Combined Questions and Answers (QA) for ATIS LMS.pdf

Item # Subject USG Reference Questions/Comments USG Response

1 Does the Government prefer solutions that are already authorized at DISA Impact Level 4 (IL4), or will solutions requiring future authorization be considered equally?

The preference is for solutions that are already authorized IL4.

What is the Government’s preferred deployment model, specifically between a fully managed SaaS solution and a Government-hosted solution within cArmy AWS GovCloud?

The Government's intent is for the vendor to be a certified provider of the software.

Additionally, the vendor should provide the software licenses and administrative maintenance support such as defect patching, upgrades, making releases available to the Government.

How does the Government envision a multi-tenant architecture supporting both centralized governance and decentralized control across the 88+ Centers of Excellence and Schools?

The Government envisions a hierarchical multi-tenant Learning Management System (LMS) where centralized governance manages enterprise security, data standardization, and core infrastructure (Impact Level 4 compliance, Identity, Credential, and Access Management [ICAM]), while decentralized control allows each of the 88+ Centers of Excellence (CoEs) and Schools autonomous administration over their specific curriculum, local user roles, and distinct training workflows.

What level of automation is expected within the LMS, and is there interest in incorporating AI-assisted workflows for course design, enrollment, and learner progression?

The Government does have interest in incorporating AI-assisted workflows for course design, enrollment, and learner progression in the LMS. The expectation is by incorporating AI into a Learning Management System (LMS) will allow for shifts in automation from simple rule-based triggers to intelligent, adaptive orchestration.

Expected levels of automation range from 60-80% reduction in course creation time to real-time, autonomous adjustment of learner pathways based on performance data.

While administrative and repetitive tasks are reaching near-total automation, higher-order mission-specific instructional design still requires a "human-in-the-loop" for final validation and security compliance. When implementing these automations in a DoW context, the following "Human-in-the-loop" constraints are expected:

Validation: Instructors must review AI-generated assessments for technical accuracy and mission relevance.

Security: AI-generated content must be screened to ensure no unauthorized classification markings or sensitive data leaks occur during the generation process.

Bias Mitigation: Automated grading and intervention systems must be periodically audited for fairness and objective performance standards.

How will the Government evaluate the balance between native LMS capabilities and reliance on third-party integrations, particularly with respect to security, sustainment, and performance?

The Government evaluates the balance between native capabilities and third-party integrations through the lenses of Risk Management, Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), and User Experience. The Government prefers native LMS capabilities for core functions (e.g., content delivery, gradebooks, assessments) as this minimizes the attack surface, streamlines the continuous Authority to Operate (ATO) process under a single boundary, and simplifies sustainment.

However, the Government recognizes that specialized capabilities may necessitate third-party integrations. In these instances, the Government will evaluate proposed integrations based on their adherence to DoD IL4 data residency requirements and their use of modern open standards (such as LTI 1.3 and xAPI). Proposed third-party reliance will be evaluated unfavorably if it introduces complex licensing, fragmented Service Level Agreements (SLAs), API fragility during core system updates, or requires transmitting DoD data outside the accredited security boundary.

Does the Government intend for the LMS to support readiness-focused analytics beyond course completion tracking, such as competencies, performance outcomes, and mission readiness indicators?

Yes this is the intent of the Government.

7 How will total cost of ownership be evaluated over a 5–10 year period, including infrastructure, security compliance, sustainment, and ongoing modernization?

To evaluate TCO, the Government will calculate the sum of all direct and indirect costs from Acquisition through Retirement. This includes IL4 security compliance, integration with current systems, and long-term maintenance. The Government will utilizing the GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide and the DoW Enterprise Software Initiative (ESI) as the primary toolkits for the framework.

Request for Information (RFI) Mission-Wide Learning Management System (LMS)

What are the Government’s expectations and priorities for migrating legacy content and users at scale, particularly across a user base of approximately 1.5 million personnel?

The Government’s primary expectation is a zero-loss migration that preserves the operational readiness of the 1.5 million personnel across the enterprise. Priority one is Mission Continuity: all legacy content (SCORM/AICC/xAPI) must remain fully operational without the need for re-authoring or technical intervention. Simultaneously, the Government requires the complete migration of user historical data, including transcripts and certification records, to ensure that personnel training paths are uninterrupted.

Success will be measured by the system’s ability to transition 1.5M users with 100% data integrity, ensuring that a user’s training history is accurately reflected and accessible upon their first authenticated login to the new platform.

9 Is there an incumbent contract? If there is, can you please send me the previous contract information/incumbent info?

This is not a new requirement. The Government can confirm that an incumbent contract exists. The incumbent is Enterprise Technology Solutions, INC. The contract number is W52P1J20D0049/W911S024F0104.

10 If not fully detailed in the RFI document, can you please expand on the legacy LMS system and scope of capabilities this new mission-wide LMS is replacing ?

Please see the RFI for the LMS requirements and scope of capabilities.

Please expand on the requirement for ‘a roadmap that reflects support for emergency capabilities and standards’ (e.g. sample scenarios, definition of emergency capabilities, etc.)

This request is centered around future releases of the proposed product and the support provided for those releases.

12 Can you share additional information regarding anticipated timeline for RFP release, and eventual launch/rollout plan?

We are in the early stages of market research; therefore, a timeline for an RFP release has not yet been established. We are an Agile program and plan to use Agile practices for roll-out.

13 Capability Requirement C.1

Capability Requirement C.1., you mention third-party tools and content. Can you provide examples of the types of tools and content being referenced, including file formats, associated vendors, or any other relevant details? We want to ensure we are accurately interpreting the term “tools.”

Our Program uses open source products incoporated via APIs to compliment the LMS capabilities.

14 Security requirements in E1 - E3 Are all the security requirements mandatory requirements? All security requirements are mandatory.

15 Would you entertain a cloud hosted solution that is hosted on AWS (not GovCloud) - if we committed to get FEDRAMP?

The Government plans to evaluate each response provided.

16 Technical & Architecture Questions Section 2.0 and 3.0 Concurrency Load: The RFI mentions "multiple thousands of simultaneous users" for a single course. Can the Government provide a more specific target for "Peak Concurrent Users" (PCU) to help vendors right-size their infrastructure descriptions?

The system must have the ability to support 6500 concurrent users.

17 Technical & Architecture Questions Section 2.0 and 3.0

Data Isolation (A.1): Regarding sub-organization data isolation, does the Government require physically separate databases for each tenant, or is logical separation within a single multi-tenant database (with robust row-level security) acceptable?

Separate databases are not required. Logical separation within a single multi-tenant database with row level security is acceptable.

18 Technical & Architecture Questions Section 2.0 and 3.0

Open Source/API (C.2): The RFI expresses a preference for "non-proprietary, open standards" and potential access to source code. Is the Government specifically looking for an Open Source Software (OSS) core, or is a COTS solution with a fully exposed, well-documented REST API sufficient to meet this requirement?

A COTS solution with a fully exposed, well-documented REST API is sufficient to meet this requirement.

19 Technical & Architecture Questions Section 2.0 and 3.0 Offline Capability: Given the mission-wide nature of the Army Training Information System, is there a requirement for "disconnected" or "offline" synchronized learning for personnel in low-bandwidth or austere environments?

There is no requirment for "disconnected" or "offline" synchronized learning in the LMS environment at this time.

20 Cybersecurity & Deployment Questions. Impact Level 4 (IL4) and cArmy AWS requirements

Hosting Responsibility: Requirement E.1 states the solution must be "capable of being deployed within the cArmy AWS GovCloud". Does the Government intend for the vendor to manage the AWS environment (SaaS), or will the Government provide the environment for the vendor to install and maintain the software (PaaS/IaaS)?

The vendor should provide the software licenses and administrative maintenance support such as defect patching, upgrades, making releases available to the Government. If an on prem solution is proposed, the Governments System integrator will deploy and maintain the LMS. This contract is for supply.

21 Cybersecurity & Deployment Questions. Impact Level 4 (IL4) and cArmy AWS requirements ATO Reciprocity: If a vendor currently holds a FedRAMP High or a DoD IL4/IL5 Authority to Operate (ATO) with another agency, will the PM ATIS recognize that existing authorization for reciprocity to expedite the RMF process?

The ATIS program has an ATO and will require the software to be able to be integrated within the boundaries identified in the RFI.

22 Cybersecurity & Deployment Questions. Impact Level 4 (IL4) and cArmy AWS requirements Encryption Standards: Beyond CAC/PKI authentication, are there specific requirements for data-at-rest encryption (e.g., FIPS 140-3) that must be addressed in the capability statement?

There are no additional encryption standards that must be addressed.

23 Scope & Integration Questions. Clarify the "automation" and "custom tool" requirements HR System Integration (A.2): Which specific "Government HR systems" are prioritized for API integration?

Any of the Army's G1 (HR) systems have the potential to interface with a G3 (training) system.

24 Scope & Integration Questions. Clarify the "automation" and "custom tool" requirements Migration Support: Does the Government anticipate the need for the vendor to migrate historical training records and legacy SCORM content from current systems, or will that be handled by a separate integration lead?

There is potential for an advisory role if content migration is necessary.

25 Scope & Integration Questions. Clarify the "automation" and "custom tool" requirements Bespoke Tools: Section 2.0 mentions integrating "complex simulations". Do these simulations utilize specific protocols beyond SCORM/xAPI, such as HLA (High Level Architecture) or DIS (Distributed Interactive Simulation)?

This is a stretch objective. We have not achieved simulations integration at this point in the Program.

26 Administrative & Procurement Questions. Define the timeline and competition landscape Incumbent Contractor: Is there an incumbent contractor currently providing LMS services for ATIS, or is this a new requirement to consolidate disparate systems?

This is not a new requirement. This is a supply contract. The services to operate are not part of this RFI. The incumbent is Enterprise Technology Solutions, INC. The contract number is W52P1J20D0049/W911S024F0104.

27 Administrative & Procurement Questions. Define the timeline and competition landscape Acquisition Strategy: Does the Government intend to use a specific contract vehicle (e.g., GSA MAS, Army CHESS) for the eventual solicitation, or is an "Open Market" full and open competition being considered?

The Government has not yet made a final determination regarding the specific contract vehicle or whether full and open competition will be utilized. The acquisition strategy remains under review and is pending the resolution of current funding constraints. The Government remains committed to fostering competition and leveraging commercial-first solutions where possible, in alignment with Department of War transformation principles.

28 Administrative & Procurement Questions. Define the timeline and competition landscape Timeline: Following the RFI response due date of 12 May 2026, what is the Government’s anticipated timeline for a formal Request for Proposal (RFP)?

The RFI response due date was changed via Amendment 01 from 12 May 2026 to 29 May 2026. We are in the early stages of market research; therefore, a timeline for an RFP release has not yet been established.

RFI Questions for IT Services