TMIP-J Sustainment Questions_Final.pdf

No. Document Line Comment Rationale Adjuducation

1 DRFP, Section 2.4.2.3 Challenge Scenario 2423

The first four paragraphs of this section seem related to past performance, rather than the challenge scenario (AHLTA-T DB Replacement).

Question: Should this language be included in Volume II, Prior Experience vs the Challenge Scenario?

Request adjustment to clarify solicitation. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

DRFP, Section B - Supplies or Services and

Prices

In the Training and Exercise Support CLIN Description, it states: "Managed solution to provide training and exercise support for all subsystems and components that are a part of the TMIP-J information system"

Question: Is training required for new product support?

It would be helpful for the contractor community to fully understand in-scope TMIP-J products requiring Training and Exercise support in order to properly estimate training costs.

Training will be contained to TMIP-J components in sustainment and coordination effort will be required with new product support.

DRFP, Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

F. Program Objectives

2. ALHTA-T, KIOSK, and TC2

Question: Should Item 2. AHLTA-T, KIOSK, and TC2 include Sunset Planning, Sunset Execution, and

Production Support Services? It is our understanding that these tasks are part of the scope for these product components.

Request adjustment to clarify solicitation. Yes, this should be included.

DRFP, Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

F. Program Objectives

3. Theater Medical Data Store

In the CLIN 0003 Description (starting at line 15), the DRFP states that the TMDS CLIN is a "Managed solution to sustain and sunset Theater Medical Data Store (TMDS) subsystem of TMIP-J."

However in Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program objectives for , for the TMDS system, sunset activities are not called out.

Question: Should Sunset Planning and Sunset Execution be included for the Theater Medical Data Store (TMDS) Statement of Objectives Program Objectives?

Request adjustment to clarify solicitation for scoping and pricing activities.

Yes, this should be included.

DRFP, Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

F. Program Objectives

4. Integration Applications (TMIP

Framework, TMIP Reporting, TAIM, TMIP-J Utilities)

In the CLIN 0004 (starting at line 19), the DRFP states that the CLIN is a "Managed solution to sustain and sunset the Integration Applications to include TMIP Framework, TAIM, TMIP Reporting& TMIP Utilities subsystems of TMIP-J."

However in Statement of Objectives (SOO) Program Objectives for these components, sunset activities are not called out.

Question: Should Sunset Planning and Sunset Execution be included for the Integration Applications (TMIP Framework, TMIP Reporting, TAIM, TMIP-J Utilities) Statement of Objectives Program Objectives?

Request adjustment to clarify solicitation for scoping and pricing activities.

Yes, this should be included.

DRFP, Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

F. Program Objectives 9a. Other Direct Costs, Software Licenses

Question: Can the government include a software list as part of the RFP package detailing which software JOMIS expects contractor to manage?

Required for accurate scoping and pricing. Yes, a software list document will be included.

Section B

Attachment 7, Price Worksheet Instructions Tab

The Overrun/Underrun ratios in Section B appear to be the inverse of the ratios provided in the Price

Worksheet Instructions Tab. Please confirm which ratios are correct, or provide Government and Contractor labels to the ratios in the Price Worksheet.

The ratios are currently in conflict creating a lack of clarity in the Government's intent for FPIF.

No longer applicable, see revised Price Worksheet.

8 Section B 60 CLIN 0012 appears to incorporate Exhibit A, but the deliverables from the exhibit are not listed under Task Revision Notice 01 Deliverables in Attachment L-1.

Clarity around deliverables is required to fairly compare pricing. See revised solicitation.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, D. Place of Performance

The Government states that TOs under this contract may be for work within and outside of the United States. Place of performance implies work is done at the bidder's facility. DD254 indicates work will be required at other contractor/Government location. Will the Government confirm that the data in the

DD254 is accurate and provide the other contractor site?

Accurate clearance requirements are necessary for bidders to prepare for support.

Work to be performed outside of the United States will be indicated at the task order level and is anticipated to be performed at government facilities.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, F.1. Program Objectives, Medical Situational Awareness Theater

Our understanding is that MSAT will be sunset prior to anticipated contract award date. If that is correct, what is the MSAT scope related to TMIP-J Sustainment, if any?

Ensure clear understanding of level of effort, required skillsets, etc.

MSAT front end will be sunset, not MSAT back end.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, G.1. Security 463–465

The first constraint states: "a. The IDIQ will support the following levels of security: Unclassified;

Unclassified, But Sensitive; Secret (S); and Top Secret (TS)." Will DHA be issuing a DD254 at the IDIQ level and then separate DD254s for each task order (TO) level based on the clearance requirement for each

TO?

Accurate clearance requirements are necessary for bidders to prepare for support.

DD254 will be applicable at the IDIQ level, not at each individual task order level. However, clearance requirements will be specified at the task order level.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, G.1. Security, and

DD254

463-465

The DD254 states the following: "2. Contractors performing on this contract will receive or have to generate classified materials, emails and documents up to the TS/SCI level. Classified information will be handled IAW the National Industrial Security Program, DoD 5220.22-M."

The draft SOO states: "G. Constraints, 1. Security, a. The IDIQ will support the following levels of security:

Unclassified; Unclassified, But Sensitive; Secret (S); and Top Secret (TS)." Will the Government confirm which level of clearance will be needed?

Accurate clearance requirements are necessary for bidders to prepare for support.

TS is the appropriate level.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, G.8.c. Contract Maximum and Minimum

Guarantee & 52.216-19 Order Limitations (OCT 1995) (a)

560 & 1270 There is an apparent typo in 52.219-19 for the minimum order value. Please correct to ensure accuracy of contractual documents.

Clause 52.216-19 Order Limitation, para (a) remains as stated.

TMIP-J Sustainment Questons

Section F, Section B

630 &

CLIN 0010 PoP is 15 DEC 2021–14 MAR 2022. Section B, CLIN 0010 Transition In, states: "The contractor shall be prepared to assume responsibility for and commence sustainment no later than 15

NOV 2021." This appears to be a schedule inconsistency.

Please clarify. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

Section L, 1.0 Program Structure and

Objectives 2151–2153

The contract will allow for up to 5 years of performance from the date of contract award, and all orders issued under it must be completed within that 5-year period. CLINs listed in the Pricing Worksheet indicate a potential 5.5 years of performance. Does the Government intend the 5 years to be an ordering period or, as stated, the total Period of Performance?

Clarifying the anticipated Period of Performance will assist in enabling accurate and reasonable bids.

IAW Section B of the revised solicitation, the ordering period will be date of award to 60 months thereafter. CLINs 5001-5005, 5007-

5009 and 5011-5012 represent FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services.

16 TABLE 2. Proposal Organization 2256 Narrative Summary row: We suggest the Electronic File Name of the Narrative Summary be

TMIPJ_OfferorName_Cover_Letter_Exec_Sum

The Narrative Summary details provided in 3.0 Volume I - Executive Summary (Lines 2311–2325) specifies the inclusion of both the cover letter and the executive summary.

The file name remains unchanged.

17 TABLE 2. Proposal Organization 2256 Volume II Technical: IDIQ PWS row. We suggest the Electronic File Name of this requirement be

TMIPJ_OfferorName_IDIQ_PWS This is to distinguish the submission clearly from the TO PWS.

File names have been revised, offerors shall use the nomenclature as revised in updated solicitation.

18 TABLE 2. Proposal Organization 2256 Volume V Contract Deliverables: Task Order Document row. We suggest the Electronic File Name of this requirement be TMIPJ_OfferorName_TO_PWS

This is to distinguish the submission clearly from the IDIQ PWS. See revised solicitation.

19 Section L 2256–

Table 2 details separate document names for individual sections of Volumes II, IV, and V. Section L, 4.2, directs that Volume II should not exceed 39 pages (the combination of the three subfactors' page limits).

Would the Government consider reducing the number of individual documents to only the five PDF volumes and necessary attachments (documents required in a separate file format) rather than submitting each subsection individually?

This will simplify formatting and enable hyperlinks from the TOC and sections within a volume, allowing more efficient

Government review.

Page count remains unchanged

20 Section L 2270–2274

Section 2.8.2, Page Size and Format for Written Submission, requires that all "narrative element, graphics, art, figures, imported charts, charts, and any other graphical representation that includes text" be 11 pt. font. Would the Government consider allowing a smaller font size for graphics, art, figures, imported charts, and charts?

Graphics play an integral role in demonstrating solutions, and requiring an 11 pt. font significantly restricts the size and content of graphics, diminishing the value to the Government in evaluating proposed solutions.

Font size update 10-point, note that font limitations do not apply for pre-existing documents captured in screenshots.

21 4.4.1 Proposed Approach, Item 9 2394–2397 In the IDIQ PWS, there are references to the Contractor PWS. We suggest replacing the words

"Contractor PWS" with the words "IDIQ PWS."

Introducing different words for "Contractor PWS" (CPWS) can be confusing, as we understand the requirements for both an

IDIQ PWS and a TO PWS.

See revised solicitation.

22 Section L 2423–2441

The 00-TMIPJ-DRFP, Section L, 4.4.3 Challenge Scenario, Lines 2423–2441 provide requirements previously included as a part of the 2021-06-21 draft Prior Experience section of Volume II and refer to instructions on detailing prior experience. These requirements are now provided as instructions for completing the Challenge Scenario section of Volume II. Additionally, the 2021-06-21 draft Challenge

Scenario requirements have been removed.

Section M, 2.3.2.3—Technical Subfactor 1.3—Challenge Scenario, Lines 3100–3121 remain largely unchanged and describe evaluation criteria related to the 2021-06-21 Challenge Scenario. We would like to confirm that these changes were unintentional and the intent for the Challenge Scenario is more fully reflected by the requirements presented in the 2021-06-21 draft Section L.

A fully developed solution to the Challenge Scenario is essential to the success of the Government’s acquisition and future TMIP- J Sustainment program; therefore, if the correct language is not included in the 2021-08-19 DRFP, we request that the Government consider extending the anticipated response timeline from 35 days to 45 days to allow for thorough responses that support the Government's needs.

See revised solicitation.

23 5.0 Volume III, Cost/Price 2487 Section 5.3.2.4 states: "If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to justify the estimated complexity of each backlog item contributing to the sizing of estimated hours." Can the Government provide the backlog?

Backlog information will facilitate a realistic estimation of hours. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

24 Section L - 5.3.4.12.1 2625 Is the IDIQ ceiling price referenced in 5.3.4.12.1 the same as the Maximum Guaranteed ceiling price in Section C: $203M?

Requirement is not clear. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

25 Section L - 5.3.4.12.1 2625 By "traceable to the IDIQ ceiling price" is it the Government's intent that offeror pricing for "respective IDIQ CLINs" should add up to $203M? Please clarify.

Clarity is required to ensure fair competition. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

Section L - Section 3 and Section B

05-306

Section L states: "5.3.4.12.1 Offeror shall use this worksheet to detail the elements that make up the price proposal that is traceable to the IDIQ ceiling price for the respective IDIQ CLINs." Are all CLINs considered IDIQ? If the answer is "No," can the Government please specify which CLINs are IDIQ?

Clarity is required to ensure fair competition. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

27 Section L - 5.3.4.12.4 2636 Will the Government detail the requirements and format for the BOE? Requirement is not clear. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

28 Section L - 5.3.4.12.4 2636 Does the requirement for the BOE pertain only to Task Order 1 pricing? Requirement is not clear. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

29 Section L - 5.3.4.12.4 2636 Is the BOE reference to "Subfactor 2.3" an error? Subfactor 2.3 does not appear in the draft RFP. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

30 L-1 2929 Attachment L-1 references Paragraph 1.2, but the paragraph is missing from the section.

The objective of Attachment L-1 is incomplete without this paragraph.

No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

31 L-1 2937 The Government indicates support is required for HALO, MedCOP, and OMDS. Will the Government please provide a date, relative to the award date, offerors should assume work starts on each of these CLINs?

Clarity is required to ensure fair competition. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

ATTACHMENT L-1, Order 01 - Initial Task

Order

The Government-estimated BOE table shows two entries for Application Developer, with one having quantity of two and the other a quantity of eight. Would the Government clarify whether these entries are intended to be the same labor category?

Clarifying anticipated labor categories will assist offerors in presenting reasonable staffing and pricing that meet the

Government's intent.

No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

ATTACHMENT L-1, Order 01 - Initial Task

Order

Paragraph 4.0 states: "To assist offerors in estimating the price of this work, the government includes the below estimated BOE. This BOE is provided as an aid and is not required in developing the offeror’s price if it does not reflect the technical approach that the offeror intends to use to achieve the above outcomes." Would the Government please provide an FTE breakdown by CLIN for the Basis of Estimate

(BOE)?

Providing offerors a FTE breakdown by CLIN will enable the Government to receive more comparable bids, facilitating accurate evaluation.

No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

34 Section M 3163 Will the Government clearly define the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in the Section M text? It is unclear what comprises the TEP. See revised solicitation.

35 Section M 3163 Does the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) consist only of Order 01 - Initial Task Order? It is unclear what comprises the TEP. See revised solicitation.

36 Section M 3163 If the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) consists of more than Order 01 or other than Order 01, can the Government please specify the respective CLINs and contract Periods?

It is unclear what comprises the TEP. See revised solicitation.

37 Attachment 7 Glossary Will the Government clarify the intent of the Requirement Number? The purpose of the Requirement Number is not clear. See revised Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet.

38 Attachment 7 Glossary Will the Government clarify the intent of the Period Quantity and Unit? The purpose of the Period Quantity and Unit is not clear. See revised Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet.

39 Attachment 7 Glossary Will the Government clarify the intent of the Standard Labor Category? The purpose of the Standard Labor Category is not clear. See revised Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet.

40 Attachment 7 Glossary Will the Government clarify the intent of the Workstream/Price ID? The purpose of the Workstream/Price ID is not clear. See revised Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet.

41 L-1 N/A Will the Government provide a transition schedule to which all offerors must adhere?

Without an established transition schedule, the Government will have advantaged the incumbent unduly. Further, it will be difficult for the Government to compare pricing among vendors.

L-1 is no longer applicable, see sections B & C of the revised solicitation.

42 L-1 N/A Will the Government provide the incumbent's transition-out plan and require that it comply with that plan?

This approach ensures fair, adequate, and robust competition.

L-1 is no longer applicable, however a transition out plan (if any) will be provided to the awardee.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications, F.1. Program Objectives, Medical Situational Awareness Theater

N/A For offerors to submit Firm Fixed Price, will the Government provide a detailed schedule of transition of systems (ALTHA-T/KIOSK/TC2) from incumbent contracts to TMIP-J Sustainment and Sunset?

This approach allows for equal evaluation across offerors by removing assumptions.

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

44 Attachment 7 N/A Must all columns on the Task Order sheet be completed? The instructions for the Task Order sheet are not clear. No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

45 Attachment 7 N/A The Task Order tab of Attachment 7 seems completely independent of the Input tab and therefore is not calcluated into the Contract Summary tab. Should the costs of the Task Order tab roll into the Input tab at the appropriate WBS levels?

It is not clear if there should be a relationship between the two tabs.

No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

46 Section M N/A Does the Government intend to provide plug costs for Travel and ODCs?

We suggest the Government provide plug numbers for travel and ODCs to ensure fair evaluation across all offerors.

See revised Attachment 4 – Price Worksheet.

Attachment 7, Contract Summary and Reference tabs

Section B

Various CLIN PoPs and definitions are inconsistent among these references in Attachment 7 and the DRFP. Please clarify. See revised solicitation.

48 SOO 377 Can the Government provide details on the infrastructure that hosts these TMIP-J suite of applications?

Does each service provide their own infrastructure?

clarity for bid Hardware specifications will be provided.

49 SOO 377

Can the Government provide details on the test/production environments for these applications? Are their separate test environments for each of the services? Is the contractor expected to maintain these as well as part of this procurement?

clarity for bid

JOMIS maintains Testing Infrastructure (TI) for test environments. The Services have their own test enrivonments. The offeror is not expected to maintain Service environment.

50 SOO 377 Would the Government consider providing estimated timelines of when applications will sunset for estimating?

clarity for bid Further details will be provided during transition-in.

51 SOO 426

Can the Government provide existing volumes of help desk calls per month as it exists today, Average

Handle Times, and Average Speed to Answer?

clarity for bid

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

52 SOO 426 Would the Government consider clarifying what it considers fielded Service Platforms? clarity for bid Addressing incidents in production.

53 SOO 426 Does the Government currently have an IVR/ACD Vendor it uses for its help desk? If so, what is that vendor? Will it allow the contractor to suggest it's own vendor?

clarity for bid No

54 SOO 426

Does the Government currently use an ITSM tool to track trouble tickets for it's applications and what tool is currently used? Would the government allow the contractor to provide it's own?

clarity for bid

Service Now is the tool. The government is open to recommendations, however Service

Now is the system of record at this point.

55 SOO 2953 Will the Government confirm if the 157 FTE count is the current FTE count on the contract or the desired FTE count for this procurement?

clarity for bid See revised pricing model, FTEs should be based on the offerors unique approach.

56 SOO 382 Will the TMIP-J vendor provide Risk Management Framework (RMF) and Cybersecurity requirements as an integrated team or is there an independent contract to carry them out?

clarity for bid Integrated Team

57 DRFP 2423 - 2449

Section 4.4.3 Challenge Scenario does not present a scenario, but rather asks for reference information related to prior experience. The Government also requires offerors to submit a proposed deployment schedule based on the challenge scenario that has not been provided - will the Government clarify the requirement for Subfactor 1.3?

clarity for bid

See revised solicitation, sec L provides the challenge scenario, while section M provides how the Government will evaluate the challenge scenario.

58 DRFP 2423 - 2449

The Challenge Scenario in Section L (4.4.3) asks the offeror to “provide a narrative response that demonstrates its prior experience in command and control software development” and include “a proposed deployment schedule of Oracle database replacement within the TMIP-J project”. Is the offeror expected to provide a deployment schedule that reflects the methods cited in the prior experience narrative for Subfactor 1.3?

clarity for bid See revised solicitation.

59 Draft PWS Pricing Please provide the number of servers or quantity of users for the current operational baseline of the

AHLTA-T application.

This information is needed to address the Challenge Scenario (AHLTA-T solution replacement) for Offeror(s) to size the replacement solution.

There are approximately 800 deployed sites

60 Draft PWS 3114

The statement reads: "The Government will also evaluate the extent to which the Offeror’s presented solution satisfies the issues outlined in the Challenge within reasonable schedule and performance standards while minimizing the risk(s) of failing to achieve intended outcomes."

Question: Does the Government have minimum performance standards for this Challenge Scenario?

What are the required technical performance standards for this application?

Please provide clarity in the final PWS.

For the purpose of the challenge scenario the

Government doesn’t have a minimum performance standard.

61 Draft PWS 3100-3121

In the JOMIS Industry Day held on April 20, 2021, The Government stated the desire to sunset AHLTA-T in 2023. However, the challenge scenario does not discuss the planned phase out of this application. In addition, deployment of new functionality or new technology within the operational medicine environment can take several months/years.

Recommend the Government consider including the requirement for Offeror(s) to demonstrate how their solution to the Challenge Scenario reduces the complexity of an AHLTA-T decommissioning.

Section M references the challenege scenario results must yield long term benefits to JOMIS and reducing TMIP-J footprint.

62 Draft PWS 462-484

This section states that all deliverables become the sole property of the US Government with unlimited rights to use, duplicate, for any purpose whatsoever, etc.

Please clarify that the deliverables ownership rights/unlimited use terms in this RFP would not automatically apply to commercial ODC licenses used in the deliverables.

Please clarify that ODC commercial prices for component software licenses/support would be acceptable for the prime’s accounting and reporting obligations.

Generally data rights clauses do not apply to commercial product licenses.

Concur

63 Draft PWS 1479 Please clarify whether ODC commercial prices for component software licenses/support would be acceptable for the prime’s accounting and reporting obligations.

General practice for commercial product licenses.

Software licenses can be procured via ODC, however the specific software must be incidental or consumed as part of the services for the specific task order.

64 DRFP Section L.4.4.2, Section M.2.3.2.2 NA

Section L does not currently require offerors to show the relevance of submitted Prior Experience to the TMIP-J program, creating risk that the offerors lack the required domain expertise. We recommend the Government require offerors to explain the relevance of its prior experience to the TMIP-J program, and that the Government explicitly evaluate the relevance of submitted prior experience.

Reduce risk by ensuring relevant experience and expertise. Unchanged

65 DRFP Section L.2.8.2 2270-2276

The government requires 11 point Times New Roman font size for all text, including tables and graphics.

Given the small number of pages allowed, offerors will be extremely constrained to provide the level of detail required for the government to conduct a thorough evaluation. Will the government allow 10 point font for tables and 8 point font for graphics so long as both are legible and readable?

Allow a reasonable level of detail for a rigorous evaluation. See revised solicitation.

66 DRFP NA

Due to the mission critical nature of the TMIP-J applications, we recommend the Government evaluate each offeror’s approach to transition the entirety of the program as part of the Technical Approach. We recommend offerors be required to describe their approach to transition the program in no more than

30 days to minimize mission disruption. We further recommend the Government evaluate offerors more favorably to the extent they can complete the transition with low risk.

Reduces potential risk. Unchanged

67 DRFP Section L.7.9.2 and 7.9.3 2910-2917

The government requires offerors to submit "mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office" in

L/7.9.2.3 and the "company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; DUNS code."

in 7.9.3. It is unclear what "facility codes" the government requires, particularly for the referenced government offices. Request the government clarify what codes are required or remove the requirement.

Need clarification to ensure compliance. Facility code is also known as DoDAAC

68 DRFP Section C.3.10 435-454 Will the government clarify where the work scope described in C.E.10 should be priced in the Pricing template? There is no obvious place to include this scope in the CLIN Structure or WBS provided in

Attachment 7.

Need clarification to ensure compliance. See revised solicitation.

69 DRFP Section C.3.10.f 449-450 Will the government clarify that Help Desk Support for the Service Specific Support includes Tier 1 Support?

Offerors require clarification to provide a valid price. Help Desk tasks include Tiers 1,2 and 3.

70 Section L 350 - 352

The Government states; "The offeror shall submit a proposed solution on eliminating the use of the Oracle database within the TMIP-J legacy system and proposing a replacement solution for Oracle within

AHLTA-T." Can the government provide the current architecture and interfaces for AHLTA-T, including the types of languages or development platforms used on the development of AHLTA-T?

Providing the current architecture and interfaces helps the offeror validate their solution will meet all current requirements of AHLTA-T and reduces an unfair advantage of the current team supporting TMIP-J. If the architecture and interfaces cannot be shared can the government provide the high-level requirements for the Oracle component being replaced.

No longer applicable, see revised solicitation.

71 Section L 350 - 352

The Government states; "The offeror shall submit a proposed solution on eliminating the use of the Oracle database within the TMIP-J legacy system and proposing a replacement solution for Oracle within AHLTA-T." Can the government provide the amount or nature of any objects (GUIs, Reports etc.) written using Oracle's suite of Development Tools?

Providing the current architecture and interfaces helps the offeror validate their solution will meet all current requirements of AHLTA-T and reduces an unfair advantage of the current team supporting TMIP-J.

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

72 Section L 350 - 352

The Government states; "The offeror shall submit a proposed solution on eliminating the use of the Oracle database within the TMIP-J legacy system and proposing a replacement solution for Oracle within

AHLTA-T." Can the government provide the amount or nature of any database objects (GUIs, Reports etc.) wrtten using Oracle's specific logic like User Defined Functions (UDF) or Oracle's Proceedural SQL

(PLSQL)?

Providing the current architecture and interfaces helps the offeror validate their solution will meet all current requirements of AHLTA-T and reduces an unfair advantage of the current team supporting TMIP-J.

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

73 Section L 350 - 352

The Government states; "The offeror shall submit a proposed solution on eliminating the use of the Oracle database within the TMIP-J legacy system and proposing a replacement solution for Oracle within

AHLTA-T." Can the government provide what technologies are used for implementation of user interfaces (eg. Oracle forms)?

Providing the current architecture and interfaces helps the offeror validate their solution will meet all current requirements of AHLTA-T and reduces an unfair advantage of the current team supporting TMIP-J.

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

74 Section L 331-332 The Government states; "The prior experience included within this volume shall be related to software development undertaken no earlier than 2019." We recommend the requirement be "undertaken within 5 years".

Limiting past experience/past performance to those projects undertaken since 2019 will exclude meaningful and applicable experience that could have predated 2019- but may still be ongoing.

See revised solicitation.

75 Section L 325-326

The Government states; "The offeror shall provide a narrative response that demonstrates its prior experience in command and control software development that was completed in accordance with an agile process". Would the Government consider removing this requirement of specifically command and control software?

Limiting past experience to those vendors holding highly specific experience with command and control software would unfairly limit competition and would not substantially improve the quality or executability of a vendor's proposed solution.

No

76 Draft Cost Worksheet Input Tab The document states that we are only to utilize/make edits in the Input sheet. It would be necessary to have detailed instructions for what is required in each column and clear definitions of any column headers [Source (B1), Requirement # (D1), etc] so that it is clear to Offerors.

Without specific details shared among competitors, the Government would not be able to make a fair assessment/ evaluation of differing cost proposals.

See revised solicitation.

77 SOO #7 Help Desk The SOO states that the Offeror will manage Help Desk tasks, can the Government provide data surrounding current ticket volume and required response SLAs?

Without specific details shared among competitors, the Government would not be able to make a fair assessment/ evaluation of differing cost proposals.

The government will take such request(s) into consideration during the finalization of the

RFP. However, release so such information is contingent upon CUI vetting.

Attachment_4_HT0038-21-R-

0007_DD254.pdf

13. SECURITY

GUIDANCE

(pg 2)

Does the security guidance in the Rationale column require the incumbent contractor to have TS/SCI security clearance profile?

"2. Contractors performing on this contract will receive or have to generate classified materials, emails and documents up to the

TS/SCI level. Classified information will be handled IAW the National Industrial Security Program, DoD 5220.22-M."

Yes

Attachment_1_-HT0038-21-R-

0007_Terms.docx All

Typically, the government provides software/licenses for specific related software on GFE. For non-GFE (contractor-owned equipment), the contractor is responsible for software licenses to include installation and purchase.

The software licenses required to support TMIP-J are not currently contractor specific. There's a single running list of all licenses to support across product teams and systems, which are composed of multiple contractors/contracts. TMIP-J license management is also not fully managed by the JOMIS program office/asset management team. PEO also manages various enterprise licenses associated with TMIP-J suite of products. It's important to scope this particular attachment for contracts and contractors based on the type of support activities assigned independently once awarded.

We recommend a list of specific non-GFE sofware required to support the new contract be included as an appendix to ensure adherance to the aforementioned attachment in column D. From a TMIP-J perspective, a running list of software licenses across legacy systems already exists. This may be a good starting point to provision this appendix.

TMIP-J Sustainment Questions