Round_2_(43-85)_Q As_ICODES-V7_(18_Dec_14).pdf

RFP HTC711-14-R-D006

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS (43-85)

43. RFP, Section L-9, Page 46, Para. B Offerors are explicitly directed not to include names of proposed personnel in the Staffing Approach volume. Can names of key personnel (such as the program manager) be included in Volume 2, Technical Approach?

Answer: Names of key personnel should not be included in the Technical Proposal.

44. RFP, Section L-9, Page 49, Para. D Please provide a copy of Attachment 14 referenced in Section L-9(d).

Answer: Please reference Amendment 0002 to the RFP.

45. PWS, Section 1.1, Page 4 The Government has not provided any documentation or data regarding ICDM software. What data (source code, data models, metadata) and documentation will be available for the ICDM software?

Anwer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Questions 37 and 38.

46. PWS, Section 1.1, Page 4 In accordance with the PWS, the Government states “Some parts of the software, specifically Integrated Cooperative Decision-Making (ICDM), are claimed to be proprietary to Tapestry Solutions thereby limiting the Government’s ability to freely use, disclose, or modify the software.” In order to provide a fair and reasonable playing field for all offerors, can the Government you provide additional information and details on specifically what software is considered proprietary and what specifically this proprietary code is used for within the ICODES application? Moreover, are requirements, data models, other documentation available and can you the Government provide this information to all offerors?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Questions 11 and 22.

47. PWS, Section 1.1, Page 4 Will all offerors, including the incumbent assuming they bid, be evaluated on the approach and development of replacing the proprietary code? It would provide the incumbent an unfair competitive advantage if the incumbent elects to offer the proprietary code to the government via a licensing agreement vs. replacing the code in its entirety. Perhaps the government would consider leveling the competition by assigning a plug number for the replacement of the proprietary code and assessing the technical approach for replacing the code as acceptable or unacceptable.

Answer: All offerors will be evaluated in accordance with Section M of the RFP.

48. PWS, Section 1.1, Page 4 Could the government provide a functional description of the ICODES proprietary code?

Answer: The Government does not have a functional description of the ICODES proprietary code as it is a technical solution transparent to the functional user. The technical description is as follows: ICDM is an application development framework and toolkit for decision-support systems incorporating software agents that collaborate with each other and human users to monitor changes (i.e. events) in the state of problem situations by generating and evaluating alternative plans and alerts users to immediate and developing resource shortages, failures, threats and similar adverse conditions. The ICDM Toolkit is designed to support the machine generation of significant portions of the both the server and client side code of an application.

This is largely accomplished with scripts that automatically build an application engine by integrating the Toolkit components with ontological properties derived from the internal information model. The ICDM-based application consist of loosely coupled, generic services (e.g., subscription, query, persistence, agent engine), which in combination with internal domain-specific information model are capable of satisfying the functional requirements of the application.

49. PWS, Section 1.3.2.1 Can you provide source-code base, system requirements and design documents, Extensible Mark-up Language schemas/Extensible Schema Definition files, diagrams, interface and service agreements for the proprietary ICDM software? The system functionality reflected in Appendix E and Appendix F does not address the proprietary ICDM module.

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Questions 22 and 38.

50. PWS, Section 1.3.3, Page 10 Will the current incumbent be responsible for maintaining the proprietary ICDM software until the ICDM component is replaced with non proprietary code?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 23.

51. PWS, Page 1 Many of the Architectural documents provided in the solicitation package include documents ranging in dates from 2006 and 2009. Are offerors to assume these documents reflect the current state of the ICODES system? Has the gov't validated currency of these documents? If these documents are not current, will updated documentation be provided?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 6.

52. We understand that SDDC has an extensive Enterprise Architecture including the Operational (OV), Systems (SV), Standards (StdV), Capabilities (CV), and Services (SvcV) viewpoints and can be separated by system, in this case; specifically ICODES.

You have provided some of this information but we are specifically interested in the following:

a. OV- OV-5a: Operational Activity Decomposition Tree, OV-5b: Operational Activity Model, OV-6a: Operational Rules Model, OV-6b: State Transition Description, OV-6c: Event-Trace Description

b. CV - CV-4: Capability Dependencies, CV-5: Capability to Organizational Development Mapping, CV-6: Capability to Operational Activities Mapping, CV-7: Capability to Services Mapping

c. SV - SV-4 Systems Functionality Description, SV-5a Operational Activity to Systems Function Traceability Matrix, SV-5b Operational Activity to Systems Traceability Matrix, SV- 10a Systems Rules Model, SV-10b Systems State Transition Description, SV-10c Systems Event-Trace Description

d. StdV - StdV-1 Standards Profile

e. SvcV - SvcV-3a Systems-Services Matrix, SvcV-3b Services-Services Matrix, SvcV-4 Services Functionality Description, and SvcV-5 Operational Activity to Services Traceability Matrix

Could you provide this additional information? This information is required to determine work effort and required capabilities.

Answer: The documents can be requested in accordance with Attachment 12 of the RFP.

53. Labor Rates Price Proposal Breakout, Page 1 Instructions at the bottom of Attachment 5 state we're to use labor categories "on the following sheet". Attachment 4 identifies "Generic Labor Category Descriptions". Are those the categories we need to provide? Can we add labor categories?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 5.

54. RFP, Section L-6, Page 44, Volume 4 Past Performance Volume 4 page count is limited to 2 pages per reference. The Past Performance Reference Sheet is already 3 pages. Do you mean 2 pages per "Performance Areas" for a not to exceed 6 pages per reference? Does the page count limit only apply to Section 1?

Answer: Please reference Amendment 0002 to the RFP.

55. RFP, Section L-6, Page 44, Section 5 Price Proposal The table indicates that the Price Proposal includes Attachment 5. Where should the B Tables be included?

Answer: Section B consists of the CLINS located on pages 2 – 10 of the RFP.

56. RFP, Section L-9, Page 44, Paragraph C The RFP states, "Offerors should provide a clear explanation of the relevancy of each example submitted." Is it acceptable to include a one page introduction to Volume 4 and an additional one page introduction for each reference to address this requirement? Would the government consider expanding the page count limit to allow for 4 additional pages to address these introduction sections?

Answer: Offerors shall explain the relevancy in the area provided in Attachment 6. The Government will provide an updated Amendment to clarify the requirement.

57. RFP, Section L-9, Page 49, Paragraph E, 1 The RFP states, "Development Cost CLIN 0001 (CPFF)– Offerors shall identify the period of performance for this CLIN based upon its unique technical approach. The ICODES V7 development effort must be completed and fully deployed no later than (NLT) 30 September 2016. NOTE: The Government has limited Development Funding in the amount of approximately $3,000,000.00."

RFP, Section L-9, Page 50, Paragraph E, 13 Attachment 5 covers both CLIN 0001 (development) & CLINs x002 (sustainment). What information is required to be provided for FFP CLIN x002?

Answer: Please reference Amendment 0002 to the RFP. Attachment 5 does not apply to CLINs X002. Attachment 5 is for CLINs X005 (enhancements during the sustainment periods [labor hour]) and Attachment 5a is for CLIN 0001 (ICODES V7 development [cost]).

58. RFP, Section L-9, Page 50, Paragraph E, 5 The RFP states, "Government established NTE amounts" for LH CLINs 2005, 3005, & 4005.

Section B has 2 lines for those CLINs "TOT ESTIMATED PRICE" & "CEILING PRICE". Is it the Government's intention that the offeror propose a total estimated price for each and the provided NTE amount as the "Ceiling Price"?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 12(a).

59. RFP, Solicitation, Offer and Award, Page1, Para 9 The amount of documentation that needs to be reviewed by all non-incumbent offerors is extensive. Would the government consider extending the proposal due date until January 19, 2014?

Answer: The Government extended the RFP due date as identified in Amendment 2.

60. RFP, Section L-9, Page 47-48, Para C RFP Instructions state to provide a Point of contact for each of the performance areas (a), (b) and (c) listed at the bottom of page 47 and the top of page 48. Is it the Government’s intent that offerors provide one and only one point of contact for each performance area? Or, may we submit 2 Attachment 6 pages for each performance area, understanding that the total number of pages may not exceed 6? i.e. is the following an acceptable response:

Performance Area (a) Contract 1 Attachment 6 (1 page) Contract 2 Attachment 6 (1 page)

Performance Area (b) Contract 2 Attachment 6 (1 page)

Contract 3 Attachment 6 (1 page)

Performance Area (c) Contract 1 Attachment 6 (1 page) Contract 3 Attachment 6 (1 page)

Answer: Allowable past performance references were increased from 3 to 5. Offers must provide one (1) reference for each of the contracts identified in Attachment 7 for a maximum of five (5) references. Offerors must complete the performance area(s), in Attachment 6, applicable to the individual reference identified in Attachment 7. This means offerors may submit up to a maximum of three (3) Past Performance Reference Sheets per reference. The change will be reflected in the next Amendment.

61. RFP, Section: L-6, Page: 44, Paragraph: Table Volume 1, Section 2 – is identified as needing an OCI Mitigation Plan. Under Section L-5 subsection (c) OCI is referenced back to FAR Subpart 9.5. In FAR 9.5, a contractor can provide an OCI certification or a Mitigation plan. Please confirm if the Government is requesting an OCI Mitigation Plan or the OCI certification?

Answer: An OCI Mitigation Plan in accordance with Section L-5(c) of the RFP.

62. RFP

Will you be proving Attachment 14 as referenced in the solicitation?

Answer: Attachment 14 was provided with Amendment 0002.

63. The labor categories provided does not include any database administration or system administration roles so please let us know who handles these responsibilities currently?

a. Is it done as a part of another contract?

b. Or can we add these labor categories to handle those tasks or assign the existing labor categories to handle these functions?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 5. The Government database servers are managed and administered under another contract.

64. The PWS indicates that these tasks are handled by a different contract. Can you please identify the contract associate with it? Is it the CCE Contract? The current Enterprise hardware and software environments (Production, Staging, Testing, and Training) are hosted within SDDCs Common Computing Environment (CCE). Another SDDC team, comprised of system and database administrators, manages the CCE. The CCE is virtualized in order for SDDC systems to share resources for the Command.

Answer: Please clarify the task areas you are referencing as some environments are handled by the CCE contract.

65. Can government share some historical workload on this project? This will help us understand the sustainment part so that we can estimate for development and enhancement efforts.

Answer: There are estimates in the PWS which are based on historical information.

66. We understand that the source code will not be available for the proprietary ICDM modules.

But as the new contract begins, will this proprietary code be available in byte code/binary form?

So the application can continue to run in production while we phase out the proprietary code over the course of time? Will it be available to the developers to run the application locally during the migration process?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Questions 23 and 39.

67. Questions on Network diagram / Architecture diagram that is part of the documentation

a) What do the multiple boxes for Single Load Planner (SLP) in Desktop, Enterprise and Satellite version mean? These boxes appear twice for Desktop and thrice for Enterprise.

Answer: The multiple boxes reflect the scalability of the underlying components realized in the form of virtual servers or instances that support and make up the Single Load Planning (SLP) capability as provided by ICODES and not to be interpreted or constrained by the actual number of boxes depicted.

b) Diagram shows Master Virtual Server (MAS). What kind of virtual server is this?

Answer: Windows Server 2008.

c) Diagram shows Application Server (APP). Is this the Tomcat Application Server within which the iCodes applications such as CIW run? Why is this shown as a separate box?

Answer: It is shown separately because the diagram is a logical representation of the architecture and not physical. The Application Server is depicted separately to illustrate the multi-tiered approach employed.

d) Why are four database symbols shown in the various editions? Are they four separate database instances or four different schemas within a single database instance?

Answer: No, the multiple database instances represent the scalable nature of the existing architecture. There are multiple schemas scaled that are replicated across database instances.

68. Past Performance reference sheet has 3 pages but the instructions provided limits the references to two pages. Please explain whether government would like to see not more than 2 areas in each performance to fit the page limit.

Answer: Please reference Amendment 0002 to the RFP.

69. We are finalizing our Staffing Matrix (Attachment 4) and noticed that Configuration Manager is not included in the list of Labor Categories. Can the Government provide an updated Matrix to include a Configuration Manager LC, or should we propose those hours under a different LC (i.e., Software Engineer)? Also, while we are on the subject of Attachment 4, will the Government accept modified Labor Category descriptions, level of experience and education, or should we stick to the generic descriptions included?

Answer: Please reference Round 1 Q&A, Question 5.

70. The title of Subtask 4 says “Employment Status Report”, but the text in the PWS paragraph that follows calls it an “Employee Status Report.” A small difference, but can you please clarify which is correct?

Answer: Employment Status Report is correct.

71. As we are working on our proposal, we realized that this project was done by CDM in the past that was part of Caltech so we would like to know if labor rates can include Student rates?

Also, the recent amendment does not provide any answers on software license related to ICDM.

It is very important that these modules are available for sustainment and during development till the migration is accomplished.

Answer: Provide labor rates associated with the labor categories identified in Attachment 4.

72. PWS, Section 1.3.2, Page 8 For Task Area 2, Develop System Functionality, what Hardware and Software will be provided to the contractor? Will a Development environment be provided via GFE or does the contractor need to establish the Development environment and presumably charge costs to the Government via ODCs?

Answer: (1) The government will provide GFE as identified in Section 4.0 of the PWS. (2) No GFE will be furnished to establish a development environment, see: Paragraph 1.3.3.3.1 Contractor Development Environment in the PWS.

73. PWS, Section 1.3.2, Page 8 To effectively perform the Analysis/Design sub task as well as perform testing to ensure new development software provides the same results as the current ICODES software, access to the up-to-date baseline code will be required. Will remote access be provided or will the Contractor be required to establish a mirror environment at their site?

Answer: The Government cannot provide the bidding contractors with a working copy of ICODES. The Enterprise Configuration of ICODES Version 6 is available to all CAC-holders, upon access application approval, for Government Purposes. If the offeror does not have CAC access, the offeror may request a live Department of Defense Connect Online (DCO) demonstration.

74. PWS, Section 1.3.3.3.1, Page 14 The PWS states "The contractor shall provide a controlled and restricted facility to build, store and maintain the development network environment. The contractor’s development environment shall contain all developmental products and services, to include databases necessary to conduct development activities within the environment. The contractor’s development environment shall be locked down IAW Defense Information System Agency (DISA) STIGs and remain fully patched. The contractor will perform monthly scanning to check for patch compliance and will provide a patch compliance report to the programs IA Security Officer."

Will the development Hardware and Software be provided as GFE? If not, how should establishment of this Development environment be priced and provided to the government as part of the proposal (e.g. no ODC CLIN exists that could be used to cover these expenses)

Answer: The government will not provide GFE to establish the development environment.

Development must be priced under CLIN 0001.

75. RFQ Amendment 2, Section L-9 (e), Page 18, Para 13 Item 13. in the Cost/Price Proposal section states: "13. Offerors are required to propose labor categories and hourly labor rates (exclusive of fees) for all labor categories that will or could be utilized for performance of tasks under this task order contract." Are we to use Attachment 5 to identify all labor categories not just those labor categories and rates needed to support CLINS 1005, 2005, 3005, and 4005 as stated in items #4 and 5 in the same section?

Answer: Offerers shall identify all the labor categories (from Attachment 4) that will be utilized during development in Attachment 5a. Offerors shall identify all the labor categories (from Attachment 4) that will be utilized during sustainment in Attachment 5.

76. Round 1 Q&A, Page 2, Question 10.d (in reference to RFP section L, Page 43-45 Para L-6) The Q&A document answers question 10.d with this statement: "The number of past performance references for the prime offeror will remain at three (3). " but the RFP Section L-9 (c ) states: "Offerors shall provide no more than 3 examples…" A.) RFP Amendment 1 (dated 10 Dec 2014) does not restrict the past performance references to the Prime Offeror but yet the Q&A states that the number of past performances for the PRIME offerer will remain at 3. Would the Government please verify that the three requested past performance references are not restricted to just the Prime Offeror.

B.) If we are proposing a team of 2 subcontractors, are we able to submit (3) References from the PRIME, and then (4), 2 EACH from our Subs?

Answer: The requested past performance references are not restricted to just the Prime Offeror.

Please reference Question and Answer #61 above.

77. RFP Amendment 2

Will the Government be releasing a 3rd amendment that incorporates the changes from Amend 2 with the original RFP so we can include the required pricing for all CLINS? As the Amend stands right now, we will need to incorporate some of the CLIN sections from the original Solicitation.

Answer: The Government will provide a conformed copy of the RFP after completing the next amendment.

78. Round 1 Q&A, Page 5, Question 18, Answer A-1 Government answer states: "The Prototype of SLP, CE and TARGET is the minimum functionality requested for testing at the end of the Base Period, which is to be no later than 30 Sep 2015." Should this actually reflect 30 SEP 2016 (or later date)?

Answer: No. September 30, 2015 is the correct date.

79. PWS, Section: 2.0, Page: 46, Paragraph 2, Paragraph: 2 in Section 2.0 Is it the Government’s intent to permit technical solutions that incorporate freely downloadable 3rd party components which may be subject to no-cost license dependencies (Examples: Java Standard Edition Development Kit, which is subject to the Oracle Binary Code License Agreement, other components licensed under Apache Software License)?

Answer: Please reference question 62 above.

80. Round 1 Q&A Section: Q-16, Page: 4 The governments answer stated that they expect fully burden labor rates which would include profit or fee. In Amendment 0002 page 18 (4) the government lined out the phrase “…Fully burden (with profit/fee)…” Please confirm this is a oversight and that Attachment 4 tab titled Labor Category & Rates (5) are to include profit/fee in the fully burden rates.

Answer: “The fully burdened” was lined out in error and will be corrected. Only “(with profit/fee)” should be lined out because “fully burdened” includes more than profit/fee. This will be reflected in the next amendment.

81. Round 1 Q&A, Section: Q-12, Page: 3 The governments answer is that all Offerors are to use the NTE values as provided with each applicable CLIN for bid purposes. Please confirm Offerors are only pricing CLIN 0001, 0002, 0006, 0007, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002.

Answer: Offerors are to price the CLINs applicable to their unique approach for accomplishing the requirements. CLINs 0002 and 1002 are Optional based on the offeror’s unique approach for accomplishing the requirements.

82. Round 1 Q&A, Section: Q-8, Page, Section L-9 (d) and Section M-2, Factor 4, Subfactor 2- Small Business Utilization Plan Question: The government answer stated that the “The utilization plan submitted by Small Businesses will be evaluated as Stated in Section M-2, Factor 4, Subfactor 2 of the RFP”. Please confirm this is an oversight and that the utilization plan should be submitted by Large Businesses and will be evaluated as stated in Section M-2, Factor 4, and Subfactor 2 of the RFP for Large Businesses.

Answer: As stated in Sections L-9 and M-2, Factor 4, Subfactor 1 applies to Large businesses only. Large businesses shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Subfactor 2 applies to Small businesses only. Small businesses shall submit a Small Business Utilization Plan.

83. Round 1 Q&A, Section: Q-13, Page, RFP Section L-8 , Page 48, Para (d) The government answer stated that “While small business need only submit an acceptable utilization plan for proposal evaluation, large business must submit an acceptable subcontracting plan with goals they set for themselves”. Per FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns is for Large Businesses. Could you please clarify if Small Businesses are to submit a participation plan as referenced by FAR Part 15?

Answer: please reference question 84 above.

84.Could you please provide date and time Government will be able to accept early proposals prior to 5 January 2015?

Answer: The Government posted the following on Fed Biz Ops:

**Note: Early Hand delivery of proposals will be accepted as follows:

- 29 Dec 2014 (0700-1500 CT) Contact POC’s are Ms Kendra Taylor, 618-220-6729 or Ms Beth Ruckwardt, 618-220-7054.

- 30 Dec 2014 (0700-1500 CT) Contact POC’s are Ms Linda Murphy, 618-220-7101 or Ms Kendra Taylor, 618-220-6729 or Ms Beth Ruckwardt, 618-220-7054.

**Proposal Due Date remains 2:00 PM (CT), Monday, 5 Jan 2015

85. RFP, Section M-2, Page 57, Factor 5 - Cost Price. Based on the current method for establishing the Total Evaluated Price (TEP), it appears that any vendor who can provide a development solution earlier than the set milestones will be at a cost disadvantage because they will potentially incur a higher total sustainment cost (CLINS 0002, 1002, 0005, 1005) since the sustainment requirements would start earlier. How will the Government ensure equitable price evaluation for vendors who deliver early?

Answer: In accordance with Section M of the RFP, the Government will select the best offer based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation criteria listed in the RFP. The RFP states that the government may assign strengths if an aspect of an offeror's proposal has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance. In addition, Section M of the RFP states that award may be made to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Source Selection Authority reasonably determines that the benefits provided by a higher priced offeror outweigh the price difference.