91, Paragraph M.2.1.1.e | Both. | |||
| 33 | If the Transition Plan is at the IDIQ level, what CLIN should the DES contractor use? | DRFP, P. 91, Paragraph M.2.1.1.e | Transition is required as performance for task order 1. The transition is also mentioned in the base IDIQ because transition may be required for each task order issued under this contract. Each transition CLIN will be paid under the respective task order. | |||
| 34 | What date should be used for the PWS: date of proposal submission, date of latest submission in the event of ENs, or December 7, 2021 (planned contract start per Section C, Period of Performance, Paragraph/Section 14, P.21)? | Attach 14 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template |
| DRFP, P. 21, Section C.14 | Date of proposal submission. | |||||
| 35 | The DRFP intends to evaluate ability to comply with FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting. As this is a full and open competition (not a set aside), should this be removed? | DRFP, P. 95, Section M.2.4.4 | That was deleted from the RFP. 52.219-14 does not apply. | Y | M.2.4.4 | |
| 36 | Please confirm the applicability of 52.222-53 to this IDIQ, as marked under 52.212-5. Part (c) of the -53 exemption states "each service employee who will perform the services under the contract will spend only a small portion of his or her time (a monthly average of less than 20 percent of the available hours on an annualized basis [...]) servicing the Government contract." |
| If this IDIQ is subject to the Service Contract Act, please update the fill-ins to 52.212-5 and attach the applicable Wage Determinations. | DRFP, P. 57, Section H.13 | Clause 52.222-53 was removed from 52.212-5. | Y | Clause 52.212-5 | ||
| 37 | Section L requests information adequate to evaluate price realism, reasonableness, and completeness, however nothing in Section M is evaluated for price realism. Recommend Section M be updated to include a price realism evaluation or assessment of performance risk associated with unrealistically low prices. | DRFP, P. 81, Section L.6.1 | A price realism analysis will not be conducted under this procurement. | Y | L.6.1 and L.6.1.1 | |
| 38 | Section L.6.1.1 indicates that pricing may be evaluated for affordability. There is no mention of affordability in Section M, please clarify. | DRFP, P.81, Section L.6.1.1 | Section L.6.1.1 has been revised. | N | L.6.1.1 | |
| 39 | The DRFP states that "The hours and labor categories provided in the Excel workbook does not obligate the Government…" indicating that the Government will provide labor categories and hours to be priced. This is inconsistent with other parts of section L where the DRFP indicates the contractor is responsible for defining and pricing the labor categories and hours required. Please confirm that offerors are to define the labor categories needed for the IDIQ, provide fully burdened rates for these, and apply these same labor categories and rates to price of TO # 0001 with any proposed discounting. | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.3 | See question 30. Labor categories will be provided in the revised attachment 8. The vendor is required to provide fully burdened pricing for those categories. Additionally, the vendor is required to apply any applicable labor categories and rates with any proposed discounts to task order 1. | |||
| 40 | The DRFP states "The Fixed Price (FP) Labor Rates proposed represent the Offeror’s fully-burdened FP hourly labor rates for each skill classification for work performed at Government and Contractor sites both in the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS)." As there can be a significant difference in the cost for OCONUS positions, please confirm our understanding that only one ceiling rate is to be proposed, applicable to both CONUS and OCONUS performance. | DRFP, P. 2, Section B.2 | Please refer to question 238. | |||
| 41 | The RFP states "The Fixed Price (FP) Labor Rates proposed represent the Offeror’s fully-burdened FP hourly labor rates for each skill classification for work performed at Government and Contractor sites both in the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS)." As there is a price difference in the cost for government site and contractor site, please confirm only once ceiling rate is to be proposed, applicable to both Government and contractor owned sites. | DRFP, P. 2, Section B.2 | Refer to question 238 response. | |||
| 42 | Section H.6 appears to indicate Key Personnel are required or permitted. However, there are no key personnel requirements, or evaluation factors associated with specific proposed personnel. Please clarify how clause H.6 applies to TO #0001, the evaluation of proposals, and the best value trade off. | DRFP, P. 37, Section H.6; P. 88-96, Section M.1.2 | Section H.6 applies to the entire IDIQ, while it will not be evaluated for the IDIQ or task order 1, it may be needed to evaluate performance of any future task orders. | |||
| 43 | Joint Ventures are typically a single purpose entity without past performance. Please confirm new entities/joint venture that do not have a history of past performance will receive no higher than a "Neutral Confidence" rating for the Past Performance Factor. | DRFP, P. 94, Section M.2.3 | Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance and, as a result, will receive an "Neutral Confidence" rating for the past performance factor. For evaluation purposes, a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating is worth more than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating. | |||
| 44 | Cell A60 on the CLIN Structure IDIQ tab states "Subtotal of all option periods prior to surge." However, the formula in cell E60 also includes the 4 year Base Period. Please confirm the label in cell A60 should read "Subtotal of Base Period and all option periods prior to surge." | Attach 08 DES clin Structure | See question 30. | |||
| 45 | Cell A62 on the CLIN Structure IDIQ tab states "Subtotal of all option periods including surge." However, the formula in cell E62 also includes the 4 year Base Period. Please confirm the label in cell A62 should be "Subtotal of Base Period and all option periods including surge." | Attach 08 DES clin Structure | See question 30. | |||
| 46 | The DRFP states "The Offeror shall submit a contractor created excel spreadsheet to include the CLIN structure provided in the (Attachment 8) for both the IDIQ and task order 1." Please confirm that the Contractor is permitted to insert the contractor created Excel spreadsheets into Attachment 8. If not, please confirm that the contractor created Excel spreadsheets must be provided in a separate file? | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.3 | See question 30. | |||
| 47 | The RFP states "The Offeror shall use the estimated Travel figures provided by the Government under the Pricing Summary tab as a plug amount in its price proposal for evaluation purposes only." Does the "Pricing Summary tab" refer to the "CLIN Structure tab" in Attachment 8? | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.3 |
Attach 08 DES clin structure
| See question 30. | |||||
| 48 | The travel figures provided by the Government for the IDIQ period total $46,460,900.98, not $46,461,400.98 (this total amount includes the $500 Minimum Guarantee). Please update the total included travel amount for the IDIQ period? | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.3 | The travel amounts included in the RFP are estimates. Note section L.6.3 has been updated. | Y | Section L.6.3 |
| 49 | Clause 52.222-46 is included, but no requirements are provided. Recommend Section L be updated to provide direction on content for a Total Compensation Plan, and Section M be updated to identify how this plan will be evaluated. | DRFP, P. 46, Section I | The clause has been removed as it does not apply to commercial contracts per the FAR clause matrix. | ||
| 50 | Attachment 14 SOO Appendix E (IDIQ PWS Template) page 2 indicates that Performance Area 2 (Application Hosting) consists of the following: |
- Access to Virtual Server Hosting
- Dedicated Server Hosting
- Website Hosting
However, SOO Appendix A (Services Summary) page 23 indicates that "Application & Hosting" consists of
- Access to Virtual Server Hosting
- Dedicated Server Hosting
- Software Management
Please provide a definitive list of services to be provided as performance area 2. DRFP, P. 23, Section C
Attach 14 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template, P. 2, Paragraph 1 Appendix A was updated to include: - Access to Virtual Server Hosting
- Dedicated Server Hosting
| - Software Management | Y | Revised PWS Templates for IDIQ and TO #001 | ||||
| 51 | Appendix A (Services Summary) lists services as they appeared in the pre-solicitation materials. Some of these services (e.g., Authorizing official) appear to be SSP services or out of scope areas per the pre-solicitation script (e.g., Collaboration/UC services). Some are ambiguous (e.g., ITSM services). Please provide service definitions and DES offeror responsibilities for each service to enhance clarity. | DRFP, P. 23, Section C | Authorizing official was removed. The definitions were provided in the SOO for task order 1. | Y | Attachment 9 | |
| 52 | Please provide a definition of the MPE-S task referenced in the Afghanistan support section as this could not be linked back to the service summary. | DRFP, Pg. 44, Section H.13 | MPE-S means Mission Partner Environment Services it has been spelled out in the clause. Please note that the local clause is mandatory for work to be performed in Afghanistan. Please refer to attachment 11, places of performance which includes a list of the countries. | Mission Partner Environment Services (MPE-S) | ||
| 53 | Section C (page 11, paragraph 3. Scope) states "DES will also support the legacy operations and sustainment's requirements of DAFA mission partners as separate task orders…." Section M.2.1.1 requires offerors to provide an approach to AOR for 100% within 90 days. 1) Please confirm that the reference "performance start" within M.2.2.1 is the start for each Task Order. 2) Please confirm the TOs for legacy sustainment, migration to the SSP Network Environment, and long term sustainment of the SSP are a singular Task Order. 3) Please provide Section L instructions on how to capture within the CLIN Structure. | DRFP, P. 11, Section C; P. 90 Section M.2.1.1 | 1) task order 1 is expected to be awarded with the award of the IDIQ. The issuance of the task order is expected to be done a few days after the issuance of the IDIQ. 2) This will be determined at the TO level 3)See question 30. | |||
| 54 | Appendix A identifies "Circuits - Engineering" as in scope within Network Access Services. Section M.2.2.3, Paragraph a. Operations, requests offerors to provide their approach for providing sites with alternate/backup circuits. Please define "circuit - engineering" and confirm whether providing circuits is in scope for the DES provider or another Government entity. | DRFP P. 23, Appendix A; P. 93, Paragraph M.2.2.3.a | Circuits will be provided by DISA. | |||
| 55 | Section M.2.2.2, Paragraph a. Site Survey Execution ends with "…be migrated into the enterprise single service." Please confirm the Government intended this to read "…be migrated into the enterprise/single service provider." | DRFP, P. 92, Section M.2.2.2.a | It should read: "Enterprise Single Service Provider (SSP)." | Y | DRFP, P. 92, Section M.2.2.2.a | |
| 56 | Section M.2.2.4 requests Offerors to propose a toolset, noting the Government's intent to provide a list of current tools and systems used to manage the DoDNet environment. Please confirm that the references to "toolset" and "system proposed' are exclusive of the ACD and ITSM ticketing tool. Additionally, please clarify what "enterprise service" this section is referring to or whether it should be pluralized to reflect all the services in Appendix A. | DRFP, P. 93, Section M.2.2.4 | See revised section M.2.2.4. Automated Call Distribution (ACD) and ITSM Tools will be provided by DISA. | Y | M.2.2.4 | |
| 57 | Section M, paragraph a. Innovations, bullet 1 states "Total lifecycle costs to include hardware and software costs, training and sustainment." Please confirm the total lifecycle costs are to be constrained to IT specific costs and not include facility and other factors that are traditionally outside IT specific parameters | DRFO, P. 94, Paragraph M.2.2.4.a | Revised. Please see M.2.2.4. | Y | M.2.2.4 | |
| 58 | Given the scope and magnitude of the overall DES contract (370,000 users across 22 agencies, 500+ global locations) TO #0001 only represents a small fraction of the overall program. This does not represent the breadth of DES, nor provides confidence in the ability of an offeror to execute the overall program. |
| Please consider allowing offerors to provide Past Performance citations which exceed the magnitude of TO #0001 to be evaluated at a higher degree of relevancy than those that simply meet the requirement. | DRFP, P.11, Paragraph C.3 | The Government has reviewed your suggestion and decided not to revise the RFP | |||||
| 59 | Section C, paragraph 3. Scope states, "Some Common Use IT services may require a Continuity of Operations Plan... " Please specify these Common Use IT services in the RFP for which the offeror is responsible. | DRFP, P.12, Paragraph C.4 | Removed "some" from the SOO. | Y | IDIQ SOO Section 4, c. | ||
| 60 | Section M.2.2.3 states, "To include demonstrated ability and approach in sustaining and improving the network (LAN/WAN) during and after migration..." Statement appears to put WAN engineering in-scope, while other references limit scope to access/LAN engineering. Please update Section M with the Governments intent. | DRFP, P.93, Section M.2.2.3 | DES support includes LAN/WAN engineering. | ||||
| 61 | The DRFP states that the contractor shall deliver services in accordance with Table 3 - Global Service Desk. Please clarify the scope and schedule for the transition of the Global Service Desk to DES? | DRFP, P. 15, Section C | This will be determined at the task order level. Note the Global Service Desk is not in the scope of task order 1. A future task order may be issued for the work related to the service desk. | ||||
| 62 | In Section M.2.1.1, paragraph a. Network Operations Staffing, Network operations staffing refers to "…approach to support post-migration operational and sustainment environments." As this section is dealing with transition and AOR, please confirm this is correct or should it read …approach to support post-transition operational and sustainment environments." | DRFP, P. 90, Paragraph M2.1.1.a | Revised; "post-migration changed to "post-transition" | Y | DRFP, P. 90, Paragraph M2.1.1.a | ||
| 63 | Section M.2.2.4 paragraph a, states that the Government will evaluate the Offeror's "total lifecycle costs to include hardware and software costs, training and sustainment." Please confirm these hardware and software costs are only associated with the OSS/EMS for estimating purposes only. | DRFP, P. 94, Section M.2.2.4, Paragraph M.2.2.4.a | Revised. Please see M.2.2.4. | Y | M.2.2.4 | ||
| 64 | Please confirm that Task Orders may procure commercial and noncommercial items, and that FAR 17.2 Options may be for either commercial or noncommercial items. | DRFP P. 2, Section B.1 | This contract is for commercial services. | N | |||
| 65 | The DRFP states "The Fixed Price (FP) Labor Rates proposed represent the Offeror’s fully-burdened FP hourly labor rates for each skill classification for work performed at Government and Contractor sites both in the Contiguous United States (CONUS) and Outside the Contiguous United States (OCONUS)." As there can be a significant difference in the cost for OCONUS positions, please confirm our understanding that only one ceiling rate is to be proposed, applicable to both CONUS and OCONUS performance, and this rate is to include all additional costs associated with OCONUS performance such as DSSR premiums and local travel. | DRFP P. 3, Section B.4 | See answer to question 238. | ||||
| 66 | Managed service offerings provide significant appeal to some organizations operating in a standardized environment, but are often dependent on knowledge and skill to operate specific proprietary solutions in order to provide promised results. Given the dynamics of agency consolidation, migration of numerous entities with various standards, and the risk of such proprietary solutions, please confirm the Government is not considering managed service offerings from DES offerors. | Performance Area 9 – Network Access Services | The Government is not considering managed service offerings from DES offerors. | N | |||
| 67 | Please provide existing contracted PWS (including FTE count), by DAFA, to help providers develop transformative solutions specifically designed to remove duplicative capabilities, reduce labor, leverage IT efficiencies and capture Industry best practices. | DRFP, P. 91, Paragraph M.2.1.1.e | See question 10. | ||||
| 68 | Please provide a comprehensive list of current tools and systems used on each TO #0001 agencies. | DRFP, P. 94, Paragraph M.2.2.4.b | Please see DES reading library, which is provided as background information. | ||||
| 69 | Please confirm that DoDNet traffic will traverse JRSS for NIPR/SIPR and identify the non-JRSS sites. | ||||||
| Attach 12 SOO Appendix C - DES IDIQ DAFA IT Architecture | Yes, for where JRSS is available DODNET will adopt JRSS. JRSS continues to expand and does not yet exist in SIPR. | ||||||
| 70 | Section C (page 14, paragraph 1) states “Implement an integrated network operations center management of service across all aspects of the environment.” Please provide details on whether this is a stand alone operations center. If not, does it somehow interface and exchange information with the DGOC at Scott AFB or some other entity? Please provide details on what information it exchanges and with whom? | DRFP, P. 14, Section C | DES will provide integrated network operations center management across multiple DISA Global Operation Centers. | ||||
| 71 | Paragraph C.4.c refers only to CONUS however there are OCONUS sites for management. Are there specific hours for OCONUS, and if so please update Section C accordingly. | DRFP, P. 12, Paragraph C.4.c | SOO section 4 c. states: " | The 4th Estate Common Use IT services are required to be 24x7 with core hours M-F, 8 am to 5 pm local time. Some Common Use IT services may require a Continuity of Operations Plan, which includes surge support requirements for Disaster Recovery and reconstitution activities. | Y | SOO Section 4.c | |
| 72 | Please provide the Security Clearance required for all sites? | Attach 15 SOO Appendix F - DES IDIQ DAFA Data Calls, Appendix F | TS-SCI clearance requirements are designated in Appendix F, which describes the minimum site clearance for several of the sites. Further information will be provided at the Task Order level, in the DD254 document. | Y | Appendix F | ||
| 73 | Some sites at DARPA require TS/SCI with polygraph. Please confirm that these DARPA sites require a Full Scope Poly and not a CI polygraph? |
| Attach 15 SOO Appendix F - DES IDIQ DAFA Data Calls, Tab: DARPA | Specific security requirements will be determined at the task order level and documented in the DD254. | ||||
| 74 | Section L.3.6 requires a separate DD254 for each subcontractor, if applicable. Please confirm for which subcontractors a DD254 is required. | DRFP, P. 77, Section L.3.6 | Please refer to section L.3.6 which states: "A separate DD254 shall be completed for each subcontractor, if applicable. Failure to present an acceptable DD254 with the proposal will deem the proposal non-responsive and it may be removed from further consideration. See Attachment 1." Typically a contract is awarded with the prime DD254s, subcontractors DD254s are reviewed and approved during contract performance. | ||
| 75 | Please complete the entries in the deliverables table (Format, Due Date, and Distribution/Copies) in Section C. | DRFP, P. 19, Section C | Specific deliverable information will be listed in each task order PWS. | ||
| 76 | Section C, paragraph 3. Scope, states "...will use the DISA DoDNet as the technical baseline for standardization between agencies upon transition." Please provide further details on this baseline. | DRFP, P. 11, Paragraph C.3 Scope | Win10 baseline exists and we have an architectural baseline for the infrastructure. | ||
| 77 | Section C, Table 1 indicates that Phase I agencies will be complete by FY2025 and Phase II by FY2026. Please provide anticipated schedule for Phase II agencies in Table 1, to include migration and sustainment. | DRFP, P. 12, Section C - Table 1 | Phase II agencies do not have a start date yet. The reference table is only for Phase 1 which is FY22-31 | ||
| 78 | Section C, paragraph 8, Table 2 states "Alert detection and escalation" require "Priority 1 alerts…" Please provide a definition of Priority 1 alerts. | DRFP, P. 14, Section C - Table 2 | Please refer to - "DSMC Event Management SOP" in the Reading Library, which is porvided as background information. | Y | Added to the Reading Library |
| 79 | Section C, Table 4 (page 17), row "Architecture Diagrams (DoDAF Compliant)" has a required format listed as Visio. Please confirm that other formats that provide equal/greater engineering benefits are allowed? | DRFP; P. 17, Section C - Table 4 | Visio/PDF - These are the programs likely to be installed on GFE Laptops/Computers. We will not accept other formats. | ||
| 80 | Given the scope and magnitude of the overall DES contract (370,000 users across 22 agencies, 500+ global locations) TO #0001 only represents a small fraction of the overall program. This does not represent the breadth of DES, nor provides confidence in the ability of an offeror to execute the overall program. |
| Please consider allowing offerors to provide Past Performance citations which exceed the magnitude of TO #0001 to be evaluated at a higher degree of relevancy than those that simply meet the requirement. | DRFP, P. 94-95, Section M.2.3.2 | Please refer to section M.2.3.2 where it states: "The scope and magnitude of Task Order 1 shall be used for relevancy comparison." | |||
| 81 | In reference to Table 2 in Section 9, Performance Metrics, is there a definition of "High Performing" and "Standard Sites" and how many sites are classified as "High Performing" vs "Standard Sites"? | DRFP, P. 14, Section C | Not for all 4th estate, to begin we are leveraging dual redundancy at DODNET Hub locations. Redundancy/failover would be ideal for headquarters of each agency. | ||
| 82 | Please confirm the performance metrics in paragraph 8, tables 2 and 3 will not go into effect until an agency has fully migrated to the SSP network environment. | DRFP, P. 14-15, Section C, Tables 2 and 3 | Performance metrics will go into effect after each task order's transition period. | ||
| 83 | In reference to Table 2 within Section 8, Performance Metrics, please clarify if the "Alert detection and escalation" metric refers to device alerts or cybersecurity alerts? | DRFP, P. 14, Section C, Table 2 | They refer to both as part of event management. | ||
| 84 | In reference to Table 3 in Section 8, Performance Metrics, please define "Knowledge Management Documents" (for example SOPs, knowledge-based articles, and FAQs). | DRFP, P. 15, Section C, Table 3 | Knowledge Based Documents are SOPs , TTPs, FAQs, and reference materials which may be used by service desk personnel or end users. | ||
| 85 | Section M.2.1.2, paragraph b. Authority to Operate (ATO), sub-bullet 1 states "A proven methodology to sustain network at a minimum (LAN/WAN) during and after site migrations, taking into account the current network architecture." Please clarify what is meant by "at a minimum" and provide additional details describing what is beyond this "minimum"? | DRFP, Page 91, Paragraph M.2.1.2.b | It means to maintain an operational network where user can continue to authenticate, access resources and the security systems can continue to operate such as endpoint security and scanning systems. | ||
| 86 | Please confirm offerors are to provide labor rate buildups to support the IDIQ rates submitted? | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.2 | Correct. | N | |
| 87 | Section C, Table 3, details the AQL for Performance Standard for "Tier I average time to respond to chat" with an acceptable AQL as "Within one minute for all Chats." Please clarify the workload split for all forms of required interactions (i.e., call, email, chat). | DRFP, P. 15, Section C | |||
| M.2.1.1, Pg. 90 | No change. Please see Section 8, Table 3 for AQLs. | ||||
| 88 | Section L.6.3 provides a travel plug for task order 1, Option Period 4, but not for the six-month extension. Additionally, Attach 08 DES clin structure.xlsx, Tab: CLIN Structure TO1 does not have an Option Period 4, but does have a travel amount for the six-month extension (52.217-8 Period). Please clarify if the DRFP travel plug for Option Period 4 should be for the six month extension (52.217-8 Period). | DRFP, P. 83, Section L.6.3, Paragraph 2 |
| Attach 08 DES clin structure.xlsx | Section L.6.3 has been revised to include travel for the 52.217-8 extension | |||||
| 89 | The DRFP states "Labor rates for Task Order 1 may not exceed the ceiling rates for the applicable labor categories proposed for the IDIQ contract, but they may be discounted from those ceiling rates." If the TO #0001 period of performance differs from the IDIQ period of performance then the proposed labor rates for the Task Order will be a composite of the IDIQ labor rates from multiple years. If this is the case then the proposed labor rates will exceed the ceiling of the first year of IDIQ rates used, but will be under the second year of IDIQ rates used. Will the Task Order period of performance be the same as the IDIQ period of performance? If the period of performance is not the same not is it acceptable that the Task Order proposed labor rates exceed the first year of the IDIQ labor rates used, but are under the second year of IDIQ labor rates used? | DRFP, P. 82, Section L.6.3 | Task order 1 is expected to be awarded with the IDIQ's award. The period of performance for task order 1 is one base year and four one-year options. The period of performance for the first five years of the IDIQ should match the first five years of task order 1. | |||
| 90 | Section C, describes a performance metric for "Decrease customer interactions." As the agencies will be brought in over time, please confirm that we re-baseline as agencies are onboarded. | DRFP; P. 14, Section C | Correct. | |||
| 91 | Sections H.5 and H.14 are redundant (USE OF GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED COMPUTERS). Recommend elimination of H.14. | DRFP; P. 36-37, Section H.5; P.44-45 Section H.14 | The old Section H.14 was removed. Instead a new H.14 was added. | Y | Section H.14 | |
| 92 | Section L.6.1 states, "The total evaluated price will consist of the proposed price for task order 1, inclusive of all options and the option pricing for the additional 6-month period in accordance with FAR 52.217-8." |
Section M.1.3 states, "The total evaluated price will consist of the Contractor’s proposed prices for each of the task orders’ periods of performance including the pricing for the additional six-month period."
| Please confirm that the total evaluated price will be based on Task Order 1 only. | DRFP, P. 81, Section L.6.1; P. 90, Section M.13 | M.1.3 was removed. | Y | M.1.3 was removed. |
| 93 | Sections M.2.2.1 and M.2.2.5 state, "The Government will evaluate the proposed Performance Work Statement (PWS), including performance standards with the acceptable quality levels and associated performance incentives for exceeding the acceptable quality levels delineated in the performance standards" |
Attachment 15 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template states (P. 7, Paragraph 8 Incentives), "This is a firm fixed priced contract with no monetary incentives. Performance (positive or negative) will be rated in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)."
Please clarify the position on performance incentives. DRFP, P. 92, Section M.2.2.1; P.94, Section M.2.2.5
| Attach 14 SOO Appendix E - DES IDIQ PWS Template, P. 7 | See revised sections M.2.2.1 and M.2.2.5. | y | M.2.2.1 and M.2.2.5 | |||
| 94 | Section C.3 states "DES will also support the legacy Operations and Sustainment requirements of Defense Agency and Field Activities (DAFA) mission partners as separate task orders until such time that the DAFA is ready to fully implement standardized DES operations and management." What is the time frame apply to the DAFA for the mission partner to "ready to fully implement ..."? | DRFP, P. 11, Paragraph C.3 | Plans for migration will be heavily influenced by the awardee. The awardee’s proposed approach will identify the methodologies for migrations and inform stakeholders. | |||
| 95 | Paragraph C.4.a states "Current operations across the 4th Estate environment include a disparate mixture of government/contractor owned IT hardware (HW) (e.g. servers, desktops, laptops, routers, thin clients, printers) and IT software (SW) (e.g. desktop and application SW) as well as a combination of government and contractor operated services." This wording leads the offeror to believe that they will be responsible for operations, maintenance, and support of other Government contractor's hardware and/or software, to include potential upgrades, which presents certain liabilities and risk to the offerors. Please clarify the wording to indicate that all assets hardware or software turned over to the DES contractor will be GFE. | DRFP pg.: 12 Paragraph: C.4.a | Agencies will migrate to a SSP common IT environment. The DES provider will plan for the lifecycle and technical refresh of all infrastructure and endpoint nodes, which the Government will procure through competitive means. | |||
| 96 | Section C (P. 13, paragraph 6.A) states "The contractor shall complete the necessary steps for assumption of the operation during the phase-in period and shall meet all requirements as specified in the SOO with the beginning of full performance." This wording leads the offeror to believe that performance requirements of the SOO are not in enforced until the migration to the SSP is completed, as "Full performance" has not been defined. Please verify/clarify | DRFP pg.: 13 Paragraph: C.6.A | IDIQ SOO Section 6 was modified to add: "The phase-in period shall be no more than 90 calendar days." Full performance is required right after the 90 calendar phase-in period. | |||
| 97 | Section C, Table 3 states "Table 3 defines performance measures for the service desk." It is unclear which service desk that the Government is referring. Is this a service desk capability instantiated uniquely for DES or is a transfer of an existing service desk? If the latter, please specify. | DRFP, P. 15 Section C, Table 3 | We're referring to the existing Global Service Desk. Note that task order 1 does not include the service desk, the help desk may be added on a future task order. | |||
| 98 | Attachment 13 includes one entry for DISA, while the RFP Table 1 includes two separate entries for DISA (HQ & Field Offices). Is the information in this attachment the consolidated DISA data? If so, please provide the unique entries to ensure the offeror is able to appropriately align staffing. If not please identify which DISA entity is represented and provide the data for the other. | Attach 13 SOO Appendix D- DES IDIQ GSC Workload | Attachment 13 contains consolidated DISA GSC workload. | Y | Attach 13 SOO Appendix D- DES IDIQ GSC Workload | |
| 99 | Attachment 13 includes DHA, which is a phase II agency, but no data for the rest of the phase II agencies. The following Phase II DAFAs (re: Table 1, DES Integration Timeline) are not included in this attachment: |
- Defense Legal Services Agency (DLSA)
- Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA)
- Defense Technology Security Agency (DTSA)
- Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS)
- Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD)
- Personnel Force Protection Agency (PFPA)
- Washington Headquarters Services (WHS)
- Joint Service Provider (JSP)
| Please provide workload information for these DAFAs. | Attach 13 SOO Appendix D- DES IDIQ GSC Workload | Updated Attachment 13 to include JSP monthly workload. | Y | Attach 13 SOO Appendix D- DES IDIQ GSC Workload | ||
| 100 | Where will the Government evaluate the risk associated with the TO #0001 proposed approach? Will the Government evaluate the proposed TO #0001 resources (labor categories and hours) as part of Factor 2, subfactor 5? | DRFP, P. 94, Section M.2.2.5 | See revised section M.2.2.5. | Y | M.2.2.5 | |
| 101 | The price evaluation described in the DRFP may not provide the Government the ability to adequately evaluate risk. Specifically, the ability to discount the IDIQ labor rates for TO #0001 permits a below-cost bid that artificially reduces the total evaluated price. While all pricing will be evaluated for reasonableness, only an evaluation for realism can identify rates that are too low. Recommend the Government evaluate the risk of unrealistically low rates proposed for TO 1. | DRFP, P. 82-83, Section L.6.3; P. 94, Section M.2.4 | See revised section M.2.2.5. | Y | M.2.2.5 | |
| 102 | The Authorizing Official is inherently a Government function with DISA as the Authorizing Official for this effort. However Section C, Appendix A states that the Authorizing Official is within scope. Please clarify what duties of the Authorizing Official within the Contractor’s responsibility? | DRFP, P. 23, Section C | Appendix A was updated to remove Authorizing Official. | Y | SOO Appendix A | |
| 103 | Attachment 15 has multiple columns but the column titles are not defined. Please provide definitions for each column, specifically defining Users vs Seats and ADCON Personnel? | Attach 15 SOO Appendix F - DES IDIQ DAFA Data Calls | Users vs. seats represent whether employees are assigned individual endpoints or share endpoints. ADCON is used to designate personnel who work offsite. | |||
| 104 | By what qualities will M.2.2.2 Survey and Migration, M.2.2.3 Network Operations and Support, and M.2.2.4 Innovation and Emerging Technology be evaluated (e.g., feasibility, capability, demonstrated experience, and thorough understanding)? | DRFP, P. 92-94, Sections M.2.2.2, M.2.2.3, M.2.2.4 | As described in Section M.2.2.2, M.2.2.3 and M.2.2.4. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .