PM_LOG-FIN_CFS-001_IndustryDay_Question_Answers_2026_06_19_1200hrs.pdf

PM LOG-FIN Call For Solutions-001 Industry Day +48hrs Questions and Answers

NOTICES to Companies:

1. The Call For Solutions is the approved Solicitation that provides Companies the Instructions and Evaluation Criteria for consideration before any submission of a Solution Brief.

2. Nothing in the Industry Day presentation nor the responses below take precedence over the written Solicitation.

3. The Questions & Answers below are not listed in the order as presented at Industry Day as some are grouped by similar topics.

Q # From the Industry Event Registration Page: "Use this space to submit any questions you would like us to answer live during the Q&A session. (Questions answered will be at the Government's discretion.)"

Q) Given the value of the information expected to be shared at Industry Day, we respectfully request a two-week extension to the submittal deadline, moving it from June 30 to July 14.

A) The response deadline remains as posted on SAM.gov and Page 1 of the CFS Amendment 01. No change.

Q) We would greatly appreciate an extension through post-Fourth of July holidays (July 7 or 8, 2026) to allow adequate time to complete a thorough and high-quality response aligned with PM LOG-FIN's mission objectives.

A) No change.

Q) Will the government intend to use any existing software licensing for this CFS?

A) Yes. The government will utilize existing licenses and agreements where applicable and available. Companies must account for the cost of using proposed Solution Licenses within the ROM. Ref CFS Page 4, Section 5. GENERAL SUBMISSION NOTES - Companies that currently hold an Enterprise Agreement (EA)/Enterprise Contract (EC) with the Army or DoW are required to identify and propose IAW those existing agreements . Companies that do not hold licenses for their proposed solution must approach the Software Vendor(s) to get the cost/price information for the proposed software licenses for the ROM requirement.

Q) Are considerations for pre-built solutions weighted equally in comparing LC/NC submissions for each AOI?

A) The CFS Phase 1 Evaluation Criteria does not include weights. Please see CFS page 8, Evaluation Criteria: a. Technical Merit to align your response.

Q) Would the government please clarify the rationale/selection criteria for the approved development platforms?

A) Yes. See CFS Amendment 01, Page 12, Appendix B: References, Item #10 Army Low-Code/No-Code Development Guidance - 31 July 2025, which provides a link to the Army CIO Policy, where at Page 2, Paragraph 7. "Policy", lists the steps for Functional Owner or Command identification and nomination, Army Enterprise Cloud Management Agency (ECMA) technical assessment and recommendation and then the CIO Determination.

Q) What is the process to be included in the Approved Development Platforms for the Army?

A) The Army process for the CIO Determination is documented in CFS Amendment 01, Page 12, Appendix B: References, Item #10 Army Low-Code/No-Code Development Guidance - 31 July 2025.

Q) What selection criteria was used to determine the approved platform and data service lists? (i.e., why were some omitted?)

A) The Army process for the CIO Determination is documented in CFS Amendment 01, Page 12, Appendix B: References, Item #10 Army Low-Code/No-Code Development Guidance - 31 July 2025.

Q) Why is Palantir and Vantage listed as separate ASIC platforms?

A) The separate references to Palantir and Army Vantage as listed in the CFS tables at "Appendix C: Approved Product List (APL) " reflect the Table Headings: a) that Army Vantage is sustained by the Army Software Innovation Center (ASIC) and separately b) that Palantir is also an approved development platform. For more information, see Appendix B: References, # 10.

Army Low-Code/No-Code Development Guidance - 31 July 2025.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 1 of 12

Q) Is SAP considered an approved OCIO landing zone?

A) The CFS does not address or mention "OCIO landing zone". SAP is a "CIO Approved Development Platforms". Within the CFS, SAP is called out five times with the first in Section 1, page 2, "...transformative modernization of the Army’s five SAP-based Defense Business Systems" , and page 2, last sentence, stating: "...development is restricted to the following approved platforms: ...SAP... " Additional reference are in the CFS "Appendix A: Current Army ERP Systems Description and scope of the five Army SAP ERP systems... " and Appendix C: Approved Products List (APL), 2nd Table, "CIO Approved Development Platforms" Item "7. SAP"

10 & 11

We now see that the 6/18/26 Amendment 01 includes the statement of:

“The Army accepts solutions built on platforms listed in Appendix C and may also consider alternative platforms that provide a truly transformative capability with a compelling business case and a realistic plan for approval.”

Just to clarify, this appears to be an appropriate modification to the restrictive provision in the original CFS “CALL OBJECTIVE & Problem Statement” that stated:

“Additionally, all solutions must be hosted within or directly connected to the cArmy 2.0 cloud environment, and development is restricted to the following approved platforms: Appian, Army Vantage, Palantir, PowerApps, Salesforce, SAP, and ServiceNow.”

Q.1) Is this a correct interpretation?

A.1) Yes, CFS Amendment 01 removed the restrictive language quoted above ("Additionally... ") that appeared in the Original posted of the CSF on Page 2, Section 1.

Q.2) If so, will a proposal that presents “… a compelling business case and a realistic plan for approval” be equally acceptable under the “Evaluation Criteria” and section 6.2 “Pitch Session” review?

A.2) It depends. Not enough information is presented and the CFS does not define "equally acceptable". Companies are reminded to submit in accordance with Section 6.1.1.

12, 13, 14 & 15

[Statement] Please clarify the following language in Section 1, “Call Objective & Problem Statement,” Section 3, sentence 3: “Development is restricted to the following approved platforms:

Appian, Army Vantage, Palantir, PowerApps, Salesforce, SAP, and ServiceNow.”

Q.1) Does this restriction mean that proposed solutions must be developed, hosted, or deployed on one of the identified platforms?

A.1): No. Please see Amendment 01 which removed the restrictive wording as quoted, "Development is restricted to the following approved platforms:..."

Q.2) Or does it mean that only the companies associated with those platforms are eligible to submit a proposal?

A.2): Not applicable, Amendment 01 removed the restrictive wording.

Q.3) Additionally, may an offeror that is not one of the listed platform providers submit a proposal independently, provided its solution uses or integrates with an approved platform?

A.3): Yes. Amendment 01 removed the restrictive wording. Any proposed Software Solution must meet all of the requirements and constraints within the CFS Amendment 01.

Q.4) Or must the offeror establish a formal partnership with one of the listed platform providers to be eligible for consideration?

A.4): In alignment to the previous answers, any Company can propose development that meets the requirements of Amendment 01. The CFS does not require formal partnerships with the Platform Providers listed in Appendix C.

16 & 17

Q.1) If a solution uses an approved platform (e.g., PowerApps or ServiceNow) as the delivery layer while the core IP resides in a separate LC/NC solution with open API integrations, does that satisfy the platform constraint?

A.1) See Amendment 01, which removed the restrictive platform constraint language in the CFS at Page 2, Section 1., last sentence: "Additionally, all solutions must be hosted within or directly connected to the cArmy 2.0 cloud environment, and development is restricted to the following approved platforms: Appian, Army Vantage, Palantir, PowerApps, Salesforce, SAP, and ServiceNow."

Q.2) — Or must the entire solution be built natively within an approved platform?

A.2) No, the CFS Amendment 01 does not require that the "...solution be built natively within an approved platform ."

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 2 of 12

18, 19 &

[Statement] Given that all solutions must be hosted within or directly integrated with the cArmy 2.0 cloud environment, and development is limited to the approved platforms (Appian, Army Vantage, Palantir, PowerApps, Salesforce, SAP, and ServiceNow), Q.1) Can Companies submit its existing commercial or defense grade software for evaluation as a capability that could be deployed on or through one of these approved platforms?

A.1) Yes. See Amendment 01, the restrictive language for development was removed. Page 12, Appendix C: Approved Products List (APL).

Q.2) If a solution is not natively built on an approved platform, may it be provided as a containerized or API based capability that integrates with an approved platform inside cArmy 2.0?

A.2) Yes. See Amendment 01 which removed and replaced the restrictive approved platform wording on Page 2, Section 1. Any proposed use of containerized or API-based capabilities will be evaluated by the criteria for Technical Merit.

Q.3) Will the Government accept a solution that currently holds a DoD ATO or FedRAMP authorization and can be migrated into cArmy 2.0, or must all ATO work be performed exclusively within Army environments?

A.3) All proposed Software Solutions must have or be able to achieve an Army ATO (with evidence of readiness for an ATO).

21, 22 &

Q.1) Does a solution hosted within cArmy 2.0 that integrates with the approved platforms — rather than replacing them — satisfy the development-platform restriction on page 2 as written?

A1) Yes. See Amendment 01 which removed and replaced the development-platform restrictive wording on Page 2, Section 1.

Q.2) If the answer to question 1 is no, will the Government consider either (a) amending the Approved Products List?

A.2) Yes. See Amendment 01, Page 2, Section 1 for the change.

Q.3) Or (b) accepting an Active Capability Gap submission, to permit a compliant orchestration layer to compete under this Call for Solutions? Confirmation of either path would suffice.

A.3) See Amendment 01 and response to Q.2 above. However, the CFS does not define a "compliant orchestration layer ".

Q) What are your biggest workforce challenges supporting these modernization efforts?

A) It appears that this question surrounds functionality within IPPS-A. "Workforce challenges" are outside of the scope for PM LOG-FIN and this CFS.

Q) Are you experiencing shortages in cyber, cloud, software, or AI talent?

A) The question is not relevant to this CFS. Talent "shortages", are not in the scope of this CFS.

Q) How are you currently onboarding and training new personnel?

A) The question is not relevant to this CFS. Neither onboarding nor training new personnel are in the scope of this CFS, unless that is specifically related to a software deployment.

Q) Are workforce development solutions eligible under future Calls for Solutions?

A) No. Workforce development is not in the scope of this or future CFS under PM LOG-FIN.

Q) Are there workforce-related Active Capability Gaps currently being evaluated?

A) Please refer the CFS Section "2. OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS (Area of Interest (AOI))" page 3 "Area of Interest" for "Personnel" which provide the needed context.

Q) Is there a particular technology area that the CPE is prioritizing, or notes a gap in current capability?

A) Yes. Please refer to CFS Section "1. CALL OBJECTIVE & Problem Statement", that specifically states "The objective of this call is to solicit concise Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions." The Army will focus first on Ammunition based on available funding. Additional capabilities will be targeted subject to funding availability.

Q) Is it better to submit with partners?

A) The CFS instructions and evaluation criteria do not include any limitations or references to submissions with Teaming/Partners.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 3 of 12

Q) What does a winning solution brief look like?

A) Please refer to the CFS Section 6.1 (in its entirety). A Solution Brief that fully responds to the Phase 1 requirements with a compliant submission that addresses the evaluation criteria with the consideration of Section 6.1.2 Solution Brief Selection Process "...will be categorized as ‘Selected for Further Consideration’ or ‘Not Selected for Further Consideration’ ".

32 & 33

Q.1) Is the Government open to disaggregating types of services?

Q.2) For example, separating strategic support to develop an accelerated ERP / capability roadmap, triage use cases, and define commercial business process from systems integration efforts?

A.1/.2) The questions need additional detail to provide a response. The Government is open to solutions that address the Objective Statements for any of the four AOIs: Ammunition, Logistics, Finance, and Personnel.

34 & 35

Q.1) Can vendors submit accelerator solutions that address specific functional requirements within the broader ES2 Log-Fin ecosystem, rather than proposing a complete end-to-end platform?

A.1) The CFS does not include any reference the need for "...accelerator solutions..." nor does the CFS refer to "...the broader ES2 Log-Fin ecosystem...". This CFS provides four AOI with Objective Statements. Companies should submit a response to Section "6.1 Phase 1 - Solution Brief".

Q.2) In particular, would the Government consider accelerator capabilities supporting Human Resources, Financial Management, workflow automation, data integration, and process orchestration?

A.2) Yes, the Government would consider Software Solutions that address the Objective Statements, that are compliant with the CFS and demonstrate Technical Merit.

Q) Does the Army envision a role for no-code or low-code accelerators that can integrate with existing or proposed enterprise solutions to accelerate process modernization, workflow automation, data management, reporting, and user experience improvements?

A) See Section 1. CALL OBJECTIVE & Problem Statement, 2nd sentence, "The objective of this call is to solicit concise Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions."

Q) Will the Government evaluate modular capabilities independently, or is there an expectation that submissions demonstrate coverage across multiple functional domains within the ES2 LOG-FIN scope?

A) The CFS permits Software Solutions that address 1 or more AOIs. Companies are reminded to follow the Submission Instructions.

Q) How will the Government assess solutions that primarily provide acceleration, integration, and modernization capabilities versus replacement systems of record?

A) The Government will consider all Software Solutions that comply with the Submission Instructions.

Q) Are AI-enabled capabilities such as intelligent workflow automation, document processing, knowledge management, digital assistants, and decision-support tools within scope for this Call for Solutions?

A) Possibly. The DoW and the Army have embraced the use of AI operating inside .mil Cloud Security Impact Levels . This CFS does not specifically call out or require the use of AI, however per Section 1, "[t]he objective of this call is to solicit concise Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions."

Q) Does the office have any feedback from the known LC/NC engagement layers you have tried like PEGA, NETUNE, Appian, ParaLine, etc.

A) No, the office does not have feedback to publish on "known" engagement layers. The CFS provides the Army's Objective Statements that have not been met.

Q) According to the ABSC 1/3rd of funds for development of your CSO is to come from a source outside the federal government? Please elaborate and clarify.

A) CFS Amendment 01, Page 13 added instructions for Attachment A. Yes, Companies may choose to propose the 1/3rd cost share as outlined in the ABSC Form page 2 by selecting [_] "At least one third of the total cost of the prototype project is to be paid out of funds provided by sources other than the Federal Governmen t." This is one of the three allowable methods in meeting the requirements for 10 USC 4022.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 4 of 12

42, 43, 44 & 45

Attachment A (Affirmation of Business Status Certification, page 2) Q.1) How should a team of only traditional defense contractors complete page 2, and does page 2 apply under a FAR Part 12 award path or only to OT awards?

A) Amendment 01, Page 13 added instructions for Attachment A. The instructions were revised to clarify that Attachment A, Page 2 is optional and only applies to OT Awards.

Q.2) Would such a team be ineligible for award?

A.2) Any Team responding in accordance with the Amendment 01 Instructions will be eligible for further evaluation.

Q.3) For an SBA-approved mentor-protege joint venture proposing as the prime, does the page 2 significant-participant analysis apply the joint venture's small business size status, or does it look through to the individual JV members' size and contractor status?

A) Attachment A, Page 2 carries forward (reflects) the Legal Entity Name (Industry Size, UEI, CAGE, Tax ID, etc.), as submitted on Page 1. Thus, the Joint Venture information and not the members. Note, 10 U.S.C. 3014 defines Nontraditional Defense Contractors.

Phase 1 Submission Requirements

Q.4) File 1 (Admin) requires an Executive Summary covering "Company and corporate commercial experience " and the Affirmation of Business Status form. Where the offeror is a joint venture, should corporate commercial experience and business certifications be presented at the joint venture level, at the individual member level, or both?

A.4) A Joint Venture submission must reflect the Joint Venture entity information.

Q) Can the government clarify the file submission structure for firms submitting more than 1 response - shall each submission include a separate Administrative, Solution Brief, and ROM & Schedule file per AOI submission?

A) Resolved in Amendment 01, Section 6.1.1., Table. Only "one" File 1: Administrative. However, for File 2 & 3 see Naming Conventions for AOI Specific content at File 2: Solution Brief "CompanyName_Solution_[AOI].pdf, File 3: ROM & Schedule "CompanyName_Pricing_Schedule _[AOI].pdf".

47, 48 &

Q.1) CFS-001 spans Ammunition, Logistics, Finance, and Personnel, may a vendor respond to a single domain such as Finance / Resource Allocation, or are solutions expected to span multiple domains?

A.1) Yes. Vendors may respond to a single domain (AOI). The CFS Amendment 01, Section 6.1, Page 6 explicitly states: “Companies may submit a Solution Brief for a single AOI or up to four Solution Briefs, (one Solution Brief for each of the four AOIs) .”

Q.2) Are there discrete problem statements per domain?

A.2) Yes. CFS Pages 2 - 3, Section 2 OBJECTIVE STATEMENTS (Area of Interest (AOI)) contains four distinct Objective Statements, one for each domain: Ammunition, Logistics, Finance, and Personnel.

Q.3) What submission instrument does CFS-001 use, AOI white paper, solution brief, or full proposal, and what are the page limit, format, and response deadline?

A.3) Submission Instrument details: See CFS Pages 6 - 8, Section 6.1.1 SOLUTION BRIEF CONTENT for e-mail method, file structure & page limits, format (.pdf) and file naming convention.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 5 of 12

50 & 51

[Statement] Reference: LOGFIN26-CFS-001 / AOS W9128Z-25-S-A002, Attachment A (Affirmation of Business Status Certification, page 2). Page 2 directs the Prime/Sole Offeror to satisfy 10 U.S.C. 4022(b)(d) by checking one of three boxes.

Q.1) How should a team of only traditional defense contractors complete page 2, and does page 2 apply under a FAR Part 12 award path or only to OT awards?

A.1) See CFS Amendment 01, Page 13 added instructions for Attachment A. The instructions were revised to clarify that Page 2 is optional and only applies to OT Awards.

Q.2) [Ref. Page 2] How is a "significant participant" defined?

A.2) Please review the ABSC Form, Page 2, where significant extent is called out, followed by the statement "...the significance of the NDC or NRI's contribution that support the following factors ... " See factors list a) - g) . For further details please refer to the DoD Other Transactions Guide dated July 2023, Version 2.0, (Updated July 2025) for the Glossary terms at page 37 "Non Non-Traditional Defense Contractor (NDC) " and page 38 "Significant Extent" . Available at this Link:

https://www.acq.osd.mil/asda/dpc/cp/policy/docs/guidebook/DoD%20OT%20Guide%20(July%202023)%20-%20508%20Update_11Jul2025.pdf

Q) Will the CFS for Ammunition be for full capability, software and deployment/integration services?

A) This CFS includes Ammunition as the first Area of Interest. The are no immediate plans for any future CFS, however the Army retains the right to publish future solicitations as needed to meet requirements.

Q) What is the range of funding for each of the focus areas?

A) The Army's approved budget is publicly available. The Army has not determined a "...range of funding for each of the focus areas."

54 & 55

Q.1) What AOI's does the Army want to address in GFY'27?

A.1) This CFS provides four AOIs. See Section 5. GENERAL SUBMISSION NOTES, 5th bullet note: "The Government reserves the right to issue one or multiple awards from this CFS. It similarly reserves the right to refrain from making any award." -- in GFY'27 or any Government Fiscal Year.. The Government does intend to address the Ammunition AOI first, though this is subject to change.

Q.2) Is there funding to support the AOIs that the Army wants to address in GFY'27?

A.2) The FY27 Budget is public information and subject to change based on DoW and Army needs.

Q) Can the Government share any available budget information, program objective memorandum (POM) data, or ROM range that it considers reasonable for any of the four AOIs?

[Statement] Even a rough order of magnitude range (e.g., <$5M, $5–25M, $25–100M) would help vendors calibrate their proposed approach and avoid being disqualified for a pricing approach that is dramatically misaligned with Government expectations.

A) No. The Army's approved budget is publicly available. The Army has not determined "... a rough order of magnitude range " for each of the focus areas.

Q) Please clarify which systems are in scope for the Personnel area?

A) Please see the systems listed in CFS Amendment 01, Section 9. The Personnel Objective Statement relays the requirements for personnel financial transactions (e.g., General Fund posting) that are currently performed in Appendix A: Current Army ERP Systems.

Q) What is the intended modernization path for SAAS-MOD—sunset, partial replacement, continued sustainment, or integration into new capabilities?

A) SAAS-MOD will be sunset based on an awarded Company's approach and when it's proposed schedule delivers a replacement capability to the Army.

59 & 60

Q.1) Does the Army plan to deprecate any of the existing ERPs as part of the described implementation?

A.1) The "Army plan" is dependent on the Awarded Contractor(s) approach.

Q.2) For example, should vendors assume that all listed systems, including SAAS-MOD and AESIP, will continue to be utilized throughout the lifecycle of the solution?

A.2) Yes, the Systems listed in the CFS will continue until deprecated and replaced by an Awarded Company's solution.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 6 of 12

Q) Is the government seeking point solutions that sit on top of existing ERPs, or does this effort also include ERP modernization (migration to S4)?

A) Both. The CFS Section "1. CALL OBJECTIVE & Problem Statement" includes a clear problem statement: "The objective of this call is to solicit concise Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions. These technologies will support a transformative modernization of the Army’s five SAP-based Defense Business Systems, a critical effort designed to directly improve operational efficiency, enhance data visibility, and reduce overall sustainment costs across the Army’s business mission areas." The CFS does not include any reference of "S4" or "migration to S-4". However, SAP is listed as one of the approved Development Platforms and all five ERPs are based on SAP software that must be modernized.

Q) Can the vendor submit a S4 upgrade of the current ECCs to deliver capabilities outlined in the AOIs?

A) Yes.

63 & 64

Q.1) What are the expected timelines for the capabilities to be delivered ?

A.1) The CFS The timelines will be based on the Schedule(s) submitted by Company(ies) selected for an award.

Q.2) When are the ECC upgrade[s] expected - either part of the CFS or outside of the CFS in order to ensure that any agile apps has portability to the upgraded ECC to S4?

A.2) As detailed on Page 2, Section 1, this CFS supports the "...transformative modernization of the Army’s five SAP-based Defense Business Systems". The CFS does not establish a specific requirement or timeline of any SAP-based DBS to upgrade its SAP ERP Central Component (ECC) to SAP S4. The CFS objective is to "...improve operational efficiency, enhance data visibility, and reduce overall sustainment costs..."

Q) Is the evaluation methodology specific to this call?

A) Yes. The CFS Amendment 01 specifies in Pages 8-9, Section 6.1.1, the Phase 1 "SOLUTION BRIEF BASIS FOR EVALUAITON ", including Evaluation criteria for Technical Merit, Schedule, ROM, and IP/Data Rights.

Q) Can the Army provide guidance on the period of performance the requested ROM should cover?

A) Companies are asked to propose and submit a ROM and Schedule together. Reference the CFS, Pages 8, Section 6.1.1 Solution Brief Content, Table, File 3: ROM & Schedule, "ROM (No Page Limit): Must contain the breakout of pricing per AOI submission. Tie pricing to milestones, where appropriate. Annotate assumptions used to develop the ROM ."

Q) Within the Solution Brief Content structure, should respondents submit a single file with a ROM and schedule for all AOIs, or individual ROMs/schedules for each AOI they are responding to?

A) Submit a single File 3: ROM & Schedule per AOI. See Amendment 01 for clarification at Page 8, Section 6.1.1 Table - File // File 3: ROM &Schedule. // Required File Naming Convention:

CompanyName_Pricing_Scedule_[AOI].pdf // Contents & Page Limits * "ROM (No Page Limit): Must contain the breakout of pricing per AOI submission. "

Q) Please confirm that only one ROM & Schedule file is required per company even if the company submits against multiple AOIs. For example, would a company proposing against 2 AOIs submit one ROM & Schedule file with the ROM and Schedule for both AOIs?

A) See CFS Amendment 01, Page 8 Section 6.1.1 B. Table, File 3 ROM & Schedule for revised instructions that state the ROM: "Must contain the breakout of pricing per AOI submission."

Q) How should respondents account for software licenses on the approved platform list (e.g. costs for utilizing Appian, SAP, Microsoft, Salesforce, Vantage, or Palantir capabilities)?

A) Companies must account for the cost of using proposed Solution Licenses within the ROM. Ref CFS Page 4, Section 5. GENERAL SUBMISSION NOTES, - "Companies that currently hold an Enterprise Agreement (EA)/Enterprise Contract (EC) with the Army or DoW are required to identify and propose IAW those existing agreements." Companies that do not hold licenses for their proposed Software Solution must approach the Software Vendor(s) to get the cost/price information for the proposed software licenses for the ROM requirement.

Q) Can the Army detail the process for how a vendor can request direct NDAs with the specified non-government advisors?

A) Yes. See Amendment 01, CFS Page 10, Section 7. NON-GOVERNEMNT ADVISORS. "All Companies that require a corporate specific Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) directly with the Non-Government advisor(s), must send their NDA Form to the Government Contract Points of Contact, who will ensure it is transmitted to the Non-Govt Advisors. " As stated in the CFS, the Government will not be party to those NDAs, (Govt will not sign or acknowledge them). If applicable, the submission of these NDAs will be accepted in File 1:

Administrative. See 6.1.1 Solution Brief Content, File 1 and below the Table, Administrative Notes.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 7 of 12

71 & 72

[Statement] The CFS describes four distinct Areas of Interest and specifies approved platforms including Appian. To help industry prepare optimal responses, can you clarify two aspects of your acquisition strategy:

Q.1) Will the Government award separate contracts for each AOI, or consolidate under a single prime with multiple subcontractors?

A.1) See CFS Amendment 01, Page 4, Section 5, 5th bullet, the Army reserves the right to issue one, multiple or no awards.

Q.2) For each AOI award, do you envision platform OEMs (like Appian, Salesforce) leading as prime contractors with SI partners, or traditional System Integrators priming with platform vendors in supporting roles?

A.2) No. The CFS Amendment 01 does not define or restrict Teaming/Partnership (Prime/Sub) roles. The Army expects Companies to respond with their best approach.

73, 74, 75 & 76

Q.1) Does the Government anticipate personnel supporting this effort to be primarily onsite, hybrid, or remote, and will this vary by task order?

A.1) Not applicable to the CSF. Ref. Section 1. CALL Objective & Problem Statement. The CFS is soliciting for Software Solutions.

Q.2) Can contractors utilize qualified remote personnel when mission requirements permit, or is there an expectation that personnel be physically located near supported installations?

A.2) Not applicable to the CSF. The location of personnel is up to the Company as long as the personnel are U.S. Citizens and the work is performed in the U.S.

Q.3) Will task orders require named personnel at award?

A.3) Not applicable, this CSF will not have "task orders". The Request for Solution Proposal (RSP) will not require "named personnel"'.

Q.4) Or will contractors be expected to provide qualified personnel as requirements emerge?

A.4) It depends on the proposed Software Solution. Any personnel qualifications/security background investigation requirements will be published with any issued Request for Solution Proposal. As an example, Information Technology/Cyberspace personnel providing direct support to a proposed Software Solution in roles that directly interact with cArmy or the .mil network may be required to meet the requirements of DOD MANUAL 8140.03 CYBERSPACE WORKFORCE QUALIFICATION AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM and also hold the proper security background investigations as required for roles supporting the Army's designated Cloud Security Impact Level (e.g., IL4/5 & 6).

Q) [Statement] The [CFS states that the] development Environment is at cArmy 2.o. Is this environment in AWS, Azure, or Multi-Cloud?

A) Currently, cArmy 2.0 is hosted in both AWS and Azure.

Q) Will the Disconnected and Low Bandwidth solutions be for Handheld devices.

A) See CFS Amendment 01, Section 1, last sentence. Degraded/disconnected applies to all four Areas of Interest and includes more than just handheld devices.

Q) What infrastructure is available for tactical users in disconnected environments?

A) It depends. The Army's Tables of Organization and Equipment (TOE) vary across organizations and geographic areas and are Modified (MTOE) for Operational Needs.

Q) What specific integration protocols (e.g., OData REST APIs, RFCs, IDocs) are approved for real-time bidirectional write-backs into the five SAP ERP systems?

A) The Proposed Software Solution should support an API Strategy.

Q) Must cross-system SOD be managed natively within the platform or will the platform query an existing enterprise access governance tool via API?

A) It depends on the Proposed Software Solution. See CFS Amendment 01, Pages 3 & 4, Section 3. CRITICAL AUDITABILITY & COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS, for any Software Solution that perform financial transactions, or feeds data supporting financial posting -- "All solutions shall be designed to enforce transactional level Segregation of Duties (SOD) both within the solution delivered and across integrated systems, consistent with existing Army enterprise SOD controls..."

Q) Will the platform integrate directly with Army Enterprise Directory Services via SAML/OIDC for Common Access Card (CAC) authentication?

A) It depends on the Proposed Software Solution. cArmy provides, as an Enterprise Service, the Identity, Credential and Access Management (ICAM) / CAC authentication.

Q) Will there be any legacy data migration required?

A) Yes.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 8 of 12

Q) Does the Army Software & Innovation Center (ASIC) provide a standardized DevSecOps pipeline for deployment packages?

A) Companies should account for the DevSecOps pipeline that would support their Proposed Software Solution. The use of existing Army Enterprise resources is encouraged, however, Companies cannot just assume that the ASIC ERP Sustainment DevSecOps pipeline is compatible with the proposed solution.

85, 86 &

Q.1) What are the anticipated total concurrent user counts (tactical and strategic), and what is the peak daily volume of physical asset and supply chain transactions?

A.1) It depends on the Proposed Software Solution. The user counts and peak daily volume of transactions will vary by system and by the operational tempo of the Army (at the tactical and strategic levels). Companies should review the Evaluation Criteria: Technical Merit for "scalability of the solution".

Q.2) What is the estimated total number of financial users/auditors, and what is the expected transaction throughput for automated close and budget workflows during peak fiscal year-end periods?

A.2) See response above at A.1.

Q.3) What is the total size of the Army civilian workforce to be managed, and what is the expected daily transaction volume for time-and-attendance routing during peak pay periods?

A.3) Managing the Army civilian workforce is not in the scope of this CFS. For transaction volume and time-and-attendance, see response above at A.1.

88 & 89

Q.1) Does this targeted call for solutions preclude future AOI White Papers in those four AOIs?

A.1) This Call for Solutions is closed and provides Companies with instructions and a due date for a response.

Q.2) Or can we still submit solutions under the umbrella Call for Solutions from June 3rd?

A.2) No. The "umbrella Call for Solutions" was removed from SAM.gov and is not an active Solicitation. However, Companies are encouraged to review CFS Amendment 01, Page 13, "Submission of Active Capability Gaps outside of This Call" for details on future submissions and the statement "The Government reserves the right to make additional awards and/or issue new calls in the capability areas listed, consistent with the continuous nature of the AOS."

Q) If fortunate to be invited to Phase 2, will demonstration scenarios be provided and how much time do you anticipate companies having to prepare?

A1) If invited to Phase 2, the Government will provide the demonstration scenarios and all associated instructions in the official Phase 2 invitation letter.

91 & 92

Q.1) [What are the Govt's] proposed time-lines?

A.1) The CFS requires Companies to propose their Schedule within File 3.

Q.2) [What can the Army share] about clear priorities for the Army in transforming its ERP platforms?

A.2) The CFS provides the Army's Problem Statement and Area of Interest Objective Statements.

93 & 94

Q.1) For Phase 1 submissions, does the Government prefer solution concepts focused on a narrowly defined use case and minimum viable capability, or broader enterprise transformation approaches across an entire Area of Interest?

A.1) The Army has not defined a preference. Companies are invited to review the entire CFS Amendment 01 and propose their best Solution.

Q.2) Does the Government anticipate multiple awards aligned to individual Areas of Interest, or is the intent to identify integrated solutions capable of addressing multiple mission areas?

A.2) See CSF Amendment 01, Page 4, Section 5. GENERAL SUBMISSION NOTES, 5th bullet: "The Government reserves the right to issue one or multiple awards from this CFS. It similarly reserves the right to refrain from making any award."

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 9 of 12

95, 96 &

Q.1) Are there different government teams reviewing each AOI solution brief?

A.1) The Army does not publish information about Solution Brief review team(s).

[Statement] The instructions state that "development is restricted" to certain systems, but also states that it seeks commercial technologies with low-code/no-code capabilities.

Q.2) Please confirm that this Call For Solution is preferably seeking existing commercial technologies to address the AOIs, and not professional services involving custom coding/development work.

A.2) Please review CFS Amendment 01, at Page 2, Section 1, the wording "development is restricted" was removed. Yes, the CFS wording confirms that the Army is seeking Software Solutions.

Q.3) Please clarify what the Logistics AOI is focused on.

A.3) The focus is on the Objective Statement.

Q) What is the expected timeline between phases? and expected time of award?

A) Any timeline for each Phase (1 - 3) or between Phases will be determined after the receipt of proposals. Any Award is targeted to be within FY26, (prior to 30 September 2026).

99 & 100

Q.1) For Ammunition, is the Government seeking replacement, modernization, augmentation, or integration of SAAS-MOD and related ammunition systems?

A.1) Yes. The Government is "seeking replacement, modernization, augmentation, or integration of SAAS-MOD and related ammunition systems" to address the Ammunition Area of Interest.

Q.2) What is the desired prototype start date, period of performance, and minimum viable capability timeline?

A.2) Start Date and Minimum Viable Capability Release are desired today (as soon as possible). Companies are asked to submit a proposed Schedule (File 3) for the Period of Performance.

Q) Could you please clarify what level of CMMC certification the prime contractor and any subcontractors need to hold (such as CMMC Level 2 (self))? Will the same certification be required for all subcontractors, or only the prime?

A) The CFS Amendment 01 does not include a requirement for the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) status or level. Although not required at Phase 1, Companies should assume DFARS 252.204-7021 "Contractor Compliance With the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification Level Requirements", will be included at Phase 3 in any Request for Solution Proposal with a CMMC Level defined by the scope and nature of the work to be performed.

102 &

[Statement] Given you anticipate the work involves Impact Level 4, 5, and 6, Q.1) What CMMC level, if any, is required for award in each of the AOIs?

A.1) See response above in Q # 101.. The CMMC Level requirements will be included in any issued Request for Solution Proposal.

Q.2) Is there an anticipated timeline for any CMMC level evolving requirements specific to this CFS?

A.2) Yes, at Phase 3 or earlier with any issued Request for Solution Proposal.

104 &

[Statement] I am reaching out to submit a question regarding the Ammunition, Logistics, Finance, and Personnel Modernization Call for Solution.

Q.1) Could you please clarify what level of CMMC certification the prime contractor and any subcontractors need to hold (such as CMMC Level 2 (self))?

A.1) See response in Q # 101 above.

Q.2) Will the same certification be required for all subcontractors, or only the prime?

A.2) The CMMC Level requirements apply the Prime and are flowed down to any awarded Subcontractors based on the scope of subcontract work.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 10 of 12

106 &

[Statement] We have been ATO in the US Army - General Fund Enterprise Business System - Sensitive Activities (GFEBS-SA) environment for 4-5 years and have an existing product/platform.

Q) Since it is an existing platform/product in the US Army environment how do we approach the “solution brief”, will we be able to submit a solution to focus on Zero Trust access security and data protection across all 4 AOI’s?

[Statement] Your guidance on this will be greatly appreciated, thanks.

A) Please refer to the CFS Amendment 01, Page 2, Section 1, Companies are encouraged to submit their best "....Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions ." that comply with the details in Section 6.1.1, bullet "Companies may submit a Solution Brief for a single AOI or up to four Solution Briefs, (one Solution Brief for each of the four AOIs)" .Table, File 2: Solution Brief "Contents", File 3: ROM and Schedule that respond to the Evaluation Criteria a. Technical Merit, b. Schedule and c. ROM.

108, 109, 110 &

[Statement] Companies appreciate the opportunity to submit questions, after attending the Industry Day.

[Statement] The CFS states that the Army “encourages concise, focused submissions” and that Phase 1 evaluation will consider “technical merit,” “innovation,” and “potential to provide technological advancements.”

Q.1) Given this emphasis on innovation and the potential to provide advancements, will the Army accept notional or conceptual solutions and/or solution approaches, anchored to approved LCNC and data platforms, to demonstrate how vendors would address the AOI problem statements?

A.1) No. The Question does not provide adequate information for the Army to "accept" the statement. Reference CFS Amendment 01, Page 2, Section 1, Companies are encouraged to submit their best "....Solution Briefs for innovative commercial technologies, specifically Low-Code/No Code (LCNC) and software modernization solutions " that comply with the details in Section 6.1.1, Table, File 2: Solution Brief "Contents", File 3: ROM and Schedule that respond to the Evaluation Criteria a. Technical Merit, b. Schedule and c. ROM.

[Statement] The CFS emphasizes the need for solutions that support modernization, reduce sustainment cost, accelerate delivery, and integrate with approved LCNC platforms and data platforms.

Q.2) In alignment with this guidance, will the Army accept service and development frameworks and delivery models to achieve AOI objectives that demonstrate, with relevant examples to problem statements, how vendors will build and sustain compliant, auditable, scalable applications on the approved platforms?

A.2) No. The Question does not provide adequate information for the Army to "accept" the statement. Please refer to the response to A.1) above.

[Statement] During Industry Day, multiple Army speakers highlighted that the workforce needs support to build, integrate, and sustain solutions on the approved platforms, and that many capabilities do not yet exist in cArmy.

Q.3) To ensure we align to this need, can the Army confirm that service based solution approaches, that will support the software OEMs with data engineering, system development, audit and risk management, integration, sustainment, and domain expertise applied to LCNC and data platforms are acceptable as part of a Phase 1 Solution Brief?

A.3) No. The Army cannot confirm this question. The wording "service based solution approaches " is not found in the CFS Amendment 01. Please refer to the response at A.1 above.

Q.4) The Phase 1 Solution Brief page limit (four pages per AOI) suggests the Army does not expect fully developed applications at this stage. Will the Government confirm that vendors are not required to submit working applications, but may instead propose approach, concept descriptions, and representative examples that demonstrate feasibility on the approved platforms?

A.4) No. Again, the Army cannot confirm this question. Please refer to the response at A.1 above and the entire text in the CFS Amendment 01.

Q) Can a company submit more than 1 solution brief for an AOI for addressing partial capabilities within an AOI?

A) No. See CFS Amendment 01 Page 6, Section 6.1.1, for the bolded text "Companies may submit a Solution Brief for a single AOI or up to four Solution Briefs, (one Solution Brief for each of the four AOIs)."

Q) Will a recording of this be provided after the fact?

A) Yes. See files posted on SAM.gov for CFS Amendment 01.

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 11 of 12

Q) Please post or send the recording. I missed the June 17th event. Thank you.

A) The recording and transcript are posted under CFS Amendment 01.

115, 116, 117 &

Ammunition AOI - Technical Q.1) Does the Government envision the modernized solution replacing, augmenting, or integrating alongside the existing TAMIS and SAAS-MOD systems during the transition period?

A.1) Yes. The Awarded Company(ies') proposed solution and approach will determine if direct replacements, augmentations, or any unique deployments will be followed and the timing of any such events.

Q.2) Should proposed solutions plan for a phased coexistence model with current systems of record, or a full cutover?

A.2) The Awarded Company(ies') proposed solution will determine if a phase coexistence, full cutover or hybrid approach is implemented.

Q.3) Can the Government provide additional detail on the operational environments and connectivity constraints for tactical users at ammunition supply points?

A.3) Not at this time - not in Phase 1. However, details on the operational environments, connectivity constraints for tactical users is publicly available on the internet.

Q.4) Specifically, what offline transaction volume, sync frequency, and device types (iOS, Android, Windows) should proposed solutions support?

A.4) The Army does not have the requested information ready for publication. Companies should conduct their own research and document any assumptions.

Platform Licensing and Enterprise Agreements

[Statement] Section 5 states that companies holding an Enterprise Agreement (EA) or Enterprise Contract (EC) with the Army or DoW are required to propose in accordance with those existing agreements.

Q.1) Given the CFS permits solutions on multiple approved platforms (Appian, SAP, Army Vantage), does the EA/EC requirement apply at the prime-contractor level, the platform-vendor level, or both?

A.1) The Statement (Section 5...) above is correct. Companies must account for the cost of using proposed Solution Licenses within the ROM. Companies that do not hold licenses for their proposed solution must approach the Software Vendor(s) to get the cost/price information for the proposed software licenses for the ROM requirement. At/After Award, the Government projects it will provide any Licenses required that are available under an Enterprise Agreement or Enterprise Contract as Government-Furnished.

Q.2) Additionally, will SAP licensing be Government-furnished under existing Army ERP enterprise agreements, or is it expected to be included in the vendor's ROM?

A.2) License costs must be included in the ROM. See the response at A.1) above.

120, 121 & 122

Q.1) Submission Deadline and Rolling Evaluation: Could you confirm the current submission due date for LOG-FIN26-CFS-001?

A.1) Reference CFS Amendment 01, Page 1, the Solution Brief Due date remains as published on SAM.gov - 30 June 2026 at 12:00pm Central Standard Time.

Q.2) Additionally, will evaluations and prototype awards be conducted on a rolling basis under the AOS, or will all submissions be evaluated concurrently at a fixed date?

A.2) All submissions received on the CFS published due date (30 June 2026) will be evaluated within the same "fixed" timeframe. The timing of any awards is dependent on Army requirements and available funding. Companies are encouraged to review CFS Amendment 01, Page 13, "Submission of Active Capability Gaps outside of This Call" for details on future submissions and the statement "The Government reserves the right to make additional awards and/or issue new calls in the capability areas listed, consistent with the continuous nature of the AOS."

Q.3) Areas of Interest — Single or Separate Submissions: May offerors submit a response addressing multiple Areas of Interest, and if so, does ACC-RI prefer separate submissions per Area of Interest or a single consolidated response covering all applicable areas?

A.3) Reference CFS Amendment 01, Page 5, Section 6 SOLUTION SUBMISSION AND EVLUATION PROCESS - "Companies may submit Solution briefs for a single AOI or up to all four AOIs" and Page 6, Section 6.1.1 SOLUITON BRIEF CONTENT - "Companies may submit a Solution Brief for a single AOI or up to four Solution Briefs, ( one Solution Brief for each of the four AOIs )."

End of Q&A List

Event Date: 17 June 2026 DISTRIBUTION A: Public Release Page 12 of 12

IndustryDay Q&A