CADIS Questions amd2.doc
DOC document 85 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HSCETC-10-R-00010
- Issued by
-
Immigration and Customs Enforcement
About this file
Amendment 2 questions and answers
View the file
Other files
Show all 32
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
HSCETC-10-R-00010 CADIS Questions
| No. |
| Document |
| Paragraph |
| Page # |
| Question |
| Answers |
| 1 |
| Solicitation |
| Section C, 5.2 |
| Page 25 |
| Solicitation asks Contractor to identify which requirements in the FRD will be satisfied by the COTS product “out-of-the-box”. This was called for as a matrix in the preceding solicitation and was excluded from the page count. It is being included as an Appendix—is this the correct response? |
| Yes, the matrix is excluded from the page count. |
| 2 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L, 5 |
| Page 88 |
| The rewrite of Section L in the amended solicitation has a confusing numbering schema. Specifically, do requirements numbered 2.3 and 5.1 refer to the technical tab 1 or management tab 2 of the response. |
| The numbers refer to sections in the solicitation are for referencing purposes. |
2.3 and 5.1 are going to be evaluated as part of the management proposal but can be placed in either tab if already there.
| 3 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 1 – Technical Proposal |
Section L
p. 88 Please confirm if the following items will count against the page limit:
· Appendices
· Cover Page
· Cover Letter
· Executive Summary
· Table of Contents
· Table of Exhibits The items will not count against the page limit.
| 4 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 1 – Technical Proposal |
5.2 Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Computer Aided Dispatch System Section L
p. 89
| Please confirm if the FRD comparison matrix will count against the page limit. |
| No, the FRD comparison will not count against the page limit. |
| 5 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 1 – Technical Proposal |
12.0 Optional COTS Demonstration
Section L
p. 91
| In emergency response there is no common definition for the term ‘usage’. Please provide further guidance in preparation for the COTS Demonstration if necessary. |
| Usage means the current status of the unit and may include previous actions taken by the unit. |
| 6 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 1, Tab 2 Management Approach / Staffing |
5.1 Program Management Support
Section L
p. 93
See also
Section C p.24
5.1
Program Management Support, and
Section
7.9
Deliverables table p. 41 Please confirm if we are required to submit a draft Project Management Plan with the submittal of the response or 45 business days after contract award.
Yes a draft is required to be submitted with the proposal and we want an updated version 45 days after project kickoff. The PMP is a living document and will be revised frequently throughout the project lifecycle.
| 7 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 2, Past Performance |
| Section L, p. 92 and 93 |
| Please confirm if each major subcontractor may submit two pages per past performance (up to two examples each) in addition to the six page maximum for the three past performances of the prime contractor. |
| Yes, each major subcontractor may submit two pages per past performance (up to two examples each) in addition to the six page maximum for the three past performances of the prime contractor. |
| 8 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| Volume 3, Tab 3.1 Direct Labor |
| Section L, p. 95 |
| Please confirm if the six projects identified in this section are applicable to the CADIS RFP. |
| This has been removed, again. |
| 9 |
| FRD |
040810_attachment3.doc
| Section 2.0 Assumptions |
| p. 7 |
| Please confirm the Government’s targeted primary and backup datacenter locations that will host the CADIS environments. |
Is the Government targeting to install the CADIS environments in the Suitland, MD MegaCenter with a backup solution in Battlecreek, MI or the two DHS Data Centers in Clarksville, VA and Stennis, MS?
This is generally the concept we are asking to have the contractor consider. The government is asking the contractor to propose a configuration that will meet our requirement as stated in the SOW. The final configuration will depend on the capabilities of the COTS product to support our needs.
| 10 |
| Sol_04082010 |
| General |
| General |
| Will a new SF33 be issued with the release of Amendment 2? |
| Yes, a new SF33 will be issued with the release of amendment 2. |
| 11 |
| Solicitation |
| L5 |
| Section L.5 of the Solicitation requests a separate volume for Past Performance (Volume 2). Is it the government’s intent for this information to be in a separate volume or included as a tabbed section as part of Volume 1 – Technical Volume? |
| The Government wants to have past performance in a separate volume. That was the intent of the numbering scheme for the proposal volumes |
| 12 |
| Solicitation & FRD |
Sections 5.3 & 5.4
FRD Section 2.0
| Would the government please clarify the requirement of having the CADIS solution “initially be hosted in the FPS MegaCenters and eventually move to the DHS datacenters” as indicated several times in Sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the Solicitation versus the statement in the FRD Section 2.0 (Assumptions) that indicates: “CADIS shall be purchased and fully implemented in the data center …” |
| A site decision regarding where to host the system has not been resolved. |
The Government requests the Contractors to offer a solution based on the MegaCenter configuration.
If a determination is made that CADIS must run in the data center, there will be one primary and one backup data center. The contractor should consider this, but bid on the MegaCenter configuration.
| 13 |
| Solicitation |
| Please confirm that items previously excluded from the maximum allowed page count: appendices, compliance matrix, cover page, cover letter, executive summary, labor category mapping, project management plan, project summaries, resumes, table of contents, and table of exhibits, are all still excluded from the page limitations. |
| Correct; they are all still excluded from the page limitations. |
| 14 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L.5 |
| Section L.5, Volume 3, Tab 3.1 (Direct Labor) includes a new paragraph: “Under The Offeror shall provide the labor categories, rates, hours, and dollar totals (including subcontractor costs) for each of the six projects identified in Table 1 of the SOW (Shared Services, Investigative Case Management, Intelligence Reporting and Dissemination, Security and Oversight, Management Reporting and Workflow, and Data Management), in the base and each option year.” Please identify which costs should be detailed. These projects are not specified in either the Solicitation or FRD. |
| The paragraph identifying the specific projects has been removed again. |
Table 1 is shown as a sample format.
| 15 |
| FRD |
| FRD Requirement 5.10.15: “The system shall be available to all law enforcement personnel nationwide for investigative research and analysis.” Please confirm that this requirement applies only to all FPS law enforcement personnel nationwide. |
| Correct, just FPS law enforcement personnel will access the system from desktop, laptop and MCD (CF-19) workstations. |
| 16 |
| RFP Section L5 |
| Volume 1 Technical Proposal |
| Page 87 |
| The prior RFP version CADIS_SOL_QA_0317-oaq under Volume 1-Techncal Proposal, paragraph 2, page 87, stated the following: |
The appendices, compliance matrix, cover page, cover letter, executive summary, labor category mapping, project management plan, project summaries, resumes, table of contents, table of exhibits, and are not included in the page limitations
The above exclusions were not included in the new RFP.
Question 1: Is the executive summary still allowed as part of the proposal submittal?
Question 2: Will part/all of the above listed sections count toward the 40 pages limit? If yes, which sections?
The page limitations should not have been removed.
The exempted items for the page limitation have been added.
1. Yes
2. No
| 17 |
| RFP Section L5 |
| 5.1 Program Management Support, last paragraph |
| Page 91 |
| While section L5, Volume I, subsection 5.1 notes “The Project Management Plan will not be counted in the forty page limit of the technical proposal limit.”, the specific requirement to submit a draft Project Management Plan appears to have been removed. |
The previous RFP (CADIS_SOL_QA_0317-oaq) under Volume 1, Tab 2 Management Approach / Staffing, paragraph 2.6, page 90, stated: “ 2.6 The Offeror shall submit a draft Project Management Plan outlining resources, implementation strategies, activities, and milestones necessary to accomplish work specified in the SOW.”
Question: Please confirm that the government requires the draft PMP as part of the proposal submission?
The Government still requires a draft PMP
| 18 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L, 5 |
| Page 87 |
| Solicitation states: “All page limits referenced below include tables, graphs, and appendices.” Appendices are deemed necessary to handle the FRD Compliance Matrix, the Project Management Plan, Key Personnel Resumes, and Labor Categories mapping matrix. Are these still exempted from the 40-page limit for Volume 1? |
| Still exempted. |
| 19 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L, 5 |
Paragraph 5.2
| Page 88 |
| The Functional Requirements Document Compliance matrix currently runs to 17 pages. In the original solicitation, this matrix was excluded from the page count. Does this now count towards the 40-page limit of Volume 1? |
| Still excluded. |
| 20 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L, 5 |
Paragraph 5.1
| Page 91 |
| In the original solicitation, the requirement to map labor categories to the RFP labor categories and labor category descriptions was excluded from the page count. Does this now count towards the 40-page limit of Volume 1? |
| The page count is still excluded. |
| 21 |
| Solicitation |
| Section L, 5 |
Paragraph 5.1
| Page 91 |
| Solicitation states the Project Management Plan will not be counted in the 40-page limit for Volume 1. Does this refer to the Draft Project Management Plan? If so, where is it referenced in the solicitation? |
| Yes, the referenced PMP is in Section 5.1 - Program Management Support |
| 22 |
| Computer Aided Dispatch Information System (CADIS) RFP HSCETC-10-R-00010 |
| L.5 INSTRUCTIONS/NOTICE TO OFFERORS |
| Page 95 |
| The following verbiage was removed in the amendment released on 4/8/10. “The appendices, compliance matrix, cover page, cover letter, executive summary, labor category mapping, project management plan, project summaries, resumes, table of contents, table of exhibits, and are not included in the page limitations.” |
Will appendices, compliance matrix, cover page, cover letter, executive summary, labor category mapping, project management plan, project summaries, resumes, table of contents, and table of exhibits be included in the Technical Proposal 40 page limitation?
The verbiage has been added back in.
The appendices, compliance matrix, cover page, cover letter, executive summary, labor category mapping, project management plan, project summaries, resumes, table of contents, and table of exhibits are not included in the Technical Proposal 40 page limitation.
| 23 |
| RFP |
| L.Tab 2 Management |
C.77
| 92 |
| The requirement to submit a draft PMP seems to have been removed from SectionL, however theres is still a reference to its page allocation and it is still listed as due with the proposal in Section C.7.9. Is a Draft PMP required with submission |
| A draft PMP is still required. |
| 24 |
| FRD |
| 2.0 Assumptions |
| 7 |
| The assumption that CADIS shall be purchased a fully implemented has added language “in the data center”. Can you please clarify if you mean the 4 mega centers, the ICE data center, or the DHS data center |
| A site decision regarding where to host the system has not been resolved. |
The Government requests the Contractors to offer a solution based on the MegaCenter configuration.
If a determination is made that CADIS must run in the data center, there will be one primary and one backup data center. The contractor should consider this, but bid on the MegaCenter configuration.
| 24 |
| FRD |
| 6.3. Availability Requirements /SOW 2.1 Envisioned capabilities |
| 23/20 |
| We have an architecture that supports 99.5 but can scale to support 99.999 availability. Will the government accept a price proposal that prices the 99.5 requirement but also includes a cost estimate, that will not be evaluated with total price (like interfaces) to improve availability to 99.999 requirement? |
| The Government will accept the price proposal with the 99.999 cost estimate that won’t be evaluated, but it isn’t required or necessary as the new standard is 99.5 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .