Final_Round2_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED#

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

# Reference (Section / Paragraph) Page # Question Response

Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U) Question 16, Page 1 We understand that the title page, transmittal letter, table of contents are not included in the page count for any of the volumes. Can the Government confirm? Question from Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U) “The Government provides 25 pages for the Volume 4 response but the evaluation criteria requests that a technical and program management response be provided for both the IDIQ and TO2 SOWs. Would the Government consider increasing the page limit to 35 pages for this volume to ensure full coverage of all requirements? In addition, can the Government confirm that the usual exemptions apply for page limitations - e.g., not including Table of Content, Cover Letter, Resumes, Compliance/Cross-Reference Matrix, etc”

The government increased the page limit to 35 in Amendment 01

Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U) Questions 148, 165, 171, 173, Page 9-11

The current RFQ requirements and previous answers to questions are ambiguous and blur the lines between what requirements are scoped for the OEM vs. requirements that are for the System Integrator. For example, please see the Government’s previous answers to questions 148, 165, 171, and 173 document Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U). Can the Government please amend the RFQ so that requirements are more clearly defined and delineated?

No, we are not amending the RFQ. Answers for 148, 165, & 173, will depend on the OEM solution that is awarded. These answers show that the OEM and SI will have to work together to meet the technical requirements and establish roles and responsibilities between the parties.

The SI primarily deals with the external integration into the environment for which the system is being deployed in. As for answer 171, we need the names for those POCs identified within the OEM's company to ensure we have the Government talking to the correct individuals charged with those functions. For example, the contracting officer needs to know who the person is within the OEM organization that signs the contract and all modifications.

Will the Government adjust the requirements to allow for alternative proposals to be evaluated in alignment with the FAR 52.204-22, which states: “(a) The Government recognizes that the line items established in this solicitation may not conform to the Offeror’s practices. Failure to correct these issues can result in difficulties in acceptance of deliverables and processing payments. Therefore, the Offeror is invited to propose alternative line items for which bids, proposals, or quotes are requested in this solicitation to ensure that the resulting contract is economically and administratively advantageous to the Government and the Offeror” ? The original RFQ released (prior to Amendments) had incorporated the following: (e) Multiple offers. Offerors are encouraged to submit multiple offers presenting alternative terms and conditions, including alternative line items (provided that the alternative line items are consistent with FAR subpart 4.10), or alternative commercial products or commercial services for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Each offer submitted will be evaluated separately.

FAR 52.212-1 is still in the RFQ and FAR 52.204-22 was not removed from the RFQ. Any deviations from the RFQ need to captured in the volume 0

Cost_Price+IDIQ+template+(U)+.xlsx There is a possibility of different SaaS products by personas across the user base of 30,000 users. Additionally, each TO will require a different scope of products to meet requirements. Therefore, can we adjust the IDIQ price template to provide a price by product and persona?

Yes, please adjust to price your solution

J.5 Attachment 4 - Technical Requirements Document CLINs 0009, 1009, 2009, 3009, 4009, and 5009

Page 202 When does the Government anticipate operating on the TS/SCI network? IOC is within 5- years of award

Cost_Price+HCMS+OEM+TO+02+Pricing+Sheet Cost_Price+IDIQ+template+

The RFQ indicates that TS/SCI is the system of record, yet CLINs 0009, 1009, 2009, 3009, 4009, and 5009 for pricing TS/SCI is optional, “OPT: Unpriced Option JWICS Licensing up to 30,000 users.” Can the Government please adjust the RFQ so it is clear TS/SCI is required and needs to be priced accordingly

The Government has previously stated the System of Record for the new system will reside on JWICS in the TS/SCI environment. Because there are so many solutions that have not been deployed into the JWICS environment, the Government assumes there maybe a cost in the change to the licenses for full JWICS deployment.

Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U) J.5 Attachment 4 - Technical Requirements Document

CLINs Page 3-7 Pursuant to a few Government responses to questions that additional details will be provided post award of the SI contract, can the Government clarify what is the schedule for the release of the System Integrator RFP and intended award date?

We can't release the SI RFP until after the award is made on the OEM. However, the government intends to issue a draft RFP for the SI's to review while the OEM under goes source selection

Background / HCMS OEM SW TO 0002 SOW Page 41 In the DIA Pre-Solicitation Virtual Conference, the Government displayed a list of systems of record that would require integration. Can the Government provide the list of those systems of record and the existing interface agreements to the existing systems of records?

Please see sam.gov for ICD-like documentation on the overall HCMS system that currently exists, the Government will not be providing interface agreements for this solicitation.

9 FedRamp_Moderate.xls.xls If an OEM has an IL5 environment, can the IL5 be used to support all unclassified use cases? Yes.

Zero-Trust.pdf.pdf What specifically in the Zero Trust document in the Bidder’s Library released with Amendment 02 does the Government want the OEM to comply with or is the Government referencing the document as part of a continuing dialogue about Zero Trust with the OEM?

This document was shared to inform all offerors of potential updates to security requirements/policies, allowing all to consider how each can/will address those requirements in any proposals.

11 HHM40224Q00010003.pdf When does the Government intend to answer the latest round of questions due October 5th, 2023? ASAP

HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02_(U).pdf (2).pdf ITO Section 1.14

Page 5 Given multiple amendments and additional time to ask questions, will the Government please extend the submission of the RFQ by two weeks to Monday, October 30th, 2023?

Unfortunately due to the Acquisitions timelines, we can't extend the RFQ by 2-weeks.

OHR MOD PMO OEM

Questions Round 2/ Comment Matrix

# Classification: UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

# Reference (Section / Paragraph) Page # Question Response

OHR MOD PMO OEM

Questions Round 2/ Comment Matrix

J.5 Attachment 4 - Technical Requirements Document Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U)

Page 202, 1.2.2.2, 1.2.2.3, 1.2.3.1.2, and 1.2.3.3; Page 1, Question 15

The previous answer the Government provided to question 15 of the document titled Final_HCMS_OEM_IDIQ_Questions_Answers+(U) does not clarify the initial scope of all stakeholders interfacing with the system, especially the external stakeholders like candidates and applicants, staff management users, and contractors.

Can the Government provide a breakdown within the Technical Requirements Document titled HRIS+TRD+v3 preferably in a matrix of persona and number of users in the following sections: 1.2.2.2, 1.2.2.3, 1.2.3.1.2, and 1.2.3.3?

No because each solution may have different users. External users vary based on the vacancy announcements and applications received; this is why we gave you an estimated number of users.

Contractors are only record holders in the current system for security and IT tracking purposes.

Solicitation HHM402-24-Q-0001, Section C, subsection 2.2.5

The OEM is required to deliver a software solution that supports multiple domains including TS/SCI networks. We understand that JWICS is the only TS/SCI network that is required for this RFQ. Can the Government please confirm and adjust the requirement accordingly?

NIPR is one of the domains; SIPR maybe become added in the future out years

C.3 C.1.2 TO 02- SOW, HCMS OEM SW TO 002

SOW; Attachment 2.1 TO 02 Pricing Sheet

35/163 of Amendment

When does the Government expect/intend to award Task Order 002 for OEM SW Licensing and Initial Configuration? Right after award of the IDIQ contract.

1.1.14.1 / HHM402-24-Q-

0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf

6 OF 15 Is the 72 hours based on calendar days? Yes

1.14/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf 6 OF 15 Request the government to extend the proposal due date 30 Oct 2023 or at least a minimum of 2 weeks after the date that the government posts their reply to the 2nd round of company questions. This will give the bidders the necessary time to review the additional 15 attachments in amendment 2 and complete their proposal to be compliant to the additional DIA HCM requirements.

Unfortunately due to the Acquisitions timelines, we will not be able to extend the RFQ by 2-weeks.

14.9/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_01+(U).pdf 25 of 163 Will the government provide the SCRM questionnaire form or does the offeror use their SCRM questionnaire form? The government would provide the SCRM questionnaires, the responsibility of the offeror would be to address those questions. SCRM questionnaires will not be provided in this solicitation.

2.2.1.9/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_01+(U).pfd 14 of 163 Where are the requirements for SOW 2.2.1.9 Employee, Supervisor, and Staff Management Self Service as it is not in the FRD HCBRM Functional Area in the FRD Spreadsheet?

While not included with specificity in the FRD, the intent of 2.2.1.9 is for all offeror's to understand there does exist requirements for Self Service for the HCM system. Offerors should accordingly address this technical requirement through whatever documentation that the software solution offers.

2.2.1.9/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_01+(U).pfd 4 of 163 Is the government looking for a price quote for JWICS Licensing? If so, can they please explain the purpose of an unpriced option line in 0009?

No, because we know those costs may not be able to be determined until after the SI has started their work

2.2.1.9/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_01+(U).pfd 4 of 163 Will the government still consider proposals that don't include input for the Unpriced Option CLINS at this time? (0009, 1009, 2009, 3009, 4009 and 5009) Yes, because we know those costs may not be able to be determined until after the SI has started their work

22 4.2.2/HHM402-24-D-HCM/0002 37 of 163 Will the Sandbox environment reside within the Customer's environment? No, for Task Order 2 the sandbox environment will be the offeror's.

SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

# Reference (Section / Paragraph) Page # Question Response

OHR MOD PMO OEM

Questions Round 2/ Comment Matrix

Cost_Price HCMS OEM TO 02 Pricing Sheet (U).xlsx Labor TO02 Sheet The government provides a pricing sheet to show the cost build up for the labor base periods. If we are using

Subcontractors for some of the labor can we modify the spreadsheet format to incorporate the Subcontractor Labor Build up

Yes

Cost_Price IDIQ template (U) .xlsx Labor Base Ordering Periods, Labor Option Ordering Periods Sheets

The government provides a pricing sheet to show the cost build up for the labor base periods. If we are using Subcontractors for some of the labor can we modify the spreadsheet format to incorporate the Subcontractor Labor Build up

Yes

HHM402-24-D-HCM/0002 35 of 163 Will initial software configuration be done in offeror's environment, government's IL5 environment or government JWICS environment?

The establishment of the "sandbox" test/demonstration environment as seen in Task Order 2 was intended to be in the offeror's chosen environment. Following Task Order 2, the environment where the offeror's software is installed will be dependent on how far through the ATO process the software has gone.

(U) INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS/ HHM402-24-

D-HCM/0002

152 of 163 Does the government intend on downselecting more than one vendor post-demo to continue discussions or does the government intend on moving to award immediately after the demo phase?

Per ITO paragraph 4.3, the government intends to make an award without discussions. If required the government will follow methods/steps prescribed in the FAR/DFARS/DoD Source Selection Procedures if conducting discussions is required.

M.2.5/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf 7 of 15 Does the documentation of ATO in federal network, FEDRAMP authorization, or similar accreditation process count towards Volume 3's 25 page count?

The ATO documentation does not count towards page counts.

M.2.5/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf 7 of 15 What similar accreditation processes documentation count for this requirement? Please provide examples. The intent was for offeror's to provide any documentation on completing rigid, thorough processes to meet IT-related security requirements if offeror's have not engaged in ATO processes for Government customers. Selections for this documentation is the at the discretion of the offeror to best meet the requirements that the Government has defined in this RFQ.

M.2.5/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf 7 of 15 Do we need to provide FedRamp documentation or just provide the FedRamp package ID? Please provide ID only.

M.2.5/ HHM402-24-Q-0001_Amendment_02+(U).pdf 7 of 15 Can the offeror embed the documentation for ATO in federal network, FEDRAMP authorization, or similar accreditation process in Volume 3?

If providing FedRamp documentation, ID is only required.

4.2.5/ (U) INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS/

HHM402-24-D-HCM/0002

159 of 163 Will the government provide feedback of the Product Demonstration to the offerors? Yes, this will be included as part of the debriefings

RFQ Amendment 2/SF30 2 Amendment 2 stated a second round of questions are due Monday, October 5th. October 5th is a Thursday, can the

Government clarify whether the due date for additional questions is either Monday October 2nd, or Thursday October 5th?

See amendment 03.

RFQ Amendment 1/SF30 2 Under the purpose of this modification, Section 1. references clauses that have been deleted; however, in the body of the solicitation, many if not all of the clauses still appear in full text and by reference. Can the Government clarify the intent of Amendment 1 was to remove these clauses and not maintain them in the body of the solicitation?

We will repost since the highlighted texts did not come through

RFQ Amendment 1/SF30 2 Under the purpose of this modification, Section 2. references highlighted clauses that are considered to be mandatory;

however, the body of the solicitation did not include any highlighted clauses. Can the Government clarify if the Offeror is to interpret no clauses are considered mandatory or identify those the Government intended to highlight?

We will repost since the highlighted texts did not come through

Bidder's Library/Attachment 6 All The Government released the Bidder's Library on Friday, September 29th, 29 days after the formal release of the RFQ with an initial response period of 45 days. An appropriately responsive bid could not be drafted by any interested Offeror until receipt of all the material information provided under the Bidder's Library. With only 17 days remaining of the response period from release of the full Bidder's Library, recommend the Government in accordance with DFARS 215.371-2 extend the response period to 30 days from release of the Bidder's Library having responses due on October 30th in an effort to achieve highly responsive bids from all interested Offerors and mitigate any requirement to extend the due date if only one offer is received.

Unfortunately due to the Acquisitions timelines, we will not be able to extend the RFQ by 2-weeks.

RFQ Amendment 2, Section M, M.1, ITO, 1.7 5 of 15 To ensure fairness in the demonstration process, the Government would need to send the "scripted demonstration and prescribe scenarios" 24-hours in advance of each Offeror's demonstration. Will the Government confirm that the Offeror which has its demo scheduled for November 6, should this occur, receive the "scripted demonstration and prescribe scenarios" on Sunday, November 5?

Yes, to further clarify the government will also be holding demonstrations over the weekend based on the number of quotes received.

RFQ Amendment 2, Section M, M.1, ITO, 1.7 5 of 15 Given the Government's intent to release scripted demonstrations 24-hours prior to Offerors hosting a live demonstration in the Washington, D.C. metro area, many OEM companies are not locally headquartered in the Washington D.C. metro area and based on the script may have experts located throughout the United States. Will the Government clarify the intent behind the 24-hour advance notice and if virtual participants are allowed to meet this short turn-around schedule?

The demos will not be virtual, the government intends to travel to a site within the NCR to observe the demos in person. The intent is to give each offeror the same amount of time to prepare for the demonstrations. The government has preselected aspects of performance that should be covered in the demonstrations that are required to be shown as part of the evaluation for award. Vendors will be notified of their respective demo date and time after receipt of proposals.

SEE FAR 2.101 AND 3.104

# Reference (Section / Paragraph) Page # Question Response

OHR MOD PMO OEM

Questions Round 2/ Comment Matrix

RFQ Amendment 2, Section M, M.1, ITO, 2.5, Table 3 7 of 15 Does "Out of the box demonstration unconfigured" (fourth line in table) pertain to the "Scenario Workflow Demonstration" (first line in table), or is it an independent demonstration requirement?

The Government will be asking to see functionality demonstrated for unconfigured version of the offeror's software, and those functions to be demonstrated will be provided 24 hours prior to the scheduled demonstration.

39 Amendment 2 all Can the government please send a searchable/non scanned version of Amendment 0002? Yes, we will do our best to provide a searchable copy of all amendments

3.3.2 ITO and 14.9 IDIQ SOW 157 and 25 The instructions state "the Offeror shall address the SCRM Plan as outlined in the SOW." The SOW section 14.9 states "Provide completed SCRM questionnaires for all planned use of third-party vendor services…" Is it the government's intent that the completed SCRM questionnaires be submittted as part of the RFQ response or during execution of the contract?

Volume 3 of the each offeror's proposal should address SCRM requirements, and it is the discretion (whether to include questionnaire responses or not) of each offeror to provide relevant proposal documentation to best meet those documented requirements.

3.4 ITO - Phase 1, Volume 4 - Technical and Program

Management

157 The ITO section 3.4 states "Offeror shall include a list of certified partners with facility clearances to be invited for the follow-on System Integrator contract using Attachment 7." Can Attachment 7 be excluded from the 35 page limit and included as an appendix?

Yes, this can be excluded. However, it shall only be completed in the exact format requested by the government and shall not contain any additional information

Cost_Price IDIQ template (U) Cost_Price HCMS OEM TO 02 Pricing Sheet (U)

Labor Base Ordering Periods and Labor Option Periods

Per the Government's response to question 97, if the contractor prices/discounts off a public GSA schedule, does this satisfy the price reasonableness requirement and allow the contractor to remove the costing data information from the pricing exhibit?

No, a separate price reasonableness determination is required for DoD components.

Cost_Price IDIQ template (U) Cost_Price HCMS OEM TO 02 Pricing Sheet (U)Labor Base Ordering

Periods and Labor Option Periods

Where within the pricing exhibit should the contractor include fully burdened labor rates, inclusive of all costing and fee inputs? There does not appear to be any fields within the pricing exhibit to attach PMO and fee to labor inputs.

No, the government needs to have visibility to the direct labor costs, fringe, overhead, fee, and any fees associated with the pricing for the labor rates.

Statement of Work Software Functionality Definitions, Page 10

Can the government clarify the difference between Configuration and Customization? If the solution requires an extension within the OEM solution (i.e. adding custom fields to meet FRD requirements) and it is the customer’s responsibility to maintain that extension through all OEM product releases would that be considered Configuration or Customization?

Configuration would involve the changing of settings within the base software to meet functional requirements, where customization would involve changing or adding code (as compared to commercially available versions of the software) to meet functional requirements.