REQUEST FOR INFORMATION_AFTOC Sustainment .pdf

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI)

Air Force Total Ownership Cost Sustainment Support

Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) Financial Management and Comptroller (FM) - Air Force Cost Analysis Agency

1. PURPOSE

The Department of the Air Force (DAF) is conducting market research to identify capable sources, including large companies, small businesses, 8(a) participants, HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB, and EDWOSB firms, that can provide the services described in the attached Draft Performance Work Statement (PWS).

2. BACKGROUND

The SAF/FM and AFCAA require data system expertise to produce the data used in studies for understanding acquisition and sustainment costs associated with DAF systems. The current contract provides data repositories to help federal entities identify historical cost drivers (aircraft, munitions, space systems, Command, Control, Communications, computers, and Intelligence C4I systems and other systems). The output data products of this contract are used in analyses directly supporting OSD, DAF Air Staff, AF Major Command (MAJCOM), Space Force (SF) Field Command (FLDCOM), DAF operating agencies, and other federal entities.

3. OBJECTIVES

- Identify firms capable of meeting the requirements in full or in part.

- Understand potential teaming or joint venture arrangements that could meet the requirements.

- Assess subcontracting opportunities to maximize small business participation.

- Remove unduly restrictive requirements from prior RFIs.

4. RESPONSE INSTRUCTIONS

Please review the attached Draft PWS and provide a capability statement not exceeding 25 pages that addresses the questions below. Do not simply restate PWS requirements; instead, describe your relevant experience, approaches, and potential solutions. Responses may address the entire scope of work or only portions of the PWS (see attachment). For market research purposes, the Government will accept partial capabilities and teaming/subcontracting strategies that could meet the requirement in its entirety.

Please submit the following:

Company Information, including business name, address, DUNS/UEI and CAGE Code:

Points of Contact:

Business size classification (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB):

Questions or clarifications regarding the requirement.

5. QUESTIONS

A. Capability & Requirements Questions

1. Describe your experience sustaining DoD cost/logistics data warehouses that integrate financial, supply, maintenance, personnel, fuel data, etc into standardized analytic products (examples of systems/enclaves, do not provide proprietary details).

2. What VAMOSC / O&S cost reporting efforts have you supported (Air Force or other Services), and what was your role (data engineering, BR governance, QA, reporting, helpdesk)?

3. For large portfolios of feeder systems (like the list in 2.1.4), what is your standard approach to data transfer automation, monitoring, and failure recovery?

4. What do you consider “minimum viable” data pipeline observability (dashboards/alerts/logging) to meet monthly + quarterly production deadlines?

5. What are the most common failure modes you see in DoD feeder integrations (schema drift, missing transactions, late loads, code-package changes, etc.) and how do you mitigate them?

6. Describe your approach to integrating new ERP outputs while maintaining “legacy vs ERP” comparison/validation and cost continuity.

7. What is your method for building translation layers to support SFIS/SLOA compliance when financial source formats change?

8. What artifacts do you produce for a BR change request to make it “decision-ready” for a CCB (data impact, back-year implications, test evidence, documentation updates)?

9. What is your experience maintaining BO/WebI universes at scale (performance, security trimming, large exports, semantic layer stability)?

10. How do you manage report standardization vs ad hoc demand without breaking baseline metrics?

11. Describe your approach to running a helpdesk that supports both technical users and analysts, including prioritization with PMO approval and delivery date agreements.

12. What do you recommend as the “right” tooling/workflow for tracking DD2875 intake, annual training compliance, deactivation rules, and notifications?

13. What user/product usage metrics do you recommend the PMO track to improve adoption and reduce repetitive tickets?

14. Describe your experience sustaining systems under RMF/ATO, including POA&Ms, annual security assessments, and quarterly STIG cycles.

15. What’s your approach for ensuring correct CUI markings across reports/training/analyst notes and controlling export/transmission?

16. Confirm how you structure delivery so the Government can take custody of all scripts/code/BRs/docs/dashboards/training at any time (version control, packaging, turnover).

17. Given the stated labor mix (11.5 FTE), what staffing model do you recommend to ensure monthly + quarterly production is resilient to turnover?

18. What does a realistic transition-in plan look like in the first 60–90 days (what you need from the incumbent, government, and 520 SWES/MXDPC)?

19. What cross-training approach have you used that actually works (role backups, desk guides, runbooks, “two-deep” coverage)?

20. Which performance measures best correlate with successful sustainment: pipeline timeliness, defect rate, user satisfaction, time-to-close anomalies, etc.?

21. What “gotchas” have you seen with AQL/threshold design for data products (e.g., defining “10% error” in a way that is measurable and fair)?

22. While the government anticipates utilizing NAICS 541330 (Engineering Services) or 518210 (Computing Infrastructure, Data Processing, Web Hosting and Related Services), Industry feedback is welcome. Is there a more applicable NAICS (i.e. 541512 – Computer Systems Design Services, 541511 – Custom Computer Programming Services) that better aligns with Industry performance and structure?

6. RESPONSES DUE

Responses are due no later than 5 PM EST on 5 February via email to maia.warren@us.af.mil & Danielle.Sookhai.1@us.af.mil Please reference “RFI Response –Air Force Total Ownership Cost Sustainment Support” in the subject line.

7. DISCLAIMER

This RFI is for market research purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation. The attached Draft PWS is provided solely for planning purposes and is subject to change prior to any potential solicitation release.

8. ATTACHMENTS

PWS titled “Air Force Total Ownership Cost at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland”, dated January 2026.

mailto:maia.warren@us.af.mil