QA_N3220525Q2359.pdf

# Question Answer

Is this a new requirement, or is there an existing contract? If it is an existing contract, could you please provide the incumbent name and contract number? This is a new requirement

2 Is there an existing dashboard? No.

Is there a preferred platform for the dashboard, or can any platform be proposed? There is not a preferred platform.

Can you expand on the list of the required M2MSC Candidate's documentation beyond the list on page 6: "i.e. training certificates, military records, sea service letters, etc."?

The following are examples of documents to be provided by the candidate. This is not an exhaustive list. The candidate shall provide all records that document military experience and qualifications.

Navy:

History of Assignments FITREPs OERs Qualification Letters Army:

Sea Service Letter Any Maritime related training certificates with USCG approvals.

Does the dashboard need to be fully comprehensive of all STCW requirements and required documentation, or can it be representative of what the features could look like (partial, but not fully inclusive)? The dashboard must be fully functional and must meet all requirements of the solicitation at time of proposal submission.

6 What is the anticipated award date? The anticipated start date for the Period of Performance is 30 September 2025.

Can the government please provide historical workload data for all positions? There is no historical information. This is a new requirement.

8 Can the proposal volumes be submitted in PDF format?

The pricing spreadsheet shall be submitted in excel format and the link to the dashboard may be provided in the body of the email or as an email attachment in PDF or Word format. Do not utilize zip files.

Would the government prefer vendors include past performance details within the Technical Submission section of the proposal? If not, please advise where it should go and how it should be prepared?

Past performance will not be evaluated for this solicitation. References to a past performance evaluation have been removed from the solicitation via Amendment 0001.

In order to effectively respond to the solicitation, can the government please provide a one-week extension once the Q/As are posted? An extension has been granted in accordance with Amendment 0001 to the solicitation.

Will the awarded vendor retain rights to any enhancements made, or must those rights be relinquished to the government? Please clarify intellectual property expectations under DFARS 252.227-7013 or 7037.

The Contractor will retain ownership to the dashboard. The dashboard will be evaluated as detailed in FAR 52.212-2 of the solicitation.

There is no CLIN/PWS provision requiring any enhancements during performance.

Does the government have a transition plan to a new vendor for O&M of the government funded platform?

Paragraph 17 of the PWS details the requirements for the phase-out period at the end of this contract. Due to this being a new requirement, there is not a current contractor to provide a transition to the awardee of this contract.

Requiring a fully functional demo tailored to all elements of PWS prior to award may implicitly favor vendors with preexisting knowledge or prior system development. How will the Government ensure that non-incumbents are not disadvantaged due to lack of access to the existing dashboard, data fields, or business rules? There is not an incumbent as this is a new requirement.

Will the vendor be required to build a new dashboard or enhance a government-owned or legacy system? There is not a current dashboard. The awardee is required to provide access to a fully functional dashboard that meets all requirements of

Are technical specifications, API documentation, data dictionaries, or architecture diagrams available to vendors for review before proposal submission? If not, will the government include a pre-award Q&A session or technical briefing to ensure accurate costing and planning? All requirements for the dashboard have been provided via the soliciation. There will not be another pre-award Q&A period.

Are there standardized reporting templates, analytic dashboards, or data visualization requirements the vendor must follow? All requirements are detailed in the solicitation.

Who are the authorized users or stakeholder groups (e.g., Navy HR, unions, training institutions)?

MSC N1 employees should be the only authorized users of the dashboard, outside of the contractors. As stated in paragraph 6.3 of the PWS, the COR is responsible for identifying the MSC employees that require access.

Will contractors be responsible for defining and configuring role-based access control (RBAC) profiles, including read-only, admin, and third-party permissions?

The contractor will be responsible for access controls and protection of the information in the dashboard. Correct handling of PII and/or protected information requires restricting access to authorized persons. The Government will be responsible for identifying which personnel require access to the data/dashboard.

Will access require CAC, cloud login, or other DoD authentication protocols?

The contractor shall meet NIST control standards for protection of sensitive data and control of access. CAC login is not required or recommended as the contractors working under this contract will not be issued a CAC.

Is the credentialing dashboard expected to include built-in communication or mentoring features (e.g., chat, case tracking, appointment scheduling)?

If a feature is not identified as a requirement in the solicitation, it is not an expectation. The requirement to store canidates' documents and any notes taken regarding the canidate in the dashboard has been incorporated into the PWS via Amendment 0001.

Are mentoring session notes or case records to be stored in the dashboard or in a separate system? Any notes regarding a candidate shall be stored in the their file on the dashboard in a manner in which the MSC users can access it.

Will the vendor be responsible for staffing mentorship roles, or will this be handled by government personnel? The awardee is responsible for all requirements in the PWS to include the staffing required for sucessful performance.

Is the vendor expected to supply their own staff for 1:1 mentorship, or integrate government-furnished support teams?

The awardee is responsible for all requirements in the PWS to include the staffing required for sucessful performance. Government personnel will not be providing mentorship to candidates.

Will historical level of effort (LOE) data be provided to support accurate costing? This is a new requirement. There is not any historical data.

If the Government intends to evaluate price realism, what method will be used (e.g., IGCE comparison, cross-offeror analysis)?

The total price quoted will be evaluated and must be determined fair and reasonable in order to be eligible for award. Further price evaluation information has been added to FAR 52.212-2 via Amendment 0001.

The solicitation states that award will be made on a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) basis. Will the Government publish a detailed list of minimum technical acceptability criteria that must be met for a “pass”?

As stated in FAR 52.212-2 of the solicitation, "The quoter is responsible for demonstrating how it would meet the requirements of each step in the process from beginning to end." All dashboard requirements and steps in the procress are detailed in the PWS.

How will technical acceptability be determined during the dashboard demonstration? Will vendors receive an evaluation rubric, checklist, or scoring template in advance?

The quoter must demonstate how it would meet each requirement in the PWS. If it does, it will be determined technically acceptable.

Essetially, the quoter should show how they would perform the requirements of the PWS from the time they receive a candidate through that candidate recieving their credential (detailed in PWS paragraphs 5.1.1 - 5.1.12).

Given the requirement under FAR 6.101(b) to promote full and open competition, FAR 7.105(b) requiring acquisition strategies to consider data rights to ensure future competitive acquisitions, and FAR 9.505 addressing organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) to avoid unfair competitive advantage, will the Government require a competing software platform demonstration, or instead focus the acquisition on the operation and maintenance of an existing Government-funded platform The quoter must provide a dashboard that meets all requirements of the solicitation. There is not an existing platform.

For the dashboard URL that we will provide, our system delegates permissions based on the user’s email address. Could you confirm which Government email address we should designate as the manager account for access to the dashboard? You can use jordan.r.castellat.civ@us.navy.mil for now (during evaluation), but this may change after award.

Please confirm that the only required proposal submissions are the Attachment 1 – Pricing Spreadsheet and the dashboard URL. That is correct. Those are the only tangible submissions. The 30 minute presentation is also a requirement.

In Section 3 (Objective), the PWS states “up to 250 M2MSC candidates per contract year,” but the CLINs and pricing reference 1,000 jobs per contract year. Please confirm this is because there are four potential invoiceable events per candidate? If not, could you please explain the discrepancy?

That is correct. Up to 250 candidates per contract year X up to four events per person = 1000 potential invoiceable events per contract year.

PWS 5.1.2 states “…the candidate will provide their sea service and training documents to the contractor.” Should the dashboard be designed to allow the candidate to upload these documents directly into their account, or is email acceptable, or are both required?

The contractor support shall upload the candidates' documents to the dashboard.

Under PWS 5.1.4, is the contractor responsible for actually scheduling the training events, or will MSC schedule them and provide the details to the contractor? MSC will schedule the training after recieving the recommended pathway from the contractor.

Will the Government evaluators be asking clarifying questions during the demo, or will the demonstration be evaluated solely on the presentation without interaction?

As stated in FAR 52.212-1 of the solicitation, "During the meeting, the Government will not answer any questions asked by the quoter or prompt the quoter to demonstrate specific features of the dashboard. The quoter is solely responsible for demonstrating that the processes and dashboard meet all requirements of the solicitation".