TMIP-J RFP HT003822R0001 QA.pdf

Item No. Document Page No. /

Section Questions Answers

1 RFP Section B Pages 3-47

In the previous DRFP, the Government had a FFP CLIN for Incentive Payment that is no longer included in the B Tables. For Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) CLINs this is an associated CLIN meant for payment of the incentive fee based on previously provided Incentive Clause terms and conditions. If the Incentive

Payment CLIN is not added, we recommend the Government include an incentive fee plan as part of the RFP so offerors understand how it will operate during contract execution.

Profit adjustment/incentive fee will be based on a pre-established formula, with firm or successive targets. Such a formula is outlined in each FPI CLIN under the header “the following contract geometry applies to this CLIN”. Therefore, a separate incentive payment CLIN was removed prior to the publication of the RFP.

2 RFP Section L.4.5 Factor 2 Approach Supporting Materials

Pages 107-

Given that a sunsetting schedule is not included as part of the program objectives and that the Basis of Estimate (BOE) is not meant to include scope relating to CLIN X006 which includes application sunsetting, we want to confirm that the

Government expects offerors to estimate and price the labor for each CLIN at full sustainment for all contract years. Without a sunsetting schedule for each application, bidders will vary widely in their BOE solution and subsequent price.

We recommend requiring offerors bid all CLINs at a full sustainment level for all contract years to level the playing field, preventing unrealistically aggressive BOEs and pricing that may pose significant risk to the Government. Alternatively, we recommend the Government provide a defined sunset schedule for each product.

A notional sunsetting schedule is provided via the 'TMIP-J Reading Room', see reading room instructons in solicitation amendment 0001. Applications not included in the notional susetting schedule are expected to be addressed via the “New Prod Spt / Integration / Sunsetting” CLIN.

This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 2.

3 RFP Section L.4.5 Factor 2 Approach Supporting Materials

Pages 107-

In paragraph d) of Factor 2 there is a requirement for a Bill of Materials (BOM) and travel to also be discretely estimated. Given that CLIN series X011 and X012 for travel and other direct cost (ODC) have include plug amounts, we request that this paragraph be removed from Section L.4.5. We additionally point out that in the first paragraph of Section L.4.5 it is clear that CLIN series X011 and X012 do not require a Basis of Estimate (BOE) and is further reason to remove paragraph

d) regarding the BOM and travel estimates.

L.1 Instructions for Proposals, Section L.4.5 has been revised. See amendment 0001

4 RFP Section B Pages 3-47

CLIN series X002 is listed as being for AHLTA-T, KIOSK, and TC2. The CLIN description also includes TC2. Given that CLIN series X003 is meant for TC2, we request the Government confirm that CLIN X002 is meant for only AHLTA-T and

KIOSK and that all support for TC2 belongs in X003.

TC2 has been removed from X002 CLINs and limited to X003 CLINs. See amendment 0001.

5 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A CLIN series X002 it is listed as being for AHLTA-T, KIOSK, and TCS. Please confirm that CLIN X002 is meant for only AHLTA-T and KIOSK and that all support for TC2 belongs in X003.

Section B has been revised accoirndgly, see amendment 0001.

TMIP-J RFP HT003822R0001 Q&A

6 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

For all FPI CLINs, it appears that the reference cell formulas in the Evaluated Price column are off by a row in most instances. Please confirm that the 1.2 multiplier is supposed to be against the total amount for each CLIN, highlighted in the green cells. We request that offerors be allowed to change formulas as needed.

Alternatively, we recommend the Government provide a corrected worksheet.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

7 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

For the 50XX series CLINs for the 6-month extension, it appears that the referenced cells in the formulas are not aligned with Government's intent, i.e., the rows referenced in the formula appear to be in error for each CLIN. We recommend that the Government provide a corrected spreadsheet or allow offerors to modify formulas with the intent that the 50XX series CLINs are 50% of the 40XX series CLINs.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

8 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

For the X012 CLIN series for Other Direct Costs, there is a formula error where the indirect rate is only being multiplied by $100,000, when it appears it should be multiplied by $10,000,000. We recommend the Government provide a corrected worksheet or allow offerors to modify the formula to be accurate.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

9 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

The intent of having the Price ID column and its association with the Factor 2 - Approach Supporting Materials BOE is unclear. As the template is now, it would appear that the Government only wants a bottom-line price for each CLIN without any prices associated with each individual Price ID line item. However, we believe that in order for the completeness and balance of the pricing to be properly evaluated that each individual Price ID line item require a price that adds up to the total for each CLIN. We recommend the Government allow offerors to include a price for each Price ID line item that adds up to each CLIN price.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001. Futher, see Attachment 4 'Insrtuctions' tab.

10 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

In the Detail Summary tab the Government is requesting the WBS Description.

However, within the WBS provided by the Government, the descriptions that are provided are quite long and most descriptions state "See MIL STD 881 for definition." We believe that if the WBS descriptions were to be included in the Detail Summary tab that it would make the tab not easily viewable due to the significant amount of narrative content for each WBS description or would contain non-descriptive information like "See MIL STD 881 for definition". Instead of the WBS descriptions being required in the Detail Summary tab, we recommend that the WBS titles be required instead.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001. Further, see Attachment 4 'Instructions' tab for additional information.

11 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet N/A

It appears that most of the WBS Titles and Descriptions do not match the scope of work in the SOO (e.g., references to organizations and investments that are not in scope). Because many proposal submission requirements are tied to the WBS (e.g., BOE, Pricing), a change to the WBS at this point may require a delay in proposal submissions to allow vendors sufficient time to adjust. It appears that all SOO scope should be aligned to WBS B.2 “JOMIS Operations and Support (O&S)” in the current listing. Can the Government confirm that vendors can structure the WBS using their own approach (for example, derived from the SOO), and advise whether we should use B.2 as the single top level WBS element?

See response to question no. 10.

12 RFP CLINs 0010, 1010, 2010, 3010, 4010, SOO Various

The broad range of services required for Service Specific Support is clear in the SOO. However, there is no information provided anywhere in the RFP in order to provide a valid estimate of the level of effort required. We recommend the government provide a plug number for the expected level of support or remove this CLIN from the evaluated price.

Execution of XX10 series CLINs will be based on the necessary steps to fulfill the outcomes identified in the statement of objective and addressed in the offeror submitted performance work statement. The estimated level of effort should be based on these factors.

13 M.1.3 113

The RFP states that "The offeror shall not propose the government offer either GFE or GFI." The current TMIP-J products are sustained using government-approved/required processes that make extensive use of GFE and GFI, including hardware and software for testing, the ServiceNow Help Desk, Testing

Infrastructure (TI) and other critical items. Disallowing GFE and GFI entirely will significantly increase cost and risk to the government, likely beyond the contract ceiling. We recommend that the government update the RFP to allow GFE and

GFI that is currently being used on the program to be referenced in offerors' bids.

We note that the government's previous answers for the draft RFP to questions 49 regarding JOMIS' Testing Infrastructure (TI) and 54 regarding the Service Now tool provide two examples of GFI/GFE used currently.

Any reference to GFE/GFI in any solicitation provision or clause is conditional. No, GFE/GFI is being offered, nor should be proposed for the TMIP-J solicitation. However, contractor investment in hardware, software and software licenses required to execute TMIP-J, as needed, will be obtained solely through the ODC CLINs as approved by the Contracting Officer.

14 SOO E.7, E.8 51

a. The government indicates Help Desk Support and Service Specific Support includes Tier 1, 2 and 3 support with no further definition. Will the government provide its definition of Tier 1, 2 and 3 to level the playing field for all bidders?

b. What is the relationship of the Help Desk(s) to Service Tier 1 Help Desks? Is it the government's intent that end users call the JOMIS Help Desk directly?

c. Also, what is the government's vision for the relationship between the Help Desks referenced in the SOO and DHA's Global Service Center (GSC)?

d. What are the required hours of coverage for each Tier of Help Desk? For example, does the government require 24/7 coverage for Tier 1 support?

Tier 1 support is provided by the Service PMOs and the Global Service Support Center (GSSC).

Service PMOs have the ability to provide simple troubleshooting steps to resolve minor issues to include: account maintenance, backup/restore issues, installation issues, and password maintenance. Tier 2 support is provided by the vendor integration team. Tier 2 support is required for more advanced systems issues to include database installation issues, advanced backup/restore issues, system communications issues. Tier 3 support requires specific development team support.

Issues handled at this level are executed by the actual development team of the specific system that is experiencing an issue.

15 SOO E.11 51

Will the government define in detail what is included within $10M ODC plugs?

For example, will the government confirm that the awardee shall procure software licenses for TMIP-J applications using ODCs?

See response to question 13.

16 RFP Section E.7, E. 8, and E.9 51

The SOO states that the Government may transition Training and Exercise Support (E.7), HelpDesk Support (E.8), and Service Specific Support (E.9), to a future Supportability & Operations contract. Given that Service Specific Support

(CLIN X010) is only required to be estimated in the Base Year and Option Year 1, should Training and Exercise Support and Help Desk Support also be priced only for the Base Year and Option Year 1 for consistency?

Pricing for all years (base + all options) shall be provided. L.1 Instructions for Proposals, Section

5.2 and Attachment 4 Price Worksheet have been revised. See amendment 0001.

17 RFP H.3 75

The referenced section of the RFP states "The Contractor shall be ineligible to perform, whether as a contractor, subcontractor, or team member, under any PEO DHMS 'Enabler' contract that is managed by a PEO DHMS partner or subordinate organization (Program Office) 'Enabler' Support – non-Prime Mission Product Support for PEO DHMS mid- and back-office functions that provide advice, consulting, and include privileged access to information. The most notable examples are the contract efforts known as Workforce 3.0, Workplace 3.0, and DISCO….” Please confirm that the government will consider an OCI mitigation plan from an a subcontractor for this contract which is also a subcontractor to a

Workforce 3.0 awardee?

Pursuant to H.3 Organizational Conflict of Interest, the government will 'not' consider any OCI mitigation plan for any PEO DHMS “Enabler” contract that is managed by a PEO DHMS partner or subordinate organization (Program Office), such as Workforce 3.0.

18 RFP Section L.2.6 (Proposal Submission) 105 Will the Government please consider allowing Offerors to submit their proposals via email or other electronic means (such as DoD SAFE)?

Per Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) guidance, DoD SAFE should not be used for transmission of contract proposals or other contract award documentation. Proposals shall be submited pursuant to L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.6 Proposal Submission.

RFP Section L.2.5 (Proposal Content) & RFP Section L.7.0

(Volume V – Contract Documentation)

103 & 110

Table 2 in RFP Section L.2.5 indicates that we are to provide Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL); however, Section L.7.0 (Volume V - Contract

Documentation) does not provide any specific instructions for that requirement.

Please clarify what is required to be submitted for this requirement.

Anticipated Exhibit A (CDRLS) have been provided in order to inform the offeror's approach and to aid in the completion of the PWS as well as the H.2 Data Rights Mapping (Attachment 3) pursant to L.1 Instruction for Proposal Section 7.7.3 License Mapping.

RFP Section L.2.5 (Proposal Content) & RFP Section L.7.0

(Volume V – Contract Documentation)

104 & 110

Table 2 in RFP Section L.2.5 indicates that we are to provide Contract Security Classification Specification Form DD254; however, Section L.7.0 (Volume V -

Contract Documentation) does not provide any specific instructions for that requirement. Please clarify which fields are to be completed to satisfy this requirement.

Detailed instructions in Section L.7.0 regaridng the completion of DD254 are not required, as offerors shall complete sections 6 & 7 of the Contract Security Classification Specification Form

DD254.

RFP Section L.2.5 (Proposal Content) & RFP Section L.4.4.1

(Subfactor 1.1 Proposed Approach)

103 & 106

Table 2 in RFP Section L.2.5 indicates that the “Proposed Approach narrative (addressing below paragraph 4.4.1 bullets 1 through 7)” has a page count of 12 pages. However, Section L.4.4.1 asks for a significant amount of information, including a full transition approach and timeline.Will the Government please change the page count for the “Proposed Approach narrative (addressing below paragraph 4.4.1 bullets 1 through 7)” to 25 pages in order to allow Offerors to adequately respond to all requirements in a compliant manner?

Page count limit for Subfactor 1.1 has been increased to 15 pages, see amendement 0001.

RFP Section L.2.5 (Proposal Content) & RFP Section L.4.4.2

(Subfactor 1.2 Corporate Experience)

103 & 106

Table 2 in RFP Section L.2.5 indicates that Subfactor 1.2 Corporate Experience has a page count of 12 pages.Will the Government please change the page count for Subfactor 1.2 Corporate Experience to 15 pages in order to allow Offerors to adequately respond to all requirements in a compliant manner?

Page count limit for Subfactor 1.2 has been increased to 15 pages, see amendement 0001.

23 Attachment 4 (Price Worksheet) N/A

In the Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet, the FPI CLINs’ Evaluated Price formulas on the Detail Summary tab do not seem to reference the correct cell, e.g. cell M6 does not reference the green highlighted Offeror input cell when calculating the total CLIN 0001 ceiling rate. Will the Government issue a corrected spreadsheet?

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

24 Attachment 4 (Price Worksheet) N/A Will the Government please clarify what level of detail is required in the

Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet Detail Summary tab’s columns titled PWS, WBS, WBS Description, Price ID, and Price ID Description?

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001. Futher, see Attachment 4 'Insrtuctions' tab.

Attachment 4 (Price Worksheet) & RFP Section L.4.5 (Factor 2 – Approach Supporting Materials)

107 Will the Government please clarify where we are to find the Price ID and Price ID Descriptions? Will the Government be providing this information?

The price ID provides traceability from BOE to the price worksheet. See Attachment 4 'Insrtuctions' tab.

26 Exhibit A CDRLs, Initial Column 3 through 6 Integrated Master Schedule is referenced repeatedly in “Initial” column but is not included as a CDRL. Please clarify if this is a CDRL requirement. Integrated Master Schedulesee is incoproated via CDRL A031.

27 Exhibit A CDRLs, A033/A038 5 & 6

Are CDRL A033 Cost and Hour Report (Flexfile), Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) and CWBS Dictionary and CDRL A038 Contract Work

Breakdown Structure (CWBS) duplicative requirements? If so, will the Government please remove one of them as a CDRL?

Exhibit A CDRLs have been updated, see revised CDRLs. CDRL A033 has been replace and A038 has been deleted in its entirety.

28 Exhibit A CDRLs, A033/A039 6 & 6 CDRL A033 and A038 do not contain Initial and Subsequent due dates. Will the Government please provide this information?

Exhibit A CDRLs have been updated, see revised CDRLs. CDRL A033 has been replace and A038 has been deleted in its entirety.

29 RFP; Section H.1.2 63

The RFP states “License agreements shall be provided to the Government Contracting Officer concurrent with proposal submission to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions shown below (Alternatives I and II only) to the extent known at the time an offer is submitted to the Government”. Should this information be provided in the Contracts Documentation Volume?

L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.5 Proposal Content has been revised.

30 RFP Section L.4.2 & L.4.4.1 106

The RFP states that the Contractor shall “Provide the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying your proposed program management approach”; however, the Contractor is not specifically asked in any of Subfactor

1.1 (Proposed Approach) for a program management approach. Will the

Government please confirm that the program management approach mentioned in L.4.2 is equivalent to the Section L.4.4.1 Subfactor 1.1 requirements? If not, please add additional page count over the 25 pages requested above.

The proposed program management approach identified in 4.2 (Format and Specific Content) is the same as the Subfactor 1.1 Proposed Approach. Amendment 0001 revised the language in 4.2 to eliminate confusion.

RFP Section C Scope &

Questions and Answers released April 1, 2022; Q #48

Section C references a suite of software/applications and the Government’s response to the April 1st Q&A #48 indicates that “Hardware specifications will be provided”. This information has not been provided as part of the Final RFP. Can the Government please provide details on the various infrastructures that host these TMIP-J suite of applications? Does each service provide their own infrastructure?

This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 1.

32 Questions and Answers released April 1, 2022; Q #50 3

In the Questions and Answers released April 1, 2022, Question 50 states “Would the Government consider providing estimated timelines of when applications will sunset for estimating?” and the Government answered with “Further details will be provided during transition-in”. Is there a decommissioning schedule that we should consider that covers the full period of performance of this contract? If so, please provide.

If not, please confirm that Offerors price proposal shall cover full sustainment throughout the full period of performance. This would be to ensure the

Government has established a level playing field for evaluation.

See response to question no. 2.

33 RFP Section C.E.8 (Help Desk Support) 51 Can the government provide some historical data on the numbers and complexity of previous trouble tickets? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 3.

RFP Section M.2.3.2.3

(Subfactor 1.3 – Challenge Scenario)

Section M.2.3.2.3 has a sentence that states “The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach to reduce the current TMIP-J footprint,…”. It seems strange to be concerned with reducing footprint of a solution as it is being sunset. The footprint should be zero once sunset is complete. Will the Government please update Section M for the Challenge Scenario so it aligns with the changes made to Section L?

In part Section M 2.3.2.3 states, “The Government will evaluate the offeror’s approach to reduce the current TMIP-J footprint, identification of impacts to any end user accounts, limit downtime, lighten the System Administration burden on End Users, and involve Stakeholders and the Services during the process.” Additionally, Section L x states in part, “Government has provided official notification that a legacy application must be sunset within 180 days… There may be numerous policy or statutory requirements for JOMIS to maintain some of the system data for 5-10 years after application sunsetting…” Section L and Section M are in alignment.

35 RFP Section B, Item 0002 4 Should TC2 be removed as it was broken out in Item 0003? See response to question no. 4 36 RFP Section B, Item 1002 13 Should TC2 be removed as it was broken out in Item 1003? See response to question no. 4 37 RFP Section B, Item 2002 22 Should TC2 be removed as it was broken out in Item 2003? See response to question no. 4 38 RFP Section B, Item 3002 31 Should TC2 be removed as it was broken out in Item 3003? See response to question no. 4 39 RFP Section B, Item 4002 40 Should TC2 be removed as it was broken out in Item 4003? See response to question no. 4

40 RFP Sections C & E 48 & 55 Section D was missing. Was that intentional? If so, will the Government please mark it as “Intentionally Excluded”?

Section D 'Packaging and Marking' is not applicable at the IDIQ level. All sections not applicable are idnciated are indicated as such in box 11 of the cover page. See box 11 'Table of Contents'.

41 DD-254 Section 1 1

Notes that "All contractors performing on this contract must hold an Industrial Personnel Security Clearance of an interim SECRET or above IAW 32 CFR Part 117 National Industrial Security Program (NISPOM). Yet in a seeming conflict, section 2 states that "Contractors performing on this contract will receive or have to generate classified materials, emails and documents up to the TS/SCI level.

Please advise on this apparent discrepancy between Secret and TS levels of clearance. Should FCL be at TS level as well even if work is at other contractor or government site?

As delineated by task orders certain tasking will require either a Public Trust, Secret, Top Secret and/or Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information Clearance. At this time members of the product support team require Top Secret Clearance in order to properly support MSAT. All Top

Secret Clearance work be at a government site.

42 DD-254 Section 10 N/A In section 10, item b is not checked (restricted data) and yet section 13 references restricted data/SIPRNet access. Please advise. DD254 will be resived accordingly upon award.

43 N/A N/A Are ITAR provisions in effect / or required as well? ITAR provisions are not applicable to this requirement.

44 SOO 49 Can the Government share the JOMIS Product Decommissioning plan and the notional/confirmed dates they are targeting for sunsetting of applications? See response to question no. 2

45 SOO 51 Can the Government provide ticket volumes over the past year based on their defined priority levels? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 3.

46 SOO 51 Does the Government intend for the Help Desk Support for fielded service platforms in Objective 9 to be separate from Help Desk Support in Objective 8? The government does not intend for these to be separate.

47 SOO 51 How many instances of the JOMIS applications are on Fielded Service Platforms? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 4.

48 SOO 51 How many CONUS and OCONUS Exercise Support Activities occur in a single year? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 5.

49 SOO 51

Can the Government provide tickets by system (Tier 1-2-3 for both annual volume and currently open based on priority levels) for purposes of providing a BOE for labor support?

This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 3.

50 SOO 51 Can the Government provide current FTE counts by system? The government is unable to provide FTE count by systems, however historically the TMIP-J incumbent has used approximately 90 - 120 FTEs to execute.

51 SOO 51 Can the Government provide the number of software installations with versions for estimating purposes? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 4.

52 SOO 51 Can the Government provide the TMIP-J areas with critical/high cyber vulnerabilities? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 8.

53 SOO 51 Can the Government provide the current upgrades that are underway with a schedule (i.e., Oracle, Cache)?

The Government is unable to provide the requested information due to lack of a solidified path forward.

54 SOO 51 Can the Government provide number and sizes of databases? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 4.

55 SOO 51 Can the Government provide existing COTS license counts versus installed This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Items 4 & 6.

56 SOO 52 Can the Government provide number of users by system? Based on operational tempo, the approximate number of end users ranges from 3,000 to 5,000.

57 SOO 53 The Government explain what they meant by MSAT backend that will not be sunset?

MSAT backend database will be migrated to another system in the future. Until then the database should be maintained.

58 SOO 54 Can the Government provide existing volumes of Help Desk calls per month as it exists today, Average Handle Times, and Average Speed to Answer?

Tickets are acknowledged immediately, additional information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP- J Reading Room Item 7.

59 RFP 2.0 General Instructions /

2.5 Proposal Content 104

In Table 2. Proposal Organization under Volume V Contract Documentation, it lists a Support Contractor Proposal Consent Form. No such form was included in the RFP attachments. Will the Government provide the form in an amendment or should contractors provide a statement in their Transmittal Letter that permission is granted allowing the contractor support identified access to the contractor’s proposal?

L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.5 Proposal Content has been revised.

60 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet

Cell K2 "Proposed Fixed Price Incentive-

Firm Target Cost"

Column heading instructs offerors to enter Proposed Fixed Price Incentive-Firm Target Cost. Please confirm that the amount depicted in this column should represent total target Price inclusive of targeted profit.

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

61 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet Evaluated

Price Column M

Can the Government confirm formula reference errors identified as total evaluated price is not calculated off of green cells (i.e., M6 is applying 20% ceiling to cell

K5 instead of K6) in all FPIF CLIN’s for all Evaluated Periods?

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

62 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet ODC Direct Cost CLINs

Can the Government confirm a formula error in Column M Evaluated Price:

Indirect only applied to $100K not $10M in all Evaluated Periods?

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

63 Attachment 4 - Price Worksheet CLINs 5001 thru 5009

Can the Government confirm formula reference errors in column M, Rows 183 to 190, in the “Detailed Summary” tab?

The Government has revised the Pricing Model to address this question. See revised Attachment 4 Price Worksheet rev 1 published with Amendment 0001.

64 2.5 Factor: SB Participation Plan Targets

Please confirm that the Small Business Participation Plan requirement of 38% for Small Businerss is based off of the Total Subcontract Value of the Labor Price?

Small Business Participation is a percentage of dollars. See Attachment 5 Small Business Participation for additional information.

65 Background, 2 a & b 49 Will baseline (current) cost and level of effort be provided? See response to question 50.

66 Program Objectives 1. 49 When is MedCOP anticipated to be fully operational to replace MSAT? Once the blood requirements are completely met by MedCOP, it will fully replace MSAT.

67 Program Objectives 3.f., 4.g., 5.f. 50 Can the Government please provide more details of the requirements for Managed

Services Sustainment?

Managed service sustainment means the contractor will assume total management of the TMIP-J product with little Government oversight. The contractor has the liberty to propose industry best practices regarding software development, configuration management, release planning, enterprise architecture, and helpdesk.

68 Program Objectives 6.a. 50 Please provide list of new applications being considered for integration. This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 9.

69 L.1 Instructions for Proposal 2.6 Proposal Submission 105 Will the Government accept hand delivery of bidder's CD/DVD submission to

1700 N Moore St STE 2300 Rosslyn, VA? See response to question no. 18.

70 2.6 Proposal Submission 105 Will the Government consider extending the submission due date? Submission due date has been revised. See L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.6 Proposal Submission.

71 N/A N/A How many users are there and how many licenses are required? See response to question 56 reagarding the number of end users. Software license inventory is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 6.

72 N/A N/A Should the efforor's platform be implemented to provide common help desk services across the joint services, can you estimate about how many GOV users would need to interact with system?

The government already has a common tool that is being utilized (ServiceNow)

73 N/A N/A How many IT operations users might there be? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 4.

74 N/A N/A How many IPs are being scanned for security issues/vulnerabilities? Please also include medical devices in the count This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 10.

75 N/A N/A How many Security users are there in total? The only Security users are the offeror's cyber team and the internal JOMIS cyber team.

76 N/A N/A How many devices, endpoints, and data center infrastructure such as servers/storage/switches, across the environment(s)?

Production environment architecture cannot be provided. Information regarding development environment is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 10.

77 N/A N/A Please confirm the licenses are GFE? See response to question 13.

78 N/A N/A In previous Q&A, you indicated ITSM tool to be used was ServiceNow. Can you provide detail as to what ITSM tool is used currently at each of the services in theater?

The services utilize ServiceNow as well.

79 N/A N/A Do each of the services currently use ServiceNow? Yes, each of the services currently use ServiceNow.

80 N/A N/A Can you provide detail as to current ticketing process in theater? See response to question 14. Additionally, see See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 10.

81 Proposal Submission 105 Can the offeror hand deliver the CD/DVD proposal submission to the Government office on May 17, 2022, located at 1700 N Moore St STE 2300 Rosslyn, VA 22209?

See response to question no. 18.

82 All FPI CLINs N/A

Can the government provide specific application examples of the contract geometry metrics? For example: Will the government please provide an example of the intended use of the 1) Ceiling rates, 2) Overrun Share Ratio and 2) Underrun Share Ratio.

Target Cost: Fixed cost the Government and Contractor agree upon in order to complete the effort.

Target Profit: % of the Target cost for fee

Total Target Price: Target Cost + Target Price

Ceiling Price: The maximum amount the Government will pay regardless of the cost to the contractor.

So if the contractor overruns the cost significantly for this effort, anything above the ceiling is what the contractor pays out of their “pocket”.

The Government will only pay up to the Ceiling Price Share above Target is when the total cost is above the Target Cost. Amount of cost “above” the total target price is what is split between the Government and the Contractor. The Split ratio is agreed upon between the Contractor and the Government as delineated in Section B This means less profit for the contractor.

Share below Target is when the total cost is when the total cost is below the Target Cost. Amount of cost “below” the total target price is what is split between the Government and the Contractor.

The Split ratio is agreed upon between the Contractor and the Government as delineated in Section B. This means more profit for the contractor.

83 L.4.4.3 (Subfactor 1.3 Challenge Scenario) 107

The challenge scenario from the RFP makes no mention of a replacement healthcare delivery system (HCD) to provide the functionality of the sunsetting system. Should we assume that the HCD is already in place and operational prior to Government providing official notification to sunset the legacy application? Or is the HCD that will replace the functionality of the legacy application to be deployed in parallel with the legacy application sunsetting? If the latter, what is the responsibility of the offeror to test/integrate the application, engage/train users, or provide any other services/support relating to new HCD for the purpose of the Challenge Scenario?

The deployment of the new HCD solution will occur at the same time as the sunset of the legacy applications. The offeror may have to perform some integration activities at the government's direction. The offeror will NOT be responsible for training or providing any services/support for the new HCD solution.

84 L.4.4.3 (Subfactor 1.3 Challenge Scenario) 107

The RFP states that “The Government has provided official notification that a legacy application must be sunset within 180 days.” Should offerors assume that any and all required government approvals to sunset the applications have been obtained prior to Government providing this official notification?

No, the offeor should not assume all the approvals are there. However, this should not be a hindrance in developing the approach and planning to sunset the system on schedule.

85 L.4.4.3 (Subfactor 1.3 Challenge Scenario) 107

a. The RFP indicates a requirement to archive and store some legacy system data “… in the most cost effective means possible with zero physical server or storage ownership by JOMIS.” Does this language simply mean that JOMIS wants to store data in a cloud environment as opposed to on JOMIS-owned on-premises hardware?

b. After data is archived in the appropriate environment, will the government become the formal steward of the data? Or should we assume the offeror will assume responsibility as the steward of the archived data and facilitate access to the archived data for future needs (i.e., audits, inspections).

The Government is the official steward of the data today. JOMIS has migrated to a mostly cloud infrastructure for the enterprise systms (TMDS).

86 SOO E.9 51

It is our understanding that DHA's Global Service Center (GSC), and Service specific Help Desks currently provides Tier 1 support for the TMIP-J suite of applications following deployment. Will the GSC, or other Help Desks continue to provide any Help Desk support, or will all support transition to this contract? If the support transitions, does the government intend that offeror for this solicitation to assume full responsibility for Tier 1 support on Day 1? Alternatively, will the government provide a date when the awardee shall assume full responsibility?

GSC and the Service Helpdesk will continue to provide support for Tier 1.

87 SOO E.12 CLIN 0014 51

Please confirm that offerors are required to submit a full 12-month base period price based on full sustainment starting on Day 1 of the contract and that the transition CLIN 0014 price is meant to cover transition specific activities that are not a part of full sustainment.

Offerors are required to submit a full 12-month base period price with performance commencing at the conclusion of the transition period, consistent with CLIN 0014.

88 N/A N/A To better understand the impact on project costs and ensure more informed submissions, what is the expected timeline for MedCOP Rollout? Similarly, would the Government provide an expected timeline for the MSAT Sunset?

This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 2.

89 N/A N/A Would the Government define the Secret and Top Secret access points? Will the Government provide access to Top Secret facilities for this purpose? See response to question 41.

90 N/A N/A Is the Service-Specific Support a replacement for existing MC4/TMIP-M/TMIP-J

Service contracts (to included deployed support), or is it expected to work alongside them?

The Service-Specific Support, is expcted to work alongside existing MC4/TMIP-M/TMIP-J Service contracts.

91 N/A N/A Will the Government provide a list of current software licenses required to maintain the TMIP-J suite of programs? This information is considered to be CUI. See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 6.

92 N/A N/A

Section M.1.3 “Evaluation Criteria” states, “The offeror shall not propose the Government offer either GFE or GFI.” Since the TMIP-J suite of programs are

Government-owned programs, and since it would be reasonable to expect that the Government would share information about the development, maintenance, and previous executed changes associated with this opportunity, would the Government provide such information about the TMIP-J suite of programs to the awardee?

Government will provide awardee necessary information for sustainment. However, this information is not required for offerors to prepare proposals. Also, see response to question 13.

93 N/A N/A

Section M.2.3.2.2 “Subfactor 1.2- Corporate Experience” does not have a requirement for successful management of federal contracts as measured by CPARS. FAR 15.304(c)(3)(i) requires the evaluation of past performance of offerors for negotiated procurements above the simplified acquisition threshold unless a determination is documented by the agency that such evaluation is inappropriate for the acquisition. See FAR 15.304(c)(3)(i), see also Inmarsat Government, Inc., B-419583, B-419583.2, May 21, 2021 (appropriate where “[the agency] concluded that reviewing past performance information . . . would not yield significant data for evaluative purposes.”). Given the size of this acquisition, and the highly complex and critical nature of the legacy systems, does the Government intend to utilize CPARS or other quantitative means to evaluate the past performance of the offerors?

In accordance with FAR Part 15.304(c)(3)(iii) and prior to release of the solicitation, the Contracting Officer documented his determination not to include past performance as an evaluation factor. The Contracting Officer determined an evaluation of past performance is unlikely to yield differentiation beyond that which is likely to be achieved through an evaluation of corporate experience.

94 Section L 6.1 N/A

Other than Small Business (OTSB) offerors are not required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan IAW FAR 52.219-9 as part of the proposal. This would indicate Small Business ARE required to submit a SB Subcontracting Plan.

Please confirm if this is the requirement.

Pursuant to L-1 Instruction for Proposals Section 6.2, all offerors are required to submit a Small Business Participation Plan. A Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be required prior to award to assist in the establishment of a determination of responsibility should the awardee be other than

Small Business (OTSB).

95 Section L 2.5 (Table 2) N/A

Table 2 indicates offerors are to submit Exhibit A. Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) with our response. As none of the listed CDRLs indicate a deliverable due at the time of proposal and no instruction is included within Section L, what does the Government require offerors to provide in response to this requirement?

Potential Response: See response to question no. 19.

96 RFP Section L 2.5 (Table 2) N/A Data Rights is not detailed in Table 2. What is the filename convention for submitting a response to Data Rights in Volume V? L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.5 Proposal Content (Table 2) has been revised.

97 RFP Section C-B.1 N/A Does the Government have a specific number of 6-month extensions that will be allowed?

Pursuant to FAR clause 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, the option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed 6 months. If exercised in full, the maximum ordering period as noted in FAR clause 52.216.18 is 66 months.

98 RFP Section C-F.1 N/A Will a Facility Clearance at the TS level be required for all contractors and subcontractors?

No, a TS/SCI level to include read-in personnel, is only specific to system functions regarding

MSAT.

99 RFP Section L 7.8.3 N/A With the replacement of DUNS with UEI codes, would the Government prefer UEI, DUNS or both codes? Offerors should provide both the DUNS and the UEI codes.

100 RFP Section B and Section C, para d.3 N/A

Would the Government provide the current level of effort (Hrs per labor category for the period) for the sustainment of each module/application of the TMIP-J system/suite? Would the Government provide the historical level of effort (Labor category and Hours over the last year) for the CLINs?

See response to question 50.

101 N/A N/A What is the likelihood and potential timeline for a transition of helpdesk support?

Tier 1 Helpdesk support will not transition and will still be maintained by GSC and the Service

Helpdesk.

102 RFP Section C, para D.3; E N/A The SOO does not include E. Program Objectives for g. Data Migration Utility

(para D.3). Will the Government provide the Program Objectives for this TMIP-J product?

Soo has been revised, see Program Objectives Section E.10.

103 General N/A Can Offerors propose a modified CLIN structure and or add proposed CLINs not currently included in RFP, or are bidders required to comply with the CLIN structure in the current RFP?

Offerors are not permitted to propose a modified CLIN structure. However, pursuant to L.1 Instruction for Proposals Section 2.1.3, if an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions or the RFP contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the contracting officer to consider as related to the omission or error.

Any immediate notification shall be made prior to the close of solicitation questions noted in L.1, Section 2.4.

104 RFP Section L; Section M N/A

The Evaluation Criteria states, "Corporate experience older than three years as of the solicitation closing date will not be considered." As the Government does not require offerors to provide contract information, how will the Government evaluate the recency of corporate experience?

Volume II, Section 4.4.2 Corporate Experience has been revised.

105 General N/A Will the Government provide additional detail on how they define sunsetting?

System sunset is defined as the necessary procedures to phase out a system. The procedures are to include development activities, assessments of operational impact, efficiencies gained by phasing out the system, and impact to the user community.

RFP Cover Page

L Section 2.6

1 & 98 Will the Government accept hand-delivery of the CD/DVD electronic proposal? If yes, please confirm the depository location and provide hand-deliver instructions if needed.

See response to question no. 18.

107 RFP Section B Supplies or Services and Prices 2

The Government does not provide a sunset schedule as a basis for pricing but indicated during previous Q&A that timelines will be provided only during transition in after evaluation and award. If the Government allows vendors to make different assumptions regarding the timing of sunset of applications, it could undermine a fair price comparison. Will the Government confirm that pricing should include continuous sustainment throughout the full five years without regard to sunset-based reductions for price evaluation purposes?

See response to question no. 2

108 RFP Section B Supplies or Services and Prices 3 Will the Government confirm that each Lot referred to in Section B is a 12-month period? We recommend updating Section B to clarify. Potention Response: Ordering preiods are clearly defined in Section F and Section B, page 2.

109 RFP Section B 3 through

Will the Government confirm CLINs 2010, 3010, and 4010 should not be priced, and if so, revise Section B to reflect this? Please clarify. For pricing team to address.

110 RFP Statement of Objectives

9. f. 54 Will the Government please provide the PEO DHMS Metrics Plan at its earliest convenience? See TMIP-J Reading Room Item 11.

111 RFP L 2.5 104

The Proposed Approach Basis of Estimate Volume indicates the submitted file is both pdf and MS Excel and that the allocation of 25 page count limitation between the pdf and MS Excel files is at the offeror’s discretion. Will the Government clarify how they define page count in Excel (e.g., the number of tabs, number of rows, number of columns, etc.)?

A page count in Excel is equal to the number of tabs. The instructions tab does not count against the page limitation.

RFP & PW L 2.5.2 Size /

Format & Attachment 4

104 - 105

It is our recommendation that within each tab of the Pricing Worksheet, the Government allow offerors to use the MS Excel default font style, Calibri (and not change the font to Times New Roman). Please consider changing the font requirement from Times New Roman to Calibri for Attachment 4, Pricing

Worksheet.

Offeror shall use the default font for all attachments, including the Price Worksheet.

113 RFP L 2.6 Proposal Submission 105

The DCMA has marked all companies’ Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR) Letters as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Please provide updated submission instructions for offerors that allow offerors to comply with handling of CUI information.

See response to question 18. CUI proposal ifnormaton shall be submited pursuant to L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.6 Proposal Submission.

RFP Vol II Technical

4.1 General

L Table 2

105-106

103-104

Within Table 2, electronic file names for the below seem to be missing “sub” from the file name as well as the file name descriptor after the subfactor number: Will the Government please confirm that the submitted file name formats for Subfactors 1.2 and 1.3 should follow the same format as 1.1 and be updated from:

• TMIPJ_OfferorName_Factor 1.2

• TMIPJ_OfferorName_Factor 1.3 to:

• TMIPJ_OfferorName_Subfactor 1.2 Corporate Experience

TMIPJ_OfferorName_Subfactor 1.3 Challenge Scenario

L.1 Instructions for Proposal, Section 2.5 Proposal Content (Table 2) has been revised.

RFP Vol V Contract Documentation

Table 2

110 – 111

TABLE 2. Proposal Organization does not list Sections L.7.3 Cloud Computing Services Agreements and L.7.7 Data Rights. Will the Government confirm offerors response should include these two sections as separate files in Volume V

– Contract Documentation? Will the Government provide the exact file names / naming convention for these files as they are not listed in Table 2, Proposal Format?

See response to question 96.

116 RFP M. 1.3 113

How will the awarded offeror perform the work?

Access to some environments and information is believed to be required to complete this work. Examples include:

Source code

Testing / Dev environment Past Deliverables Training Materials

Test CACs Will the Government confirm that these items will be available and are not considered GFE or GFI?

This is required GFE/GFI and it will be provided to the awarded offeror.

117 PW PEO DHMS WBS tab N/A

Because many proposal submission requirements are tied to the WBS (e.g., BOE, Pricing), a change to the WBS at this point may require a delay in proposal submissions to allow vendors sufficient time to adjust. It appears that all SOO scope should be aligned to WBS B.2 “JOMIS Operations and Support (O&S)” in the current listing Will the Government confirm that vendors can structure the WBS using their own approach (for example, derived from the SOO), and advise whether we should use B.2 as the single top level WBS element?

See response to question 11.

118 PW Detail Summary tab Lines 40, 79, 113, 147, 181

Prior to the Final RFP coming out, the Government indicated they would provide such list with the RFP package. Will the Government please provide the Software list?

This information…