Questions and Answers - RFI Amend 0001.pdf
PDF 102 KB Posted
- Attached to
- DA01--Managerial Cost Accounting SaaS
- Solicitation number
- 36C10B27Q0011-0001
About this file
This is a Questions & Answers document for federal contract opportunity 36C10B27Q0011, issued October 6, 2026, clarifying discrepancies between a Request for Information (RFI) and supporting documents including a Performance Work Statement (PWS), compliance matrices, and pricing attachments.
The document resolves seven key clarifications regarding system requirements and proposal submission guidance. The Government confirmed that no historical data migration from the legacy DSS system is required, contrary to conflicting language in the PWS and attachments. The required security impact level is Moderate, not High. The solution must utilize four environments (not seven as stated in one attachment), with production-equivalent disaster recovery capacity. Regarding user licensing, vendors must support both 120 named users for licensing purposes and 120 concurrent users for performance capacity simultaneously. ROM pricing for option periods is not required in RFI responses, though the RFI references four option periods and CLIN 0001 requests licenses for the full contract life. This is identified as a new requirement with no incumbent contract. Finally, the Capability Statement, including company-information tables, counts toward the 25-page response limit specified on RFI page 9, while only the Rough Order of Magnitude cost estimate/bill of materials and the completed MCA SaaS Compliance Matrix are excluded from the page count.
View the file
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
36C10B27Q0011
October 6, 2026
QUESTION #1: RFI D.1 says VA does not plan to migrate historical data from the legacy DSS, while PWS 5.3 and Attachment 3 items 37 and 135 require legacy migration and three-year trending. Which should the ROM assume?
ANSWER #1: We do not plan to migrate data.
QUESTION #2: RFI C.1 says the required impact level is not final and may be Moderate or High, while PWS 5.4 states it is Moderate. Which impact level should the ROM and Attachment 3 assume?
ANSWER #2: Moderate.
QUESTION #3: PWS 5.2 item 1 requires four environments, while Attachment 3 item 45 requires seven, with Disaster Recovery at 100 percent of production capacity. Which environment set should the ROM price?
ANSWER #3: PWS Paragraph 5.2 is correct; there are four environments.
QUESTION #4: PWS 5.2 item 19 requires 120 named users, while PWS 5.2 item 9 and Attachment 3 item 32 require 120 concurrent users. Should the ROM price 120 named users or 120 concurrent users?
ANSWER #4: Both requirements are needed. The solution must be licensed for at least 120 named users (PWS 5.2 item 19). It also must handle 120 people using it at the same time without slowing down (PWS 5.2 item 9 and Compliance Matrix item 32).
QUESTION #5: Attachment 2 provides a Base Period table only, while the RFI describes four option periods and CLIN 0001 asks for licenses for the life of the contract. Should option period prices be added to Attachment 2?
ANSWER #5: ROM pricing for Option Periods is not required for the RFI.
QUESTION #6: Is there an incumbent contract number for this requirement, and would the Government share it?
ANSWER #6: This is a new requirement.
QUESTION #7: These questions arrive after the October 1, 10:00 AM cutoff, and Advent understands any answer is at the Government's discretion. Does the Capability Statement count toward the 25-page limit on RFI page 9?
ANSWER #7: Yes, the Capability Statement (including the company-information table) counts toward the 25-page limit. Only the Rough Order of Magnitude cost estimate/BOM and the completed MCA SaaS Compliance Matrix are excluded from the page count, consistent with the RFI's response instructions.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .