03_QA Log 2 April 2026.pdf

PDF 277 KB Posted Apr 2, 2026

Attached to: Program Executive Office, Defense Healthcare Management Systems (PEO DHMS), Notice of Availability- Innovation Solutions
Solicitation number: HT003826SC001-03
Issued by: Defense Health Agency

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI · Apr 2, 2026

This is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) Log for IPR Notice #3 (HT003826SC001-03), issued by the Defense Health Agency's Program Executive Officer for Defense Health Management Systems (PEO DHMS). The document contains 79 questions submitted by prospective vendors between March 23-25, 2026, with government responses provided on April 2, 2026.

The solicitation seeks innovative solutions across three Areas of Interest (AOI): AOI 1 (Operations/Modernization Roadmap), AOI 2 (Target State Architecture), and AOI 3 (Governance/Performance Framework). The requirement has a period of performance not to exceed nine months and requires fixed-price contract structures. Key deliverables include an Enterprise Technology Strategy Roadmap, Technology Risk Management Framework, Technology Transformation Change Management Plan, and Annual Technology Report. Prospective vendors requested clarification on numerous topics including budget parameters, scope boundaries (portfolio definition, organizational boundaries), data availability, implementation expectations, teaming permissions, and technical requirements (FHIR adoption, legacy system decommissioning, system throughput, hosting environments, integration layers). The government provided minimal guidance on most technical and scope questions, consistently stating it seeks "innovative solutions" and will not provide additional constraints to preserve vendor flexibility, with approach discussions deferred to later negotiation phases. Notably, the government declined to disclose budget or Not-to-Exceed ceilings. Evaluation criteria and relative weighting are referenced in sections 11 and 12 of the Notice of Availability Innovation Solutions document, and pricing will not be evaluated until Phase 1b submission.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
IPR Notice attachment.pdf	PDF	Mar 20, 2026

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

QUESTION #

DATE

RECEIVED

Reference PROSPECTIVE VENDOR'S QUESTION DATE OF REPLY GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE

1 23-Mar-26

The IPR Notice states the Government seeks a "functioning and repeatable framework" that can be sustained by Government personnel long-term. Does the

Government expect the offeror to deliver a fully operational governance framework with trained personnel by the end of the 9-month period of performance, or is a documented, piloted framework with a transition and sustainment plan sufficient? 2-Apr-26

The Government is looking to industry to provide an innovative solution to support all defined outcomes. The solution delivered must be a solution that can be sustained by Government personnel. To ensure you have the freedom to think creatively without constraints, we will not be providing additional guidance. How your approach can be applied to our current situation will be discussed and negotiated in later phases of the process.

2 23-Mar-26

May offerors reference past performance from programs where the end customer cannot be named publicly (e.g., sensitive government clients), provided that a point of contact is available for confidential verification? 2-Apr-26

3 23-Mar-26

Is teaming permitted under this IPR Notice? If so, are there any restrictions on the number of team members or the role of subcontractors in proposal submissions? 2-Apr-26

4 23-Mar-26

Has PEO DHMS already defined any elements of its target state architecture, or is the offeror expected to develop the target state blueprint from the ground up in collaboration with Government stakeholders? 2-Apr-26

5 23-Mar-26

Does the Government have an established budget or Not-to-Exceed ceiling for this requirement, or a rough order of magnitude it can share to assist offerors in scoping and pricing their solutions appropriately? 2-Apr-26

This information will not be made available to industry by the Government at this time.

6 24-Mar-26

What is the scope of the “current technology portfolio” for AOI 1? Please clarify whether the portfolio includes applications, infrastructure, platforms, data/integration assets, cybersecurity tools, and related investments, or only a subset. The notice now asks for a “data-driven process to continuously optimize our current technology portfolio” and a “prioritized and time-phased plan for modernization and investment,” but it does not define the portfolio boundary.

2-Apr-26

7 24-Mar-26

What is the organizational boundary for the Target State Architecture? Should the future-state blueprint cover only PEO DHMS, or also subordinate program offices, shared DHA enterprise services, and external dependencies? The notice asks for a “clear and actionable technology blueprint that defines the

Government’s future state,” but does not specify the enterprise boundary.

2-Apr-26

8 24-Mar-26

How should Offerors interpret “alignment with the Government’s Target State

Architecture” in AOI 3? Is the intent architecture review gates, compliance scoring, exception management, investment approval criteria, or some other mechanism? AOI 3 now requires oversight for risk and alignment with the

Target State Architecture, which is a more specific requirement than the earlier notice.

2-Apr-26

9 24-Mar-26

What level of implementation is expected within the 9-month period of performance? Is the Government seeking design only, initial implementation, pilot execution, or full operational use of the roadmap, target-state architecture, and performance framework? The notice states the solution should be delivered within a period of performance not to exceed nine months.

2-Apr-26

10 24-Mar-26

What data sources are available to support the data-driven modernization roadmap? For example: project portfolio data, budget data, application inventories, governance records, performance dashboards, risk registers, CMDBs, or architecture repositories. Since AOI 1 explicitly calls for a data-driven process, data availability is central to solution design.

2-Apr-26

11 24-Mar-26

Should Offerors propose a technology-enabled platform, or is a process/methodology framework alone acceptable? The notice describes the desired solution as “a process, methodology, or technology-enabled framework,” so it would be helpful to understand whether one of those is preferred.

2-Apr-26

12 25-Mar-26

Could the Government please confirm whether the clarifications provided in Q&A Log HT003826SC001-01 regarding page limits, landscape orientation, and font requirements permitting any font type of at least 11-point also apply to Notice Number HT003826SC001-03?

2-Apr-26

Please see the Notice of Availablity section titled Submission and

Evaluation Phases. This section has not changed.

13 25-Mar-26

For the attachments titled Terms and Conditions and Organizational

Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan, which do not specify page limits, please confirm whether a general statement indicating that we are not subject to any additional commercial terms and conditions and that no OCI exists, if not applicable, would be sufficient? 2-Apr-26

If an Organizational Conflict of Interest does not exist and there are no

Terms and Conditions to relay, a general statement will suffice.

Q&A LOG (HT003826SC001-03)

14 25-Mar-26 Are there sample datasets or APIs available for prototyping? 2-Apr-26

15 25-Mar-26 What are the evaluation criteria for integrating new capabilities? 2-Apr-26 Please see the Notice of Availablity evaluation section.

16 25-Mar-26 What legacy systems are still scheduled for decommissioning? 2-Apr-26

17 25-Mar-26 What is the roadmap for FHIR adoption and API-first architecture? 2-Apr-26

18 25-Mar-26 What are the current system throughput and user concurrency levels? 2-Apr-26

19 25-Mar-26 Are there approved environments for AI/ML workloads within DHMS? 2-Apr-26

20 25-Mar-26

What are the primary data sources (clinical, administrative, logistics, external partners)? 2-Apr-26

21 25-Mar-26

What is the primary hosting environment (e.g., AWS GovCloud, DoD private cloud, hybrid)? 2-Apr-26

22 25-Mar-26

What are the authoritative systems within the DHMS ecosystem (e.g., MHS

GENESIS, legacy AHLTA/CHCS, ancillary systems)? 2-Apr-26

23 25-Mar-26

Is the current architecture fully transitioned to MHS GENESIS, or are hybrid/legacy systems still operational? 2-Apr-26

24 25-Mar-26

What are the primary integration layers (e.g., ESB, API gateway, middleware platform)? 2-Apr-26

25 25-Mar-26

Could the government confirm what are the core systems, platforms, and tools that are currently in use? 2-Apr-26

26 25-Mar-26

To ensure a seamless post-performance handoff, are there specific enterprise architecture, risk management, or portfolio visibility tools (e.g. Advana, ServiceNow, LeanIX) currently standardized at PEO DHMS that proposed frameworks should natively integrate with?

2-Apr-26

27 25-Mar-26

Can the Government please provide a list of in-scope systems?

2-Apr-26

28 25-Mar-26

Regarding AOI 2, what does the Government consider a complete deliverable for the Target State Architecture within the 9-month period of performance — a fully actionable blueprint with defined architectural artifacts, a framework and methodology that enables the Government to develop and maintain the blueprint as an ongoing capability, or some combination of both?

2-Apr-26

29 25-Mar-26

For the Performance Framework described in AOI 3, does the Government anticipate the solution includes active enforcement mechanisms at the program execution level, such as deployment gates or controls, or is that outside the intended scope?

2-Apr-26

30 25-Mar-26

Does the Government have a portfolio inventory or program registry that offerors should assume as the baseline for the Modernization Roadmap, or should proposed solutions include a methodology for portfolio discovery and baselining as part of the framework?

2-Apr-26

31 25-Mar-26

Can the Government provide additional detail on the evaluation criteria and relative weighting that will be applied to proposals submitted in response to IPR

Notice #3? 2-Apr-26

See section 11 and 12 of the HT003826SC001 Notice of Availability

Innovation Solutions document.

32 25-Mar-26

What program-level tools and reporting mechanisms are currently in use across the PEO DHMS portfolio that a proposed framework should be designed to complement or integrate with?

2-Apr-26

33 25-Mar-26

Section 13 of the CSO states that successful offerors 'shall be ineligible to perform, whether as a contractor, subcontractor, or team member, under any

Prime Mission Product Support contract that is in any way related to solutions provided under any contract awarded.' For purposes of IPR #3, please define the specific scope of contracts that would trigger this ineligibility. Specifically: (a) does ineligibility extend to existing or future EIDS PMO support contracts or Data

Exchange Services contracts; (b) does ineligibility extend to other PEO DHMS program offices (JOMIS, DHMSM) beyond the office that awards the IPR #3 contract; and (c) what is the temporal scope of the ineligibility (i.e., does it expire upon contract completion, (9) months, or remain in effect indefinitely)? 2-Apr-26

If an Organizational Conflict of Interest exists and there is not an adequate

Mitigation Plan, this could prevent participation in current and/or future requirements with PEO DHMS.

34 25-Mar-26

The CSO requires fixed-price type contracts based on delivery of tangible results.

For Phase 1b pricing, please clarify: (a) may offerors propose a milestone-based payment schedule tied to their own defined deliverables and outcomes, or will the Government provide a required CLIN or milestone structure; (b) may offerors propose options or additional CLINs beyond the base effort to address scope expansion within the nine-month period of performance; and (c) for Factor 2 evaluation, which requires outcomes 'clearly linked to the proposed pricing structure,' will the Government evaluate this linkage in Phase 1a prior to receiving a price proposal, or only after Phase 1b submission? 2-Apr-26

Prices will not be considered until Phase 1b per the HT003826SC001 Notice of Availability Innovation Solutions document.

35 25-Mar-26

IPR #3 identifies three Areas of Interest: AOI 1 (Operations/Modernization

Roadmap), AOI 2 (Strategy/Target State Architecture), and AOI 3

(Governance/Performance Framework). Please confirm: (a) may a single proposal address all three AOIs within the 15-slide limit, or must offerors submit separate proposals for each AOI; (b) if a single proposal may address multiple AOIs, will the

Government evaluate it as a single integrated solution or score each AOI independently; and (c) may the Government make a partial award covering only a subset of the AOIs proposed? 2-Apr-26

See section 11 and 12 of the HT003826SC001 Notice of Availability

Innovation Solutions document. The Government does not plan to make a partial award at this time.

36 25-Mar-26 Objective

Please explain the specific gaps or shortcomings DHMS observed in CSO 2 responses that CSO 3 is intended to address? 2-Apr-26

The Government redefined the outcomes.

37 25-Mar-26

Objective

How does DHMS currently define “Enterprise Architecture” for the purposes of this IPR (e.g., business, data, application, technology layers; reference vs. solution architecture)?

2-Apr-26

38 25-Mar-26

Objective / AOI 1

IPR States, "Creates a data‑driven roadmap to optimize the current portfolio".

Does DHMS have an existing EA baseline (artifacts, standards, tools, or frameworks) that offerors should assume as the starting point, or should offerors propose both the baseline assessment approach and the future-state architecture?

2-Apr-26

39 25-Mar-26

Objective / Overall Is DHMS expecting alignment with a specific EA framework (e.g., DoDAF, FEAF, TOGAF), or is the choice of framework left to the offeror?

2-Apr-26

40 25-Mar-26

AOI 1

Does DHMS expect the modernization roadmap to include cost, schedule, and risk trade-offs, or is prioritization based primarily on strategic alignment and architectural fit

2-Apr-26

41 25-Mar-26

AOI 1

What constitutes the “current technology portfolio” for this IPR (e.g., applications only, infrastructure, data platforms, programs, or all technology investments)?

2-Apr-26

42 25-Mar-26

AOI 3

How does DHMS envision the “Performance Framework” being used operationally? Is the focus on decision support, compliance enforcement, reporting, or all of the above?

2-Apr-26

43 25-Mar-26

Deliverables

Should deliverables such as the Enterprise Technology Strategy Roadmap and

Annual Technology Report be recast specifically through an Enterprise

Architecture lens, or does DHMS expect them to remain broader in scope?

2-Apr-26

44 25-Mar-26

Objective / Overall

What types of existing authoritative data sources (e.g., application inventories, cost data, performance metrics) are currently available to support a data-driven modernization roadmap and what tools are currently in use to capture this data?

2-Apr-26

45 25-Mar-26

AOI 2

Does the Government envision the Target State Architecture as primarily:

Principles and reference architectures, or

Prescriptive standards and constraints for solution delivery?

2-Apr-26

48 25-Mar-26

Overall

What Enterprise Architecture artifacts currently exist (e.g., current-state diagrams, standards, reference architectures), and how current and authoritative are they?

2-Apr-26

49 25-Mar-26

Can the Government clarify whether it expects a conceptual, repeatable framework, an operational/software-enabled capability (e.g., dashboards, workflows, data models), or an integrated solution combining both? 2-Apr-26

50 25-Mar-26

Can the Government clarify the primary problem this requirement is intended to solve (e.g., lack of portfolio visibility, misalignment of investments, execution risk, or decision latency) and how success will be measured at the enterprise level? 2-Apr-26

51 25-Mar-26

For the Target State Architecture, does the Government expect a full enterprise architecture, a technology-focused architecture, or a mission-aligned reference architecture tailored to DHMS, or a combination/blended of the above? 2-Apr-26

52 25-Mar-26

Should the Target State Architecture align with a specific EA standard (e.g., DoDAF, TOGAF, FEAF), or may the offeror propose the most appropriate framework aligned to DHMS and DoD guidance? 2-Apr-26

53 25-Mar-26

Can the Government clarify what data sources will be made available (e.g., system inventories, cost, performance, cybersecurity, technical debt), and whether data access constraints should be assumed? 2-Apr-26

54 25-Mar-26

Does the Government expect the solution to integrate with existing DHMS tools and systems (e.g., EA repositories, portfolio tools, RMF, DevSecOps), or should it be designed to operate independently if integration points are limited?For the

Performance Framework, should the governance model include portfolio-level

KPIs, project-level execution metrics, and risk-based decision gates, and should it integrate with existing DHMS governance structures? 2-Apr-26

55 25-Mar-26

Can the Government confirm whether the listed deliverables (e.g., roadmap, risk framework, annual report) are mandatory or illustrative, and whether deliverables should be provided as static documents, interactive artifacts, or both? 2-Apr-26

56 25-Mar-26

By the end of the 9-month period of performance, does the Government expect a conceptual model, pilot-ready framework, or an operational capability with demonstrated use? 2-Apr-26

57 25-Mar-26

Can the Government clarify evaluation priorities and weighting across the AOIs, particularly how it will balance innovation, feasibility, speed-to-value, and sustainment viability? 2-Apr-26

See section 11 and 12 of the HT003826SC001 Notice of Availability

Innovation Solutions document.

58 25-Mar-26

Should the proposed governance model integrate with existing DHMS governance bodies and processes, or should the offeror propose a new governance construct if it better supports the Target State Architecture? 2-Apr-26

59 25-Mar-26

The IPR states that proposals must follow the format and guidelines specified in

“CSO Section 12.” We were unable to locate this section or corresponding format guidance in the CSO. Can the Government clarify the applicable reference and provide any associated proposal format guidance? 2-Apr-26

Please see the Notice of Availablity document attached to the CSO sam.gov post. In the document the referenced section is titled Submission and

Evaluation Phases.

60 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, AOI 1

Description

IPR Notice #3, AOI 1 describes a data-driven process to continuously optimize the current technology portfolio. How many discrete programs, systems, or technology investments currently reside in the PEO DHMS portfolio that fall within scope of the Modernization Roadmap?

2-Apr-26

61 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, AOI 1

Description

IPR Notice #3, AOI 1 requires a data-driven process. What data sources, portfolio management systems, or technology inventory tools does PEO DHMS currently use that would feed this process? Will the contractor have access to these systems, and under what data handling and classification requirements?

2-Apr-26

62 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, AOI 2

Description

IPR Notice #3, AOI 2 requires a clear and actionable technology blueprint defining the government future state. Does the government require the Target State

Architecture to conform to a specific framework standard such as DODAF, TOGAF, or the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework, or will commercially developed architectural frameworks be evaluated on equal footing?

2-Apr-26

63 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, AOI 3

Description

IPR Notice #3, AOI 3 requires a Performance Framework ensuring on-time, on-budget project execution. Does this framework apply to all programs within the

PEO DHMS portfolio, a defined subset, or only to contracts awarded under this

CSO?

2-Apr-26

64 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, AOI 3

Description

IPR Notice #3, AOI 3 requires a Performance Framework aligned with the Target

State Architecture. Does PEO DHMS currently have a governance board, investment review process, or technology decision-making body that the

Performance Framework must integrate with, or is the offeror expected to design the governance structure from scratch?

2-Apr-26

65 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, Deliverables

Para, Lines 1-5

IPR Notice #3 lists four anticipated deliverables: Enterprise Technology Strategy

Roadmap, Technology Risk Management Framework, Technology Transformation

Change Management Plan, and Annual Technology Report. Are these the minimum required deliverables, or illustrative examples? Will proposals that reframe or substitute these deliverables be evaluated on equal footing?

2-Apr-26

66 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, Deliverables

Para

IPR Notice #3 lists the Annual Technology Report as an anticipated deliverable.

Given the 9-month period of performance, does the government expect one

Annual Technology Report delivered within the period, or is this a sustainment deliverable the government will produce independently after contract completion?

2-Apr-26

67 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, PoP Para

IPR Notice #3 states the period of performance shall not exceed 9 months. Does the government expect all three AOI deliverables to reach final acceptance within the 9-month period, or will the government consider a phased approach where foundational deliverables are completed first and later deliverables are baselined for government sustainment?

2-Apr-26

68 25-Mar-26

IPR Notice #3, PoP Para

IPR Notice #3 does not specify interim milestone deliverables within the 9-month period. Is the offeror free to propose its own phased delivery schedule, or does the government have internal milestone requirements - such as quarterly reviews, executive briefings, or go/no-go decision points - that the schedule must accommodate?

2-Apr-26

69 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 7, Para 1-2

CSO Section 7 states that organizational changes have highlighted critical capability gaps. Does PEO DHMS currently have an existing enterprise architecture function, documented EA artifacts, or an EA tool suite in place, or is this requirement starting from a clean slate? The answer determines whether the solution must assess and build on existing assets or design the capability from scratch.

2-Apr-26

70 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 7, Para 1

CSO Section 7 references the need to bridge the gap left by experienced personnel. Approximately how many EA or strategic technology planning positions have been vacated, and at what organizational level - program office, portfolio, or enterprise?

2-Apr-26

71 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 8, Para 2

CSO Section 8 states the solution must be structured for full adoption and sustainment by government personnel. Does the government expect the contractor to recommend, procure, or implement specific tooling or software platforms as part of the solution, or must the solution operate within the government's existing tooling and infrastructure?

2-Apr-26

72 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 10(4)

CSO Section 10(4) requires a comprehensive transition plan ensuring continuity of operations and long-term sustainment. Will dedicated government personnel be available to participate in solution delivery during the 9-month period of performance, or will the contractor operate largely independently with periodic government review?

2-Apr-26

73 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 10(4)

CSO Section 10(4) requires a comprehensive transition plan. How many government FTEs are designated to operate and sustain the framework after delivery, and what is their current proficiency level in enterprise architecture, data analytics, and technology portfolio management?

2-Apr-26

74 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 11, Threshold Para;

CSO Sec. 7, Para 2; DFARS

212.7001

CSO Section 7 defines innovative under DFARS 212.7001 as a new technology, process, or method, or a new application of an existing one as of submission date.

Will the government evaluate the innovation claim against the defense health EA domain specifically, or against the broader federal government EA market? This distinction determines whether a commercially proven but DoD-novel framework satisfies the threshold.

2-Apr-26

75 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 11, Factor 1

CSO Section 11, Factor 1 states the proposed solution must be creative and forward-thinking, and that solutions not representing a meaningful improvement will be ineligible for award. Can the government describe what it considers the current status quo for enterprise architecture in the PEO DHMS context, so offerors can clearly differentiate against it?

2-Apr-26

76 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 11, Factor 2

CSO Section 11, Factor 2 requires specific, measurable outcomes that define success and clearly links these outcomes to the proposed pricing structure. Will the government evaluate outcomes at the AOI level, the individual deliverable level, or both? 2-Apr-26

See the Evaluation section of the Notice of Availability. Prices will not be considered until Phase 1b per the HT003826SC001 Notice of Availability

Innovation Solutions document.

77 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 12b, Phase 1b Para

CSO Section 12b states the government is only authorized to make fixed-priced contracts. Will the government accept a milestone-based payment structure where each payment is triggered by formal acceptance of a specific deliverable, or does the government prefer a different fixed-price approach such as equal monthly installments?

2-Apr-26

78 25-Mar-26

CSO Sec. 12b; CSO Sec. 11, Factor 2

CSO Section 12b states pricing details will be provided at Phase 1b. Will the government require a single fully loaded fixed price, or will it accept a deliverable-based structure where each AOI is priced as a separate line item with its own acceptance criteria? 2-Apr-26

Prices will not be considered until Phase 1b per the HT003826SC001 Notice of…

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Aug 13, 2026.