Q and A Response Amend 01.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 85 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Exam Delivery & Proctoring for: DoW Acquisition and Financial Management Functional Area Certification Exams
- Solicitation number
- HQ003426RE123
- Issued by
-
DOD Washington Headquarters Service
About this file
This is a Question and Answer (Q&A) Response document that addresses vendor inquiries submitted in response to solicitation HQ003426RE123 for exam delivery and proctoring services for the Department of War (DoW) Acquisition and Financial Management Functional Area Certification Exams.
The Q&A document clarifies 32 substantive and critical questions spanning exam delivery requirements, pricing structure, technical specifications, and contract performance expectations. Key clarifications include: (1) vendors must demonstrate worldwide delivery capability through contractor-provided or third-party testing sites, with no preference specified between proprietary networks or partner locations; (2) historical exam delivery data shows a 92% in-person to 8% virtual split, with estimated annual volumes provided in SF1449 pricing tables for three exam types (Contracting, Program Management, and Financial Management); (3) pricing should be submitted as a single blended per-examination unit price rather than separate modality-based pricing; (4) contractors may invoice full examination fees for no-shows and late cancellations consistent with commercial testing practices; (5) government-owned exam item banks currently contain approximately 300 items (Contracting), 1,050 and 900 items (PM Practitioner and Advanced), with FM banks estimated at 200% of exam size; (6) the September 30, 2026 exam-ready date is firm, with contractors responsible for proposing their phase-in approach during the August 1 through September 29, 2026 transition period; and (7) vendors should assume geographic distribution for PM and FM exams comparable to the Contracting workforce. The document confirms that accommodations data, historical exam performance metrics, and detailed pool-based delivery specifications have been or will be provided in supporting exhibits.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Form 1449 - HQ003426RE123 Amend 02.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Criteria_Amend 01.docx | DOCX document | |
| L7 Exam Data by Geography and Mode_Amend 01.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| L5 Past Performance Questionnaire_Amend 01.docx | DOCX document | |
| J1 Statement of Objectives_WarU Cert Exam_Amend 01.docx | DOCX document | |
| L2 CON and PM Cert Exam Historical Actuals Amend 01.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| L1 Comment Resolution Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| L6 Contractor Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form.docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Criteria_Final.docx | DOCX document | |
| L5 Past Performance Questionnaire.docx | DOCX document | |
| H1 Special Contract Requirements (VIQ Clause).docx | DOCX document | |
| Standard Form 1449 - HQ003426RE123.pdf | ||
| J1 Statement of Objectives _WarU Cert Exam.docx | DOCX document | |
| L3 Geo Dispersion of CON workforce (2021 data).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| L2 CON and PM Cert Exam Historical Actuals.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 15
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
Instructions
# Document Page Impact Question/Comment
Number of Comment Indicate the document section name and/or number Indicate the page number of the referenced document Select the appropriate impact category from the drop down list Insert question (plus any necessary context) pertaining to the draft document or other related areas of interest
| EXAMPLE | ||||
| 1 | SF1449/Section L.3.1 | 17 | Significant | Why is this an objective versus a design concept? |
Comment Resolution Matrix (CRM) Instructions
1. Do not change formatting of table or number of columns.
2. Insert only one question or comment per row – no carriage returns within the column.
3. General questions or comments: enter a 0 (zero) for page, paragraph, and section.
All CRMs must be submitted to the POCs listed in the notice instructions by the due date shown.
Question Matrix
| # | Impact | Question/Comment | Government Q&A Response | ||
| Document | Page # | ||||
| 1 | Section 4.1 | References contractor-provided or third-party testing sites worldwide. Can the Government clarify its expectations regarding worldwide in-person testing coverage, including whether offerors are expected to identify all available testing locations at the time of proposal submission or demonstrate a process for providing worldwide coverage through contractor and third-party partner sites during contract performance? | Vendors are responsible for demonstrating experience performing the required services in sufficient detail for the Agency evaluators to give credit. The Agency’s preferences can be found at L.6.2.1. | ||
| 2 | Can the Government provide historical data showing the number of candidates who elected in-person testing outside the Continental United States (CONUS), broken down by country or region if available? | See: "L-7 Exam data by Geography & Mode (June 2026)".xls. Tab 1, Submitted as an additional exhibit. | |||
| 3 | Attachment L-2 | Attachment L-2 provides historical volumes for the Contracting and Program Management exams. Can the Government provide historical (or projected) annual delivery volumes for the three Financial Management certification exams? | The FM certification exams will be new starting in FY2027, as such there are no historical actuals. However, estimated quantities are provided for each of the CLIN's, for each of the base and OY's in the solicitation, SF1449, "Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs" in the tables in page 5-12. | ||
| 4 | Does the Government have geographic distribution data for Program Management and Financial Management examinees similar to Attachment L-3 (CON workforce), or should offerors assume a distribution comparable to the Contracting workforce? | Vendors should assume a distribution comparable to the Contracting workforce. | |||
| 5 | Can the Government provide historical percentages of candidates who selected remote online proctoring versus in-person testing? | Historically, the split between in-person and virtual has been 92/8 (92% in-person, 8% virtual) | |||
| 6 | Section 5.10.6 | Section 5.10.6 requires test item analysis, item discrimination, and data analytics. Are there minimum psychometric methodologies or reporting standards (e.g., Classical Test Theory, Item Response Theory, DIF analysis) expected under this requirement? | The government does not intend to require the contractor to perform psychometric analysis on the exam items, but instead, ensure item performance data is available and accessible to the government COR's, to enable test item analytics. The SOO has been amended to reflect this clarification. | ||
| 7 | Section 4.2.3 | Section 4.2.3 references API or flat-file integration. Does the Government have a preferred integration method, and are interface specifications available for the WarU Student Management System? | There is no preference regarding methods for secure file transfer and data interchange betweem API, or SFTP (for flat files). Examinee data (ie: Name, Student ID, contact information, etc.) are the primary data elements that are transferred to the exam provider, and the expectation is that the return data would be exam performance data (and modality of delivery, delivery date, etc.). | ||
| 8 | Will the Government provide existing exam content in a structured electronic format suitable for bulk import, or should offerors anticipate manual conversion or formatting activities as part of the transition? | The current Government maintained exam data-bank(s) are contained in a Microsoft excel format. Without knowing anything about vendor's exam publishing requirements or exam delivery system, it's difficult for the Government to know the level of conversion or formatting activities that may be required. | |||
| 9 | Will the incumbent contractor be required to provide transition support, including exam content, scheduling information, and historical candidate records, to facilitate a seamless transition to the successor contractor? | In the event of a "transition" from the incumbent to another provider, the Government does not anticipate a need for a formal overlap between contractors, and the following would apply: |
1. The government owns and/or has access to all exam data and historical candidate records, and would provide as needed.
2. Regarding scheduled exams, the Government would be responsible for managing a process for scheduled exam transition between contract periods, since it's assumed that exam providers exam schedules and delivery venue's/methods are independent of one another.
The SOO has been amended (Amendment 01) to provide clarifications for Phase-in activities.
| 10 | When evaluating Corporate Experience, how will the Government assess worldwide exam delivery capability? Will demonstrated experience delivering secure remote proctored examinations globally and utilizing third-party testing center partners satisfy this requirement, or is ownership or operation of an extensive proprietary international testing center network preferred? | Section L.6.2.1 of the Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Criteria, Titled "Relevant Experience", states "…Preferred projects demonstrate similar scope, complexity, and magnitude to the requirments of the SOO...as well as ability to meet the exam delivery demand both CONUS and globally, with preference to in-person delivery vs. virtually where available and feasible." The SOO outlines desired performance outcomes, offerors are expected to submit approach to those outcomes. The evaluation criteria does not mention preference between partner sites or contractor-owned locations. | |||
| 11 | SF1449 / Section B – Schedule of Supplies/Services | (p. 2–3) | Critical | Will the Government provide estimated quantities (by performance period and/or by CLIN) for pricing and Total Evaluated Price purposes? If so, will they be issued by amendment? If not, should offerors propose estimated annual quantities derived from Attachment L-2, noting that L-2 appears to reflect cumulative CY22–CY26 actuals rather than annual volumes? | Estimated quantities are provided for each of the CLIN's, for each of the base and OY's in the solicitation, SF1449, "Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs" in the tables in page 5-12. |
Attachment L-2 is provided for informational purposes only, and to demonstrate that estimated quantities may vary from actuals for offerors to consider for business related decision purposes only, and should not be used as quantities for proposal purposes.
| 12 | SF1449 / Section B – Schedule of Supplies/Services | (p. 2–3) | Critical | Please confirm what each CLIN represents and the unit of measure to be priced (e.g., price per examination delivered, by exam type, and/or by delivery modality). For the Base Period, please clarify the distinction between CLIN 0001 and CLINs 0002–0011, and confirm the corresponding Option Year line-item structure (x001–x009). | CLIN descriptions are included in the "supplies/Services" column of the SF 1449 Page 5 - 12. Pricing should be provided based on the description in the "Unit" column in the same table (Supplies or Services & Prices or Costs). Regarding the pricing of modality (virtual or in-person), see the answer to question 14. |
| 13 | SF1449 CLIN 0001 (Phase-In) | Section M.4 | Critical | Is the Phase-In effort (CLIN 0001, 1 August–29 September 2026) to be separately priced as a firm-fixed-price lump sum, and is its price included in the Total Evaluated Price or evaluated separately? | CLIN 0001 is not labeled as a "Phase-in Effort" CLIN. However, the government does recognize the absence of a "transition" CLIN as relates to the evaluation criteria in L.6.4 Factor 3: Transition Plan. See the solicitation instructions at M.1 paragraph four, this will be addressed with the apparent successful vendor. |
| 14 | Solicitation Instructions | Section M.4 (Price) | Critical | Should offerors provide separate unit prices for in-person and virtual (remote-proctored) delivery, or a single blended per-examination unit price? | A single blended per-examination unit price. |
| 15 | Statement of Objectives | (Attachment J-1) | Substantive | Please confirm whether the contractor may invoice a full examination (seat) fee for examinee no-shows, and for cancellations made outside the established cancellation window, consistent with standard commercial testing practice. | The Govt. recognizes the costs to the contractor (and opportunity costs) associated with no-shows and/or (contractually defined) late cancellations, and normally would accept invoices for those seat fees. |
| 16 | Standard Form 1449 - HQ003426RE123 | Page 1, Block 8 | Significant | Is the Department amenable to extending the proposal due date to July 22nd, to allow bidders ample time to create a thorough and accurate response? | An extension has been granted to July 20th. |
| 17 | Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Criteria_Final | Page 1, Section L.2 | Significant | We are working diligently to obtain access to the PIEE system. However, in the event that we should be unable to obtain PIEE access by the solicitation due date, would an email submission be acceptable? | No. We've experienced issues with emails being caught in our firewall. |
| 18 | L5 Past Performance Questionnaire | Page 1 | Significant | The L5 Performance Questionnaire states: "The company who has provided you with this form is proposing to submit a quotation to the Washington Headquarters Services (WHS) solicitation for Global Investment and Economic Security Support." Will the L5 form be reissued indicating the questionnaire is regarding a quote for the DoW Acquisition and Financial Management Functional Area Certification Exams program? | The questionnaire has been amended. For those who have already had their customers submit responses using the original questionnaire YOU ARE NOT required to resubmit them this amended version is for those who would like use it but it is optional, nothing substantive changed only the title of the program. |
| 19 | Standard Form 1449 - HQ003426RE123 | Page 0 (General Question) | Significant | Should the completed SF 1449 be returned as a part of the Factor 4 Price Volume? If not, should it be a standalone file? | Submit it as part of the price volume. |
| 20 | Solicitation Instructions and Evaluation Criteria_Final | Page 1, Section L.1 | Significant | The Department expects bidders to submit questions and comments by July 1st. Considering the upcoming holiday, is the Department willing to extend the deadline to July 8th to allow key stakeholders currently out of office sufficient time to review the solicitation and prepare questions? | This has been overcome by events. |
| 21 | Standard Form 1449 - HQ003426RE123 | Page 1, Block 8 | Significant | Is the Department also amenable to extending the proposal due date to July 22nd, to allow bidders ample time to create a thorough and accurate response? | See the response to Q.16 |
| 22 | J.1 | 2 | Substantive | Can you clarify the number of item banks that will need to be imported, as well as the approximate size of each bank? | For the CON exam, there are ~300 items in the bank. For the PM exams, there are ~1050 in the Practitioner, and ~900 in the Advanced. The number of items in the FM exam banks are unknown at this time, so assume for the purpose of this response, that the item banks will be 200% the size of the exams. |
| 23 | J.1 | 2 | Substantive | Will .CSV be an acceptable file format for item bank import, or is a different import format required? | Item banks are currently maintained in an MS Excel format. The Government team will be flexible, within reason, to adjust to whichever file format the contractors system requires, if time and resources permit. |
| 24 | J.1 | 2 | Substantive | Please provide annual test taker volume by delivery modality. Specifically, how many exams are delivered annually through remote proctoring and how many are delivered annually through test center delivery? | See: "L-7 Exam data by Geography & Mode Amend 01".xls. Tab 2, Submitted as an additional exhibit. |
| 25 | J.1 | 3 | Substantive | Can the Government clarify whether candidates must achieve a passing score within each individual pool to pass the exam, or if pass/fail decisions are based solely on the cumulative score with pool-level results used only for feedback? | Candidates must achieve a passing cumulative scores for each exam. However, for the purpose of score reports/feedback, each exam should be able to provide lower-level (at pool, or other reporting level) performance data. |
| 26 | J.1 | 3 | Substantive | What information/specifications do you currently provide for pool-based delivery? | All exams are unique, however, using the Contracting exam as an example, there are 19 pools, each with a specified amount of items to be presented randomly from within those pools. Similarly, the PM Exams have 14 pools for the Practitioner, and 13 for the Advanced Exam. The exam data-bank(s) has more than sufficient quantities of items for each pool for random selection to ensure no 2 exams are alike. FM Exam pool data is not available at this time. All exam items have a unique ID number that aligns them with the pools they belong to. |
| 27 | J.1 | 2 | Substantive | Which item performance statistics will be provided with the item banks? | The government doesn't intend to provide item performance statistics upon award of the contract, since the SOO doesn't require the contractor to perform data analytics or psychometric analysis on items, but rather is required to make performance data and metrics available to the government so they can perform analytics. |
| 28 | J.1 | 4 | Substantive | How frequently are exams and related exam content updated? For example, are updates made annually, biannually, on an as-needed basis, or according to another defined schedule? | Exams and item content are updated as needed, unscheduled, based on unpredictable revisions to guiding regulations, acts, statues, etc. that are the basis for the items in the certification exams. Updates may also be driven by periodic performance analysis of items that drive a need for revision, modification, or removal (masking, deletion). |
| 29 | J.1 | 4 | Substantive | Please clarify WarU’s expectations for ongoing item bank and content management. Will WarU use the vendor’s item authoring and item bank management system for ongoing content edits and maintenance, or will items continue to be managed in WarU’s existing system? | The customer program managers for each of the exams will be responsible for exam item development and maintenance, and will maintain their own exam databanks, with any updates or changes to be communicated for publishing in the active exam to the vendor on an as needed basis. |
| 30 | J.1 | 2 | Critical | The SOO provides for a phase-in period from August 1 through September 29, with an exam-ready date of September 30, 2026. Given the activities required to transition to a new vendor, including exam configuration, item bank import, scheduling/registration setup, data exchange, testing, and operational readiness, please confirm whether WarU will consider an adjusted implementation timeline for non-incumbent vendors. |
| If the September 30, 2026 exam-ready date is firm, please clarify whether WarU expects vendors to propose a phased transition, interim operating model, or other risk-mitigation approach to support continuity of exam delivery. | Assuming a firm 30 September exam-ready date, the Government defers to the offeror on the Phase-in model/approach. Refer to the solicitation instructions and evaluation criteria document section M.3.3 for the Government's areas of interest. | |||||
| 31 | J.1 | 3 | Substantive | Will WarU provide the specific exam blueprints/rules detailing the exact draw counts required from each pool (e.g., 10 items from Pool A, 15 from Pool B), or is the contractor expected to propose the algorithm and logic for randomization? | WarU will provide the # of items from each pool that need to presented in the exams | |
| 32 | J.1 | 5 | Substantive | Please provide accommodation volume by type. At a minimum, please identify the top five most frequently requested accommodations, the approximate annual number of requests for each, and whether each accommodation applies to remote proctoring, test center delivery, or both. | The only data available regarding accommodation requests is the total count, which can be found in "CON and PM Cert Exam Historical Actuals.xls". There have been 145 total accommodation requests approved, or about an average of 3 per month. |
CLIN's X004 and X008 extended descriptions will be changed in the SF1449 in a following amendement (Amendment 02) to read : "Fees for administering and accommodating those candidates WarU approves needing assistance. Examples of accommodations may include, bur are not limited to, one or more of the following: readers, extended, time, a private testing environment, or other accommodations IAW standard commercial practices"
CLIN's X004 and X008 will be changed from "Each" to "Lot"
CLIN's X009 will be changed from "Lot" to "Each"
| 33 |
| 34 |
| 35 |
| 36 |
| 37 |
| 38 |
| 39 |
| 40 |
| 41 |
| 42 |
| 43 |
| 44 |
| 45 |
| 46 |
| 47 |
| 48 |
| 49 |
| 50 |
| 51 |
| 52 |
| 53 |
| 54 |
| 55 |
| 56 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .