Amendment 0005.pdf

5. PROJECT NO.

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

9B. DATED

PAGE OF

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR AC- KNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 10-83)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office.is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

BY

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(If applicable)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

(X)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 3

0005 05/02/2011

Federal Emergency Management Agency Office of Acquisition Management

500 C Street, S.W., PP 5th Floor Washington DC 20472

To all Offerors/Bidders HSFEHQ-11-R-0029

03-31-2011 X x x

The purpose of this amendment is 1) to clarify numbering of amendments for this RFP, 2) to replace paragraphs 2 and 3 of Amendment 0003, 3) make revisions to the RFP, 4) remove FAR clauses 52.215-11 and 52.215-13, 5) additional questions and answers, and 6) Provide a new conformed copy of the RFP.

1) The wrong attachment was posted as Amendment 0003 of this RFP. Due to limitations inherent in the Government Point of Entry (FedBizOpps) this could not be corrected as Amendment 0003. Therefore Amendment 0003 was posted as Amendment 0004.

This Amendment, Amendment 0005, is the fourth amendment to this RFP. There is no Amendment 0004. Further amendments, if any, will be numbered consecutively after Amendment 0005.

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 (CONTINUATION PAGE)

2) Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Amendment 0003 are hereby replaced for clarity with the following:

2. The following clause has been removed:

Section I. FAR Clause 52.223-2

3. The following clauses have been modified:

Section L. FAR Clause 52.215-20 Alternate III is replaced with FAR Clause 52.215.20 Alternate IV.

Section I. Far Clause 52.215-21Alternate III is replaced FAR Clause 52-215-21 Alternate 1V

3) The following changes have been made to the solicitation:

a. Replace paragraph L.2.b with the following:

(b) Provide information described below: supporting information sufficient to evaluate items in the Schedule and other information provided in section B in accordance with the evaluation criteria in Section M.

b. Make the following changes to L.7 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTION:

i. Replace the first paragraph of L.7. C.b. with:

Volume I: Technical Proposal shall be no longer than one-hundred and forty

(140) - 8 ½” x 11” pages. One page is a single piece of 8 ½” x 11” paper. 1) Performance Work Statement, 2) Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan& Quality Assurance Plan and the 3) Program Management Plan will all count towards the total one-hundred and forty (140) page limit of the Volume I: Technical Proposal. Cover pages, tab pages, resumes and past performance information will not be counted in the page limit. All pages following the first sixty (60) pages may not be considered. All other material such as brochures or samples of work, attachments or extra pages will not be considered.

ii. Replace the table in L. 7 D

VOLUME TITLE PAGE LIMIT

Volume I:

Technical Proposal

1. Performance Work Statement Max 60 pages

2. Quality Assurance Plan & Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan

Max 25 pages

3. Program Management Plan Max 30 pages

4. Past Performance 2 pages per contract assessed

5. Primary Personnel and Staffing Plan Max 25 pages

TOTAL 140 PAGES

Volume II:

Business Proposal L.7 C (b) No page limit for Volume II

1. Price Section Unlimited

iii. The contents of L.7 F have been renumbered. Paragraph c under “Other Business Information” has been removed.

4) As already stated in the answer to question 57c. posted with Amendment 0003, clauses 52.215‐11 and 52.215‐13 have been removed.

5) Attached questions and answers are attached.

6) 5. A conformed copy of the revised solicitation is attached.

2. Other Business Information Unlimited

3. Small Business Sub‐Contracting Plan Unlimited

4. Award Fee Plan Unlimited

Question 1 Reference: RFP Section L.7.C.b, Page Limitations and Section L.7.D, Proposal Arrangement Question: This vendor respectfully requests the government increase the page allocation for the PWS (Factor 1, Subfactor A) to 75 pages, to allow for the adequate presentation of information.

See amended subsection L.7 in Amendment 0005 to the RFP.

Question 2 Reference: Amendment 003, Q&A #7.

Question: Would the government please confirm our understanding of this answer, that a single sided print out of an 11” x17” foldout page only counts as one page?

This is correct, as long as it contains a chart or diagram and not just text.

Question 3 Reference: Section L.7.D, Proposal Arrangement Question: Would the government please confirm our understanding of page count for Factor 3, Past Performance, that there is no page limitation to the overall response section, as long as each individual contract reference does not exceed 2 pages?

Correct, but note the stated limit of 5 contracts for subfactor A and 2 Contracts for subfactor B

Question 4 Reference: Section L.7, page L‐8 – Proposal Preparation Instructions Text: Price Section “The wage rates shall include all labor burden and indirect costs (overhead) allocated on a labor hour basis.”

Questions: a) Please confirm that indirect costs (overhead) include Overhead, Fringe, and G&A.

b) Please confirm that allocation of indirect costs is to be done in accordance with the Offeror’s standard accounting practices; including allocation on Labor Dollars.

Both assumptions are correct.

Question 5 Reference: Section L.10, Proposal Documents page L‐15 Text: “The Offeror shall indicate the source and construction of proposed labor rates, including whether rates are government‐approved….”

Question: Please confirm that the Prime and Subcontractors may use GSA Schedule Rates as proposed labor rates that are government approved.

GSA schedule rates may be used. We would not, however, consider them “government approved.” They are subject to negotiation.

Question 6 Reference: Section L10, Proposal Documents page L‐15 Text: “The Offeror also shall provide the complete labor break out for each CLIN by Offeror fiscal year in the price breakdown described below”.

Question: Offerors with fiscal years that overlap contract Base Year and Option Years will need to present complete labor breakout in two pieces per contract year. For ease of evaluation and ability to compare rates across contract years, may Offerors present complete labor breakout by Base Year and each of the respective Option Years?

No. The pricing will need to reflect the two parts in each contract year and show what months are covered by the different rates.

Question 7 On page H‐5 Section H.7 Data Management Program Requirements references www.fema.gov/ofm/bidinfo.htm.

At this time, this link is broken. When will it be active?

There are two documents this link refers to in the RFP. One is the Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Terms (FEMA P‐524).

It can be found here:

http:/www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/prepare/faatlist07_09.pdf

The other, “ENTERPRISE DATA MANAGEMENT DATA MODELING METHODOLOGY GUIDELINES,” has been updated to the virtual library in the A2 area as DHS_DMMG_EAB_Approved_v1.0_11132009.pdf

Question 8 Will the contractor be responsible to design, build, install, maintain and respond to findings of a host and network based intrusion detection system at the non‐DC2 hosting facilities?

Requirements for intrusion detection and other security features can be found in the DHS 4300 series documents, as referenced in the RFP.

Question 9 Please provide a list of the DHS DC2 Servers and their functions referenced in the statement, "MIP Production environment, DHS DC2 Servers: 125 TB used, 134 TB allocated, 200 TB total on SAN.” Please provide detail on the 134 TB allocated storage space by the servers using the space.

Currently we only have approximately 60TB used on the 200 TB SAN, which holds engineering data used in the MIP production environment.

A list of DC2 servers with a short description of each can be found in the virtual library in the A2 section with the filename “DC2 Environment and Servers.”

Question 10 Will the Government please provide the standard operating procedures for the LOMC, MSC, FMIX and Engineering Library?

We do not have Government SOPs for these elements.

Question 11 Will the Government please provide infrastructure Architecture diagrams for hosted systems at MSC and at DC2 facilities?

A description of the DC2 environment can be found in the A2 area of the Virtual Library A2 section with the filename “DC2 Environment and Servers.”

Question 12 Reference: L.7,C,b and L.7,D Text: The RFP states that “past performance information will not be counted in the page limit.” The Table for the Volume I structure states that past performance is limited to “2 pages per contract assessed.”

Question: May the offeror assume that while there is a page limit per contract, the overall section does not have a page limit? This will accommodate varying numbers of references, introductory material, and terminated contracts list.

The two-page limit applies to the five (5) contracts that the prime may submit for past performance, and up to two (2) for each major subcontractor. The section does not have an overall page limit.

Question 13 Reference: L.7,C,f Question: Will the Government confirm the proposal due date of May 13, 2011, as reflected in Amendment 0002?

The conformed RFP provided with Amendment 0004 reflects a due date of April 29, 2011.

Confirmed that it is May 13th as stated on the conformed copy posted to FedBizOpps with Amendment 0003.

Question 14 Reference: Q & R File provided with Amendment 0004, Q 57.C Question: In response to Question 57. C in Amendment 0004, the government stated that FAR clauses 52.215-11 - Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data - Modifications and 52.215-13 – Subcontractor Certified Cost or Pricing Data – Modifications have been removed. In further evaluation of the Amendment, references to such clauses remain in Section I of the solicitation. Would the government confirm the aforementioned clauses are not relevant to this solicitation and will be removed in a later Amendment?

Corrected with Amendment 0005.

Question 15 Clarification of previous question Reference: C, Section IX Question: Amendment 0004 RFP revised RFP Section C, page C-8, adding language to clarify that there is no hosting of Production environment by the CDS contractor required under this SOO, however Section C, page C-9 still contains a constraint that, “MSC, hosted by CDS contractor (emphasis added): 35TB used, 50 TB allocated, 120 TB total on SAN”.

Will the Government clarify if the SAN listed will be hosted at DHS DC2 or by the CDS Contractor?

No, it is not hosted by the CDS contractor. See document referred to in the response to Question 11 above.

Question 16 Previously asked, not answered Reference: C, Section IX Question: Will the Government please provide the standard operating procedures for the LOMC, MSC, FMIX and Engineering Library?

See Question 10.

Question 17 Previously asked, not answered Reference: C, Section IX Question: Will the Government please provide Infrastructure Architecture diagrams for hosted systems at MSC and at DC2 facilities?

See Question 11.

Question 18 Clarification of previous question Reference: Attachment, GFP Asset Report Question: As noted in response to Question #49, Amendment 0004 provided an updated GFP Asset Report containing additional property and physical location.

However, as outlined in Question #49, the offeror would gain a much better understanding of the requirements if the report included an association of the item to the application or task area. Is it possible to provide this information?

Further, should the offeror assume that all line items of the report are currently in use and/or intended for continued use under the contract?

The Government does not have this information at this time.

Question 19 Clarification of previous question Reference: C, Section IX Question: Question #47 states “Will the Government provide the storage requirements for the paper maps at the Engineering Library and the MSC?” The intent of the questions was to obtain information on the inventory list, size (e.g., cubic or linear feet of storage), and storage methods (e.g., map storage drawer cabinets, pallet racks, storage bins). Could the Government provide this information to ensure these requirements are considered in proposed solutions?

There are approximately 110 cabinets 30” deep, 22’ long, and 16’ high.

Question 20 Reference: Section L.7 of the FEMA RiskMAP solicitation Text: Other Government Work ‐ List all contracts or major subcontracts currently held by the proposing entity with Government agencies other than FEMA. For every contract, identify its number, name and address of Government department/agency concerned, and percent of completion to date.

Question: This Offeror respectfully requests additional

See revised sub‐section L.7.

consideration to the Amendment 0004 answers to Questions 14, 24, and 31.

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER RATING PAGE OF PAGES

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

2. CONTRACT NUMBER 3. SOLICITATION NUMBER 4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION 5. DATE ISSUED 6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NUMBER

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

7. ISSUED BY CODE 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO (If other than Item 7)

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

9. Sealed offers in original and ________________7_____________ copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand carried, in the depository located in

Until 2:00 PM ET local time _______________________ (Hour) (Date)

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All Offers are subject to all terms and conditions contained in this solicitation.

A. NAME B. TELEPHONE (NO COLLECT CALLS) C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

AREA CODE

202 646-3361 WAYNE.SOK@FEMA.GOV

NUMBER EXT.

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S) (X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

A SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM 1 I CONTRACT CLAUSES 14

B SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS 2 PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACH.

C DESCRIPTION/SPECS./WORK STATEMENT 10 J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1

D PACKAGING AND MARKING 1 PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

E INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE 1

F DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE 1

G CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA 2 L INSTR., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS 16

H SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS 17 M EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD 6

K

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND OTHER 9

STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within ________ calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period is inserted by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT 10 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 20 CALENDAR DAYS (%) 30 CALENDAR DAYS (%) CALENDAR DAYS (%)

(See Section I, Clause No. 52-232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NO. DATE AMENDMENT NO. DATE

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the SOLICITATION for Offerors and related documents numbered and dated:

CODE FACILITY 16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER 15A. NAME AND

ADDRESS

OF OFFEROR

(Type or print)

15B. TELEPHONE NUMBER 17. SIGNATURE 18. OFFER DATE

AREA CODE NUMBER EXT.

15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS IS DIFFERENT FROM

ABOVE - ENTER SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION: 23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM (4 copies unless otherwise specified)

10 U.S.C. 2304(a) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c) ( )

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7) 25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE CODE

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 28. AWARD DATE

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

(REV. 9-97)

10. FOR INFORMATION CALL:

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION STANDARD FORM 33

Previous edition is unusable Prescribed by GSA-FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

SOLICITATION

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

1 80

HSFEHQ-11-R-0029

X 03/30/2011

Federal Emergency Management Agency Office of Acquisition Management

500 C Street, S.W., PP 5th Floor Washington DC 20472

May 13, 2011

Federal Emergency Management Agency/FFC

P.O. Box 800 Berryville VA 22611

HSFEHQ-11-R-0029 Section B

B-1

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

SECTION B -SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICE

B.1 TYPE OF CONTRACT

This contract is a Fixed Price Award Fee (FPAF) contract.

B.2 PRICE SCHEDULE

The Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, and facilities, (except as may be expressly set forth in this contract as furnished by the Government) necessary to furnish the items below in accordance with the Description/Specifications/Priorities Statement in Section C.

CLIN Description Quantity Unit Total

Amount

BASE YEAR (12 Months from date of award) FPAF-Program Management;

Business/Operations Architecture; Letter of Map Change Clearinghouse; IT Hosting; NFHL Data Management; Risk MAP Data Management; Map Service Center; FMIX Call Center, and all other tasks as referenced in Section C.

TRANSITION from predecessor contractor. 1 LOT $

0002 FPAF Base Year-Award Fee 1 LOT $

TOTAL FOR BASE YEAR $

OPTION YEAR 1 (12 Months from option exercise) FPAF-Program Management;

Business/Operations Architecture; Letter of Map Change Clearinghouse; IT Hosting; NFHL Data Management;

Risk MAP Data Management; Map Service Center; FMIX Call Center, and all other tasks as referenced in Section C. 1 LOT $

1002 FPAF Option Year 1-Award Fee 1 LOT $

TOTAL FOR OPTION YEAR 1 $

OPTION YEAR 2 (12 Months from option exercise) FPAF-Program Management;

Business/Operations Architecture; Letter of Map Change Clearinghouse; IT Hosting; NFHL Data Management;

Risk MAP Data Management; Map Service Center; FMIX Call Center, and all other tasks as referenced in Section C. 1 LOT $

2002 FPAF Option Year 2-Award Fee 1 LOT $

TOTAL FOR OPTION YEAR 2 $

OPTION YEAR 3 (12 Months from option exercise) FPAF-Program Management;

Business/Operations Architecture; Letter of Map Change Clearinghouse; IT Hosting; NFHL Data Management; Risk MAP Data Management; Map Service Center; FMIX Call Center, and all other tasks as referenced in Section C. 1 LOT $

3002 FPAF Option Year 3-Award Fee 1 LOT $

TOTAL FOR OPTION YEAR 3 $

OPTION YEAR 4 (12 Months from option exercise) FPAF-Program Management;

Business/Operations Architecture; Letter of Map Change Clearinghouse; IT Hosting; NFHL Data Management; Risk MAP Data Management; Map Service Center; FMIX Call Center, and all other tasks as referenced in Section C. 1 LOT $

4002 FPAF Option Year 4-Award Fee 1 LOT $

TOTAL FOR OPTION YEAR 4 $

HSFEHQ-11-R-0029 Section B

B-2

TOTAL FOR ALL CLINS $

B.3 AWARD FEE

Offerors are to propose fee percentages as part of their proposals.

The length of the evaluation periods should be proposed by the Offerors and will be subject to negotiation before award. (See Annex 2 to the draft Award Fee Plan.)

The amount of award fee earned for FPAF CLINs shall be commensurate with the contractor’s overall schedule and technical performance as measured against contract requirements in accordance with the criteria stated in the award-fee plan. Award fee shall not be earned if the contractor’s overall schedule or technical performance is below satisfactory.

For FPAF CLINs, a base fee of X% will apply, with a maximum award fee of Y% and a potential total fee of Z*% of the total fixed price.

At the time of award, the award fee and the total fee will not be identified by percentages but will be set out in dollar amounts in accordance with Annex 2 of the Award Fee Plan.

* Sum of base and award fee percentages

HSFEHQ-11-R-0029 Section C

C-1

SECTION C -STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

Flood Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Customer and Data Services

I. DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE:

As part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has operated the Flood Map Modernization (Map Mod) program since 2004. Funding for Map Mod ended in FY2008, however work continues on the projects that were funded during the Map Mod program. Map Mod began the work of conducting a large-scale overhaul of the nation’s flood hazard maps. Work accomplished under Map Mod has included data collection and analysis, map production, product delivery, and effective program management. This initiative produced digital flood hazard data, provided access to flood hazard data and maps via the Internet, and implemented a nationwide state-of-the-art infrastructure that enables all-hazard mapping.

In Fiscal Year 2009, FEMA began the Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) Program. The vision for Risk MAP is to deliver quality data that increases public awareness and leads to action that reduces risk to life and property. Risk MAP builds on flood hazard data and maps produced during the Map Mod program.

Since the political and technological environments are continuing to evolve, this initiative will require the continuous review of existing systems and potential development of new standards or approaches in meeting the objectives outlined below. FEMA acknowledges that its current systems do not maximize technology, innovation and performance. FEMA’s goal with this SOO is to receive solutions that are innovative, proven, easy to implement and effective, while also not programmatically disruptive. In light of constant funding constraints, solutions should be phased or have standalone components which can be implemented without the realization of the entire, broad solution.

The purpose of this Statement of Objectives (SOO) is to obtain contracted support which will replace the expiring Customer and Data Services (CDS) contract. The CDS provider will support the completion of Map Mod projects as well as support Risk MAP operations and the changes necessary to fully enable the Risk MAP vision.

This SOO will address only the Customer and Data Services acquisition. Other aspects of the program have been addressed in separate documents.

II. BACKGROUND:

FEMA’s flood maps are one of the essential tools for flood hazard mitigation in the United States. These maps are used an estimated 20 million times annually in the private and public sectors, in the following ways:

Lending institutions and insurance companies use them to determine who needs flood insurance and to determine flood insurance rates.

Community planning officials, land developers, and engineers use them for designing and siting new buildings and infrastructure to be safe from flooding.

States and communities use them for hazard mitigation planning and emergency management.

Federal agencies use them when implementing Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management.

FEMA’s Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) is undergoing shifts in how it delivers information necessary for flood hazard reduction. FIMA’s Risk Analysis Division (RAD) is in the early years of implementing the Risk MAP Program. In March 2009, FEMA issued a Multi-Year Plan for Risk MAP, which

C-2 can be found online at the Risk MAP page on FEMA’s website:

http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/rm_main.shtm.

III. FEMA STRATEGIC INITIATIVES:

FEMA’s mission, as laid out in the Fiscal Years 2011-2014 FEMA Strategic Plan, is “to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.” Risk MAP clearly helps ensure that both the Nation, as well as individual communities, are prepared for future floods and other hazard events.

With accurate, up to date flood hazard data, states and communities have the tools to reduce future flood losses.

FEMA’s Strategic Plan leverages the core values and guiding principles of “compassion, fairness, integrity, and respect,” and identifies the following initiatives for 2011-2014:

1. Foster a Whole Community Approach to Emergency Management Nationally;

2. Build the Nation’s Capacity to Stabilize and Recover From a Catastrophic Event;

3. Build Unity of Effort and Common Strategic Understanding Among the Emergency Management Team;

4. Enhance FEMA’s Ability to Learn and Innovate as an Organization.

IV. FEDERAL INSURANCE AND MITIGATION ADMINISTRATION MISSION:

The mission of FIMA is to create safer communities by reducing loss of life and property; enable individuals to recover more rapidly from floods and other disasters; and lessen the financial impact of disasters on the Nation.

This is accomplished through three primary objectives:

Analyze Risk - Determining the impact of natural hazards that lead to effective strategies for reducing risk.

Reduce Risk - Reducing or eliminating long-term risk from hazards on the existing built environment and future construction.

Insure for Flood Risk - Reducing the impact of floods on the Nation by providing affordable flood insurance.

FIMA’s high level goals are to Value People and Relationships, Enhance Credibility, and Advance Hazard Mitigation in Support of Sustainability.

V. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

In order to leverage the successes of Map Modernization and further enhance the usability and value of flood hazard mapping, FEMA has developed the Risk MAP program. Risk MAP combines flood hazard mapping, risk assessment tools and Hazard Mitigation Planning into one seamless program. The intent of this integrated Risk MAP program is to encourage beneficial partnerships and innovative uses of flood hazard and risk assessment data in order to maximize flood loss reduction. The Risk MAP Multi- Year Plan is available online at http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=3587

The objectives of Risk MAP are:

C-3

Assess Nation’s flood risk and use this information to increase public awareness of risk. This consistent, quantitative flood risk assessment will be used to track progress toward reducing flood risk and to target resources.

Increase public awareness of risk from natural hazards and establish a baseline of local knowledge and understanding of risk management concepts.

Ensure 80 percent of the Nation’s flood hazards are current – the flood hazard data are new, have been updated, or deemed still valid.

o Provide updated flood hazard data for 100 percent of the populated coastal areas in the

Nation.

o Evaluate levee status information to ensure the appropriate flood hazards are depicted on Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps for counties with levees, including those impacted by expiring Provisionally Accredited Levee status.

Continue to meet statutory requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program through assessing on a watershed basis, the need to revise and update all floodplain areas and flood risk zones identified, delineated, or established.

The goals of Risk MAP include:

Goal 1: Address gaps in flood hazard data to form a solid foundation for flood risk assessments, floodplain management, and actuarial soundness of the National Flood Insurance Program.

Goal 2: Ensure that a measurable increase of the public’s awareness and understanding of risk management results in a measurable reduction of current and future vulnerability to flooding.

Goal 3: Lead and support states, local and tribal communities to effectively engage in risk-based mitigation planning resulting in sustainable actions that reduce or eliminate risks to life and property from natural hazards.

Goal 4: Provide an enhanced digital platform that improves management of limited Risk MAP resources, stewards information produced by Risk MAP, and improves communication and sharing of risk data and related products to all levels of government and the public.

Goal 5: Align Risk Analysis programs and develop synergies to enhance decision-making capabilities through effective risk communication and management.

In 2008, FEMA crafted an acquisition strategy to optimize stakeholder acceptance; deliver results using an enabling vision; ensure needed flexibility and adaptability exists; facilitate smooth and seamless transition; and provide innovation with problem solving capabilities to meet the challenges facing the Risk MAP program. This strategy involved a restructuring of the business model where a National Service Provider provided program management, customer service and many other services required to run the overall effort. The approach includes establishing separate contracts to provide three groupings of services:

C-4

Program Management (PM) Customer and Data Services (CDS) Production and Technical Services (PTS)

The CDS contract is expiring and a new provider must be acquired. This acquisition is for the CDS provider only; PTS and PM providers are not a part of this acquisition.

VI. UNIVERSAL OBJECTIVES FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT; CUSTOMER AND

DATA SERVICES; AND PRODUCTION AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

While each area will have separate contract(s), the success or failure of Risk MAP will hinge on the interaction and cooperation of all contractors working as a team to ensure the smooth, seamless flow of information to all stakeholders and partners, both internal and external, and a comprehensive, coordinated approach to provide information AND services to customers at all levels. A failure by a single contractor at any level may lead to Risk MAP program failure. It is the responsibility of all contractors to participate as team members with all other contractors.

To this end, FEMA has established Universal Objectives for all Risk MAP contractors. Additionally, there are Overarching Assumptions and Constraints that apply to all contractors.

Universal Objectives:

Universal Objective A: Provide a high level of cooperation across the Risk MAP program contractors, ensuring that the Risk MAP program mission overrides the individual contractors’ preferences.

Universal Objective B: Implement program cost, schedule, scope, and quality management practices that enable reliable and efficient operations and forward-thinking innovation throughout the Risk MAP program.

Ensure that internal contractor systems for earned value management and performance management integrate with the Risk MAP program systems Monitor, evaluate, and mitigate risks within the CDS portion of Risk MAP Comply with the Risk MAP change control process Support the Risk MAP Program Management contractor in achieving the Program’s goals

Overarching Assumptions and Constraints:

All activities align with DHS/FEMA strategic goals and constraints

All contractors will work together with FEMA to develop program goals and shared metrics that demonstrate the Risk MAP program goals are achieved.

Outreach activities are coordinated, integrated, and consistent with Risk MAP messaging throughout the Risk MAP program including appropriate advisory focus groups

Solutions leverage existing FEMA investments and resources, are cost effective, and demonstrate a sound return on investment (ROI)

The solution meeting these goals and objectives must address important federal mandates and business drivers, including, but not limited to: the Government Paperwork Elimination Act; the Government Information Security Reform Act; the Clinger-Cohen Act; the Government Performance

C-5 and Results Act; the Federal Records Act; the Computer Security Act; the Freedom of Information Act; the Disabilities Act; Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act; the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000;

the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994;the Stafford Act; the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1969; and other laws and regulations specific to

FEMA.

The solution must comply with all statutes and demonstrate working knowledge of applicable regulations, policies, guidelines, and specifications that affect the NFIP, the mission of the Department of Homeland Security, and related multi-hazard programs including risk assessment in a pre- and post- disaster environment.

The solution must demonstrate the flexibility to accommodate a changing environment that includes a shift to all hazards and homeland security. In addition, the solution may recommend changes to improve efficiency and effectiveness of Risk MAP program functions and management.

Data security and privacy issues are a major focus of the federal government's information technology efforts. All activities must be compliant with the Government Information Security Reform Act, OMB policies, and FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security requirements.

Information technology (IT) systems must be coordinated with and comply with FEMA and

Department of Homeland Security enterprise architecture requirements.

The solution must include a transition strategy describing how continuity of services will be maintained (e.g., production of flood hazard maps and related products, customer service and community outreach, program oversight, etc.)

VII. CUSTOMER AND DATA SERVICES OBJECTIVES.

Each Objective is split into two sections: Operations and Improvements. The purpose of this is to differentiate between the ongoing operations and maintenance objectives from the objectives that are proposed to improve or enhance the new Risk MAP program. The Projects and Improvements sub-objectives are divided into “Primary” and “Secondary” lists. All solutions should cover all sub-objectives; however those deemed Secondary are more likely to be constrained by funding and resources.

OBJECTIVE 1

Provide and Improve Direct, Knowledgeable, and Friendly Customer Service: Leverage existing systems and operations - and, where appropriate, use proven new media - to disseminate Risk MAP outreach, products and support. In coordination with content providers, identify the most effective medium for delivery and implement.

Operations

Provide technical support to prepare, deliver and maintain content from a variety of sources for posting to FEMA.gov, hazards.fema.gov, msc.fema.gov, floodmaps.fema.gov, other www.fema.gov including /library (posting Risk MAP documents) and /plan/prevent (HAZUS).

Provide a Contact Center, staffed with employees that have experience with Letters of Map Amendment, to respond to stakeholder inquiries regarding the NFIP and Risk MAP programs, as well as providing technical and system support.

Create the materials for and deliver outreach and training to stakeholders on a variety of Risk MAP tools.

Provide an effective mechanism for effective internal communication and coordination for Risk MAP initiatives across FEMA staff, contractors, and, on a limited basis, partners.

C-6

Provide a means to accept Risk MAP Program data, products and deliverables from FEMA, Risk MAP providers and other mapping partners.

Distribute all Risk MAP data, tools and products to stakeholders of the Risk MAP program and NFIP.

Collect, account for and maintain records of all fees associated with the Risk MAP Program.

Lead process and programmatic change management for all aspects of the CDS contract.

Implement the operational elements of Risk MAP projects and enhancements once the projects are complete and enter the operations/maintenance phase Support the Risk MAP National Outreach Strategy, including outreach, training, conferences development and attendance, and communications.

Projects and Improvements Primary

Support new business processes that are developed to fully implement Risk MAP.

Translate business requirements developed by or in coordination with other Risk MAP Providers into a solution and implement the solution.

Strategize, within the CDS contract, to develop programmatic enhancements and associated business requirements to improve and find efficiencies for Risk MAP.

Secondary

Develop and implement processes to collect, summarize, and share customer feedback on quality, usefulness and value of products, services and user experience for all customer services in Risk MAP.

Develop and support strategies and methods for improving the messages and communicating those messages through the most effective and innovative means.

OBJECTIVE 2

Maintain and Maximize the Current Risk MAP IT Data, Systems and Infrastructure and Support Risk MAP Program Enhancements: Maintain a reliable, efficient, and interoperable IT architecture to enable Risk MAP. Provide comprehensive IT solutions to support Risk MAP business requirements including program coordination, planning and collaboration.

Operations Leverage existing investments in systems, programs, and data while incorporating new technologies and solutions.

Achieve smooth transition from existing systems and services.

Manage and maintain Service Level Agreements for production environment of the Risk MAP Program’s management IT system, which is hosted at the DHS Data Center 2 (DC2) facility, in conjunction with the DC2 contractor.

Provide expertise and facilities for development and test environments that are synced with production environment in the DHS DC2 facility.

Provide flexibility to incorporate natural hazards-related information and capture flood-related hazards produced through FEMA disaster programs.

Provide data and disaster support services that sustain the Emergency Management Cycle and results in the development of products to support Mitigation.

Maintain the Hazus software and associated national data sets.

Maintain a data management system that enables quick and easy access to all legacy and Risk MAP data, products, tools and deliverables.

Maintain a physical and virtual library of flood map supporting documentation and make available a standard suite of data products to fulfill external data requests.

C-7

Maintain an online system allowing for distribution of Risk MAP data, products and tools.

Projects and Improvements Primary

Develop and host interoperable IT systems that support Program Management, Production and Technical Services, Customer Service requirements, and other programmatic needs.

Collaborate with the Government to provide recommendations that balance quality, efficiency and meeting of enterprise architecture which ultimately result in rapid, low-cost solutions with continuous user engagement.

Secondary Support expansion/enhancement of FEMA’s Digital Vision to integrate Risk MAP programs and products and meet Goal 4 of the Multi-Year Plan (see Program Description section).

Develop a refresh strategy for the Risk MAP Program’s systems.

VIII. DEFINITIONS:

Change Management: (Two perspectives apply). From the standpoint of systems engineering, change management is instituting a change control process and release management plan for IT systems that efficiently meets stakeholder needs and business requirements. From the standpoint of meeting desired future conditions, change management means providing support and guidance to reach improved stakeholder involvement and communication, improved alignment of technology with business processes and improved understanding and implementation of policies.

Continuous Improvement is adaptation of systems and processes based on consistent solicitation of feedback and other data, and evaluation of changes to ensure they met needs.

Data Center 2 (DC2) is a DHS owned IT hosting facility. The Mapping Information Platform (MIP) Production environment will be moved to this facility and hosted here as of April 2011.

Hazus is a risk assessment software program for analyzing potential losses from floods, hurricane winds and earthquakes. In Hazus, current scientific and engineering knowledge is coupled with the latest geographic information systems (GIS) technology to produce estimates of hazard-related damage before or after a disaster occurs.

Life cycle development methodology is the model of processes that will be used to create or refine a system and drive improvement of the system.

“Map Service Center data distribution” includes data storage, archival repository, distribution, and inventory control of paper and digital products, with focus on transition to all-digital.

Partner: An entity that leverages resources with FEMA, and potentially other entities, to achieve a shared vision of hazard and risk information communication. Partners typically provide access to data that they maintain, but may also provide other types of support.

Products developed under Risk MAP includes Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), Flood Insurance Studies (FIS), Letters of Map Change (LOMC), Hazus, Flood Risk Maps, Flood Risk Database, and Flood Risk Report.

Products may change or increase as the Risk MAP Program continues to evolve.

C-8

“Projects and Improvements” refers to initiatives within Risk MAP that go through an investment review prior to funding; are projects with a definable start and end; and result in an efficiency, improvement or benefit to the Risk MAP program.

Risk Analysis Division programs: includes, at a minimum, Flood Hazard Mapping, Risk Assessment, Hazard Mitigation Planning, Dam Safety and others as identified.

Stakeholder: Has vested interest in Risk MAP programs but may not be contributing data. Stakeholders include partners and users, in addition to other entities. Current stakeholders include general public, state and local officials, lenders, insurance agents, realtors, homebuilders, environmental groups, engineers, surveyors, planners, flood insurance policy holders, other Federal Agencies, Congress, Office of Management and Budget and others.

User: Any technical or non-technical customers accessing, utilizing, or manipulating Risk MAP data, products, or systems.

IX. CUSTOMER AND DATA SERVICES ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS:

The CDS Contractor will support rapid issue resolution requests, such as requests and demands from Congress and other issues that arise that need immediate attention and quick responses.

The NFIP and Risk MAP program must be agile in order to be sustainable. Funding is dependent upon the NFIP premiums and year-by-year appropriations. Currently, there is no guarantee that these Programs continue to be funded, or even authorized, from year to year.

Contractors must comply with all DHS information technology requirements including but not limited to:

Data center policy Enterprise Architecture IT security Enterprise Architecture target for geospatial information infrastructure requirements 508 compliance

The CDS contractor is currently migrating the production environment to DC2. This migration effort will be completed under the current contract. The other environments reside on systems managed by the CDS contractor directly. There are no current plans to migrate the test, development, and disaster recovery environments to DHS Data Centers. Offerors should plan on migrating these environments to systems under their control.

The DHS Data Center 2 (DC2) will host the Production environment of the Mapping Information Platform (MIP). This will require some CDS staff to occasionally work on site at the DC2 facility.

All solutions must include a Data Quality Plan using the DHS Data Quality Planning Guidance and template.

All solutions must investigate the use of the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) for data feeds and information exchanges as a means of improving the quality of information exchanged and minimizing the number of separate data feeds and information exchange developed.

The DHS Systems Engineering Lifecycle (SELC) or comparable FEMA version of the DHS SELC shall be incorporated into the solutions approach.

Enterprise Licenses may be available through DHS and FEMA, and must always be investigated as part of the solution.

The strategy and solution should address:

C-9

User and business requirements including all aspects of regional operations requirements.

Building upon the progress made during Map Mod and other Mitigation programs.

An integrated approach to E-commerce and fee collection.

Change management Continuous improvement of systems IT Architecture for Risk MAP Solutions for making systems easy to use, (e.g. single point of entry, propagating data to avoid multiple manual entries, usability, user-centric design).

Existing FEMA systems to be leveraged may include but are not limited to: MSC; FEMA Map

Information eXchange (FMIX) call center; mitigation plan tracking systems; Coordinated Needs Management Strategy; Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) Verification Tool (DVT); National Flood Hazard Layer; Map Viewer tools; Risk MAP Portal SharePoint; FEMA’s National Emergency Management Information System (NEMIS); Mapping Information Platform; Community Information System; NextGen; Floodsmart; Mid-term Levee Inventory; FEMA Levee Information System; HAZUS tools and data; engineering studies library; e-commerce, fee collection, and data and paper map delivery solutions of the MSC.

The MIP and MSC servers currently store large amounts of data that support the program. Below is the usage and availability on these servers:

o MIP Production environment, FEMA-owned storage area network (SAN): 61TB used, 78 TB allocated, 98 TB total on SAN o MIP Production environment, DHS DC2 servers: 125 TB used, 134 TB allocated, 200 TB total on SAN o MIP Development and Test environments, hosted by CDS contractor: 207 GB used, 35 TB allocated o MSC, hosted by CDS contractor: 35 TB used, 50 TB allocated, 120 TB total on SAN

Over the past year the MIP and MSC have seen growth in the amount of data that resides on the systems.

The growth rate over a recent 12-month period was:

o MIP Production environment, FEMA-owned SAN: 21% o MIP Production environment, DHS DC2 servers: 60% o MIP Development and Test environments, hosted by CDS contractor: 10% o MSC, hosted by CDS contractor: 25%

The contact center is operated Monday-Friday, 8AM-6:30PM EST, self service options are available 24/7.

The contact center may be closed for federal holidays.

Historically, the contact center receives approximately 15,500 calls per month that can be responded to by the contact center staff (Tier 1). Additionally, approximately 500 requests per month are elevated to “Tier 2” meaning that they require coordination with one of the Production and Technical Services contractors to provide a complete answer.

Historically, the contact center receives approximately 1100 emails per month through “Email a Map Specialist,” “Ask the Expert” and the MSC email address.

Currently, the contact center is required to meet the follow minimum metrics:

o Average speed of answer: 40 seconds o Service performance: 83% calls answered within 45 seconds o Call abandon rate: 5% o Average talk time: 5 minutes 30 seconds o Average handle time: 6 minutes 30 seconds o Voicemails: respond within 2 business days

C-10

Over the past year, approximately 2500 MT-1 cases (Letters of Map Amendment and Letters of Map Revision Based on Fill, conditional and final) per month and 100 MT-2 cases (Letters of Map Revision, conditional and final) per month were received at the Letter of Map Change (LOMC) Clearinghouse.

Currently, fees are collected for LOMC, distribution of products through the MSC, and distribution of engineering library materials through external data requests. As the Fee Review Board convenes on a bi-annual basis and makes decisions, this may change.

IN FY10, fees collected totaled:

o LOMCs: approximately $4.3 Million o Engineering Library requests: approximately…