NOFO FAQs.docx

SLTT ISAC NOFO FAQs (as of 8/19/2019)

QUESTIONS:

· Context: Page 8 of the NOFO describes the requirement for submission of a Technical Vison and Business Management Vision (i.e., two volumes). Pages 15-16 describes four evaluation factors.

· Question 1: We assume that the descriptions of the information to support the four factors should be organized as follows:

· The Technical Vision document should include Factor 1 (Technical); Factor 2 (Business Management); and Factor 3 (Past Performance and Prior Experience.

· The Business Management Vision document includes material to support Factor 4 as well as additional information requested on Page 8.

· Is this assumption correct?

No.

· The narrative on Technical Vision should include Factor 1.

· The narrative on Business Management should address all other Factors.

· Question 2: Page 15 Factor 1 – Technical requires a ‘Capability Demonstration’. This could potentially mean physical demonstration. However, given that no logistical details for a physical demonstration are provided, we are assuming that the proposal narrative must demonstrate the items listed on pages 15 and 16. Is this a correct assumption?

Yes.

· Question 3: Define “crowdsourcing” as used on p16. Also, please provide an example of a government use of the funding approach envisioned.

Crowdsourcing in this context is tapping into the collective intelligence of the SLTT community to get things done. Request is to provide the approach to the SLTT’s partner paid (fee-for-service) cost share methodology and specifically to support members who may lack resources for obtaining cybersecurity tools.

· Question 4: We do not see any page limits for the proposal. We are assuming a limit of 30 pages for the Technical Vision. Is this assumption correct?

The Technical Narrative must be a sufficient abstract to be able to adequately evaluate. No page limitation has been specified.

· Question 5: Given that the government has reduced available funding for the GFY 2020 ISAC program by approximately 30% when compared with funding available for GFY 2019, would the government entertain recommendations for streamlining task execution and documentation requirements that will permit reduction in cost without sacrificing technical performance?

Streamlining work processes and improving workflow (i.e. via automation) are anticipated as long as task and documentation requirements are met.

· Question 6: On page 36 of Appendix A, Item 8 under Task 27 indicates that an annual exercise summary be submitted 120 working days after award. Similarly, Item 9 under Task 27 indicates that the NCSR be submitted 130 working days after award. It is assumed that in both cases the expectation is that the document be submitted after completion of the annual exercise and completion of the NCSR survey. Is this a correct assumption?

In the initial award year, it is 120 (March 25) and 130 (April 8) working days after award. To meet these timeframes in follow-on years, it is 60 and 70 working days after completion of the survey.

· Question 7: We assume that a transition plan would not be required from the incumbent. Is this a correct assumption?

No.

A transition plan and its associated tasks are required at the start and the completion of this award.