Army-EITaaS_Proposal_Part_1_Q_A_2019_07_16.pdf

Army Enterprise Information Technology as a Service

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

ITEM # Government File Name Page # Para # / Line # Question/Comment Rationale Government Answer

1 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 26 Para 1 / Line 1 Will the Government allow subcontractors to be added to teams after the submission of Proposal Part 1?

Proposal Part 1 deadline is 19 July 19 and includes a list of proposed team members within the Cover Letter.

No Change.

For clarification see these notes:

1. Yes, Subcontractor can be added after the Part 1.

2. Submit any updates to Team Members as part of the Part 2. Submission. There is no limit to the number of DD Form 2345 or ABSC Form submissions.

3. All Teaming Agreements shall be included in Proposal Part 2, Vol IV

2 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 26 Para 1 / Line 1 Will the Government allow subcontractors to be added to teams after contract award?

Proposal Part 1 deadline is 19 July 19 and includes a list of proposed team members within the Cover Letter.

No Change. For clarification, changing / adding subcontractors after award can only occur after consultation and approval from the Government. The Government will consider any potential impact on Cost, Schedule & Performance.

3 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

N/A 1. Narrative Assumptions tab

Attachment 0005 – Army EITaaS Price Matrix includes pricing tabs for AFC, Fort Polk, and Camp Roberts, but not Fort Benning. Based on the following excerpt from the PPON, will the Army release a revised Price Matrix with an updated Narrative Assumptions tab and a tab for Fort Benning site, or should offerors insert lines in the Narrative Assumptions tab for Fort Benning and duplicate one of the other site tabs for Fort Benning pricing?

PPON, page 38, C.4.3.2:

“The Total Evaluated Price will be computed by summing the Total proposed solution costs for Enterprise IT as a Service for Army Futures Command, Fort Polk, Camp Roberts, and Fort Benning ”

Compliance Change Made: Attachment 0005 was updated to include Ft. Benning at Tab 5.

4 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 19 B.4.5 PPON Section B.4.5 states “Each non-price volume shall contain a Glossary/Acronym List of all abbreviations/acronyms used and a definition for each within that volume. Glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.” Will the Government allow offerors to provide a table of contents in volume to enable ease of evaluation?

Proposal submission Change Made. PPON updated. Any Table of Contents in Vol I, Technical will NOT be counted as part of the 20 page limit.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

5 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 20-22 B.5.1 Will the Government permit the addition of teammates past the submission of the Step 1:

Proposal Part 1 Submission, which defines the teaming details under the Offeror Letter and Attachment 0002 - ABSC form? If allowed, how would the Government request that we update those documents for Step 2 elements.

Teaming arrangements that align with new details within the final RFP.

No Change. For clarification see these notes:

1. Yes, Subcontractors, with the exception of Cloud Services, can be added after the Part 1. Cloud Services, if proposed, are required in Part 1 Submission.

2. Submit any updates to Team Members as part of the Part 2. Submission. There is no limit to the number of ABSC Form submissions.

3. All Teaming Agreements shall be included in Proposal Part 2, Vol IV.

6 Attch_0002_Army_EITaaS_Affirmation- Busin-Status-Cert_2019_07_05.pdf

1 1 Should we as a prime provide a separate Attachment 2 for each significant participating entity included in our team or provide the ABSC information and signature on page 1 for each significant participating entity and include that in a single Attachment 2?

Clarification No Change. Submit one (1) ABSC Form in accordance with the Form Instruction:

"Every significant participating entity shall complete the following table and provide a signature representing its certification." To clarify, combining multiple signed/filled out ABSC Forms into a single .pdf file is acceptable.

7 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

Section 4, Page 4 Table

N/A Qualification #8 states we should provide “Demonstrated “current” significant EITaaS Infrastructure investments of approximately $250,000 or greater. Submit Prime/Team EITaaS Infrastructure investments. Prime/Team Qualifications for #8:”Can the Government provide further explanation of what is meant by “current” infrastructure investments”?

Clarification No Change. Qualification #8 states "Demonstrated “recent/current” significant EITaaS Infrastructure investments of approximately $250,000 or greater". For this purpose "Recent/Current" have the usual meaning of those words: occurring or existing in a past period of time comparatively close to the present/belonging to the present time.

Please see PPON Section C.2.2, Table 5

NOTE.

8 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

3, 4, 5 N/A All PDF forms that must be completed and returned are locked for edit. Do we re-submit the entire Attachment 0003 file as an editable PDF, or return Tables 1 and 3 as a separate editable PDF?

Clarification No Change. The Govt did not lock the PDF forms. Follow the instructions to complete and return Attachment 0003. Ensure to click 'Enable All Features'.

9 Attch_0006_DD254 All N/A With respect to the provided DD254 do all assigned personnel require SCI access? Can the government provide a revised and consistent DD 254?

DD 254 is inconsistent Change Made. Attachment 0006, DD Form 254, will be revised where Block 11. e. (1) SCI is no longer checked "X"

10 Attch_0001_Army_EITaaS_DD2345_Mili- Critical-Tech-Data_2019_06_22

N/A N/A Prime, Offeror, will submit the completed DD form 2345. Please advise if any of the Offeror's subcontractors are also required to provide a completed DD form 2345?

Ensure Offeror's compliance with Government for subcontractors.

No Change. To clarify, Yes. Subcontractors are required to submit a DD Form 2345, if that organization will have access to the Pilot Site Data.

11 Attch_0002_Army_EITaaS_Affirmation- Busin-Status-Cert_2019_07_05.pdf

3 N/A Will the Army utilize the Offeror's estimated price proposal and percentage of contribution in lieu of a cost proposal? As a Nontraditional Defense Contractor (NDC), the Offeror’s response would be limited to an estimated price proposal and percentage of contribution in lieu of a cost proposal.

To ensure Offeror's understanding as an approved NDC.

Change Made. For Attachment 0002, a 'Cost Proposal' is not required. Attachment 0002 requires an estimate of work to be performed. PPON updated to permit re-submission of ABSC with Proposal Part 2.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

12 Attch_0002_Army_EITaaS_Affirmation- Busin-Status-Cert_2019_07_05.pdf

3 N/A Vendor requests this requirement be removed - "Provide a total estimated cost and percentage of the NDC or NRI associated with the proposal. (Note:

While cost is an indicator for the level of NDC or NRI participation, there is no specific cost threshold required."

This due date, July 19, is not a reasonable amount of time for an estimated cost on a project not yet technically solutioned.

No Change. Complete Attachment 0002 providing best estimated value(s). If it becomes needed, revised ABSC form(s) may be submitted with proposal Part 2 submissions.

13 Attch_0002_Army_EITaaS_Affirmation- Busin-Status-Cert_2019_07_05.pdf

3 N/A Vendor requests this requirement be removed - "Provide a total estimated cost and percentage of the NDC or NRI associated with the proposal. (Note:

While cost is an indicator for the level of NDC or NRI participation, there is no specific cost threshold required." We believe this is not a requirement under 10 USC 2371(b)(d).

We believe this is not a requirement under 10 USC 2371(b)(d).

No Change. The Government is requesting this information in order to assist in the analysis of significant participation that is required by 10 USC 2371(b)(d).

14 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 32 N/A This paragraph states that "Demonstrated Performance Confidence assessment Ratings will only be assessed following the application of Tables 4 and 5 above for the evaluation of the Offeror’s individual Demonstrated Performance records.

Table 6 will be used to assess the Offeror’s overall Demonstrated Performance submission for a Confidence Assessment", however Table 4 is intentionally left blank. Is it correct to assume that only Table 5 should be referenced in that statement?

To ensure compliance of the PPON response.

No Change.

To clarify, Yes, the Table 4 was removed and only Table 5 - Definitions of Demonstrated Performance Relevancy Ratings will be used to support Table 6 - Demonstrated Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings.

15 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 20 N/A Instructions for Attachment 1 indicate only the Prime Offeror need submit a DD2345 to have access to the Government Pilot Site Survey Data. Is it correct to conclude that team members will have access to the Government Pilot Site Survey Data based on the Prime's 2345 submission.

Ensure Offeror's compliance with Government for subcontractors.

Change made. The PPON was updated to state that Subcontractors are required to submit a DD Form 2345 if that organization will have access to the Pilot Site Data.

16 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 20 N/A Attachment 0002 instructions seems to indicate that the Prime Offeror and its Team Members are ALL required to complete and submit this document;

however, the Attachment 2 instructions indicate that "Every significant participating entity" completes and submits. Given the Government is relying upon the form submitter's self-certification in determining awardability and a Prime offeror meeting the definition of non-traditional defense contractor would be sufficient to warrant an OT award, would any Team member still need to complete the ABSC form?

Ensure Offeror's compliance with Government.

No Change. Complete Attachment 0002 following the instructions. To clarify, read the instructions at the top of Page 1. "Every significant participating entity shall complete the following table and provide a signature representing its certification." "Significant participating entity" is asserted by the Offeror, and verified by the Government.

17 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf N/A N/A Will the Army consider allowing Offerors to submit multiple offers? There could be more than one potential solution available from each Offeror, and we would like the opportunity to show the Army our full capabilities.

Planning/Strategy No Change. Offerors shall only submit one offer as a Prime Contractor.

18 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 2 N/A If a partner company is only providing product should they be listed in the Proposed Team Member list in the Offeror Letter? Will the Government increase the page count to 10 pages or allow for this table to be incorporated outside of the page count limited to 2 pages?

If vendors providing product only are required to be listed in this table, additional pages will be required to accommodate.

No Change.

1. The Government only requires Teaming Agreements for Team Members who are performing under the future Agreement as a "performer".

2. No Change to page count.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

19 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf and Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

10 N/A Will the Government confirm that information offeror labels as FOUO in Table 2 - Demonstrated Performance Record will be protected as FOUO upon submission to the Government?

Critical additional detail can be provided for extremely relevant programs if the Government confirms it will be protected if labeled as FOUO.

No Change. The Government confirms that it will: "Protect the Offerors proposal information from unauthorized use or disclosure for as long as it remains proprietary" See Attachment 0007, Para 4.b.

20 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 21

N/A If an Offeror is not designated as a top/highest tier Vendor from a Cloud Provider for a cloud service offering they wish to include as part of their solution, would that prohibit them from using that cloud service offering in their solution?

Clarification No Change. The scenario described would not meet the minimum acceptable standards detailed in PPON para C.2.1.E.

21 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

N/A N/A Pricing Matrix requires Offerors to price against two small size sites (AFC and Camp Roberts) and one medium size site (Ft. Polk). Will the Government confirm if Offerors will be required to provide pricing for a large size site?

The Government has indicated that in execution of the pilots, the intent is to assign one small size site, one medium size site and one large size site to each awardee. The Government has not requested pricing for a large size site to evaluate the offeror against. Scalability and efficiencies of scale in pricing is not shown with two small size sites.

Change made. Attachment 0005 updated.

Offerors are also required to submit pricing for Ft. Benning, which is considered a large Pilot Site.

22 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

N/A N/A Will the Government allow the Offeror to make changes to the price matrix to provide a single rolled up fixed unit price for Phase I Survey / Assessment, Phase II Plan & Prepare and Phase III Implement?

Activities associated with the Survey / Assessment, Plant & Prepare, and Implement phases wouldn't typically be broken out by the cost per unit by LOE detail required in the price matrix.

No Change. The Offeror shall submit the Attachment 0005 in accordance with the instructions.

23 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 11 N/A Will the Government provide a list of Proposal Part 1 adjectival ratings for all offerors without naming offerors?

Planning No Change. No, the Government will not provide a list of Proposal Part 1 adjectival ratings for all Offerors.

24 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tab 2-4 N/A Can the Government please provide examples for Column A, blue rows ("INSERT ACTIVITY / SUB COST ELEMENT - Offeror Approach")?

This will ensure all offerors are proposing similar levels of detail and will allow the Government to more easily compare submitted pricing for evaluation purposes.

No Change. The Offeror shall follow the instructions in the attachment. The Government will not provide examples for any instance on "Insert Activity"

25 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 38 N/A Paragraph C.4.3.1 states: "Quantities included in the Price Matrix (Attachment 0005) are for evaluation purposes".

Is the Government referring to quantities populated by Offerors in Columns E - I of Tabs 2-4?

Clarification of the term "quantities" No Change. The quote questioned was not the entire sentence. PPON Paragraph C.4.3.1 states "Quantities included in the Price Matrix (Attachment 0005) are for evaluation purposes and are not a guaranteed minimum." Meaning, any quantity of material / services proposed does not equal a Government agreed guaranteed minimum for an award.

26 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 21 N/A Are proof points required to be from performance as a Prime?

Paragraph F.1 in section B.5.1 clearly states that the 4 demonstrated performance records must be from performance as a prime. Does this apply to the proof points as well?

No Change. PPON Paragraph B.5.1, F.1 states "Records from Team Members are acceptable as long as the Record clearly shows that they were the Prime on the Record Performance."

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

27 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

1,2 N/A 2. Table 1: Prime / Team Qualifications: Submit a two (2) page response with Table 1 below. Keep Table 1 content formatted as provided Table Font/Size = Arial 11 Point.

Page Limit for Table 1 = 2 Pages (as provided) For Table 1, each response entry is limited to three lines in each of the blue highlighted cells.

QUESTION: Will the Government confirm if the content limit for Table 1 is 3 lines in each of the blue highlighted cells, or an overall page limit of 2 pages?

If 3 lines are utilized for each blue cell, Table 1 extends beyond the 2 page limit.

No Change. The overall Table 1 page limit is two pages total, with a maximum of three lines in each blue cell.

28 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 18 N/A Will the Government allow additional pages for the Technical Schedule to allow offerors to provide the appropriate level of detail requested for this proposal deliverable?

Additional pages No Change. All Offerors shall follow the instructions at "B.5.2.1.3 Sub-factor 3 – Technical Schedule"

29 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf N/A N/A When is payment expected monthly, annually, ect.? N/A No Change. Payments will be made by Milestones. Please PPON B.5.2.3.5 "Specific payable Milestones will be negotiated with individual Offerors prior to award."

30 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf N/A N/A Will you change of NACIS code from 518210 to 517110?

N/A No Change. The NAICS Code will remain 518210.

31 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf N/A N/A Can a small business be awarded one of the lines of effort without being part of a team?

N/A No Change. No, the Government will not award individual LOE's to individual Offerors. See PPON Figure 2 - Army EITaaS Planned Pilot Site Sets and B.5.4 Step 4: Upward Invite B –Agreement Award

32 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 21 N/A Section E states "If proposing a Cloud component as part of the EITaaS Solution as a Cloud reseller, the Offeror shall provide a designation as a top/highest tier Vendor from the Cloud Provider." Is it acceptable for the Prime's subcontractor to be designated as a top/highest tier vendor from the Cloud Provider, instead of the Prime, if the subcontractor is responsible for providing cloud reseller support?

Response Compliance No Change. To clarify, yes, a Team Member can be the Cloud Services Provider, as long as the Part 1 Proposal Submission minimum acceptable standards set forth in C.2.1. D. and E are met.

33 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

3 N/A Table 1, Qual 1 requests "Demonstrated ability to provide IT services for one or more Lines of Effort (LOEs) in a geographically dispersed environment, under a single contract that cross(ed) at least one Governmental organizational/agency or political boundary (e.g. DoD to DOE) or political (city/state lines) where customer experience and performance improvements are quantified and reported." The requirement to cross agency or political lines is not a typical requirement met by non-traditional/non-defense contractors solicited by an OTA. Will the government remove this Qual from Table 1?

Response Compliance Change Made. Qual. 1 updated to reflect aspect that examples do not need to be Government only.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

34 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

4 N/A Table 1, Qual 4 requests "Demonstrated ability to provide IT services for one or more Lines of Effort (LOEs) in a geographically dispersed environment, under a single contract that cross(ed) at least one Governmental organizational/agency or political boundary (e.g. DoD to DOE) or political (city/state lines) where customer experience and performance improvements are quantified and reported." The requirement to cross agency or political lines is not a typical requirement met by non-traditional/non-defense contractors solicited by an OTA. Will the government remove "CSfC" from this Qual?

Response Compliance No Change. The question appears to have cited an incorrect reference. However, the Government will not remove the CSfC requirement from Qual. 4.

35 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 20 N/A Will the Government allow the addition of team members after submission of Proposal Part 1?

Ability to adjust teaming mix to reflect increased understanding of government requirements

No Change. To clarify, yes.

37 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

5 N/A This section states "Summary of Services Provided (List the related EITaaS LOE(s) and list the applicable SOO Paragraph 4 (inclusive of 4.1 – 4.8) #(s) on left edge, in front of each statement/ paragraph (ex “LOE 1.2, para 4.1”)." Please clarify whether the quoted verbiage above referencing SOO paragraph 4 (EITaaS Pilot Key Goals/Success Metrics and Production) should reference SOO paragraph 5 (EITaaS Pilot Lines of Effort (LOEs) Objectives) instead?

Response Compliance and Comprehensiveness

No Change. To clarify, Attachment 0003 Demonstrated Performance, references for Contract Information 2, should respond to SOO Paragraph 4 (inclusive of 4.1 – 4.8).

38 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tab 2 N/A The Instructions tab of the Pricing Matrix states "Please submit a Firm Fixed Price value for Phase 1 and Firm Fixed Price ROMs for Phases 2 through 5." Can the Army confirm that the instructions stated above are accurate?

Response Compliance No Change.

The instructions have been revised. A Firm Fixed Price is required for all Phases.

39 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 5 N/A Will the Government please clarify whether or not subcontractor teammates are required to have a DUNS number and System for Award Management (SAM) registration?

Eligibility No Change. Yes. Please review PPON paragraph C.2.1 Proposal Part Minimum Acceptable Standards Defined, subpara A Offeror Letter: 1). To respond directly, yes, all EITaaS Agreement Team Member shall have a DUNS, a CAGE code and be registered in SAM.gov.

40 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 26 N/A Will the Government please clarify if Teaming Agreements/partnership agreements include Non- Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) or similar documentation?

Eligibility No Change. The requirement of para B.5.2.4.3 does not require submission of any NDAs executed among team members.

41 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 5 N/A Will the Government please clarify if any portion of the eligibility requirements can be waived?

Eligibility No Change. It is not anticipated that a waiver will be granted. Reference 10 UCS 2371b(d)(1)(D) for when a waiver may be granted.

42 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 18 N/A Please clarify that Format 2 (8.5"X14") may be used for the Subfactor 3 Technical Schedule.

Format 2: Each face of an 8.5 x 14 inches sheet of paper, with the digital submission viewed in print format. This format is designated for .xlsx Attachments and Offeror Solution Diagrams only.

The Schedule is specified as one page, but the size of the page is not clear.

We could also request a larger format (11"X17") since this page amounts to a Subfactor and is important.

Change Made: PPON, page 38, B.4.3 Page Size and Format:

Format 2: …. "This format is designated for .xlsx Attachments, Offeror Solution Diagrams and the Technical Schedule only." No Change to the Page Count.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

43 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

3 N/A Please clarify:

Demonstrated ability to scale geographically to support:

b.an increased customer base of approximately

1.3 million users or more over approximately 4 years.

Assuming this is correct, we request a change to Qual. 2

For the Demonstrated Performance Record submittal is limited to 4 total contracts. The example shows using these 4 contracts to cover all of the 8 qualification areas.

In Qual. 2, it states a scalability requirement for 1.3million users across LOE 1.1, 1.2, 1.3. There are not many single companies or organizations that have 1.3m employee/users. We ask the government to consider lowering this volume to something more reasonable.

(i.e. 500,000 users).

No Change. The Army Enterprise is currently estimated at approximately 1.3M users. Offerors should indicate their ability to scale geographically to the same scale as the Army Enterprise.

44 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

5 N/A Instructions state: "Contract Information (Cont.)

Summary of Services Provided (List the related EITaaS LOE(s) and list the applicable SOO Paragraph 4 (inclusive of 4.1 – 4.8) #(s) on left edge, in front of each statement/ paragraph (ex “LOE 1.2, para 4.1”). Submit up to 4 Records, Page Limit = 1 per record, the text shall be no smaller than Arial 11 point font size" Does the page limit include the table or is the page limit referring to the narrative only? We request a full 1 page text box to describe applicability across all three LOEs.

The one page limit includes the contract information and limits the ability to present relevancy informations below .

No Change. The page limit includes the table. No increase in page count. Submit Attachment 0003 in accordance with the instruction.

45 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Instructions N/A The instructions indicate "automatically calculated on each Tab 2-5". It appears the instructions should be changed to indicate Tabs 2-4. Please clarify the provided price matrix tab 5 is blank.

Clarify pricing requirements

Change Made. Attachment 0005 updated to add the Ft. Benning tab (Tab 5).

46 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

CLIN Structure N/A CLINs 2001-3005 are listed in the CLIN structure but not included on Tabs 2-4. Please confirm that the only pricing required is for the 3 sites listed under CLINs 1001-1005 of AFC, Polk and Roberts.

Clarify pricing requirements Change Made. Attachment 0005 updated to add Ft. Benning to Tab 5. Please submit pricing as instructed for the Tabs 2 - 5, (AFC, Polk, Roberts and Benning). CLINs 2001-3005 are not to be priced for Proposal Part 2 submission.

47 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tabs 2-4 N/A Due to uncertainty of Customer requirements around Travel and ODCs, we recommend the Government include a plug for evaluation purposes for these components

These costs are not able to be priced with certainty to provide a firm fixed price based on the information provided

Change made. The total Firm Fixed Price shall include all aspects of performance the Offeror anticipates will be necessary to meet the requirements of the SOO, to include travel and ODCs. Travel assumptions have been added to the 'Instructions Tab' on the Price Matrix.

48 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tabs 2-4 N/A The Total Cost formula includes Columns E-I which represent the number of units. Please fix the formula to only include Columns J-N

Fix formula Change Made. Please see the revised Attachment 0005 Price Matrix.

49 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tabs 2-4 N/A The formulas are set up to multiply the Cost Per Unit by the Number of Units. This formula does not take into account the number of months. Should bidders adjust the Number of Units by the Number of months in filling out the price sheets to reflect the total cost over the contract?

Clarify pricing requirements Change Made. Please see the revised Attachment 0005 Price Matrix.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

50 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Tabs 5-8 N/A Can the Government provide additional direction on how bidders are to use Tabs 5-8? It is unclear based on the instructions and tab headers how bidders are expected to use each of these 4 tabs.

Clarify pricing requirements No Change. Please see the Attachment 0005 Tab "Instructions", Row 9: "Tabs 6 through X - Additional Price-Cost Support.

51 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 38 N/A The RFP states "The Total Evaluated Price will be computed by summing the Total proposed solution costs for Enterprise IT as a Service for Army Futures Command, Fort Polk, Camp Roberts and Fort Benning." Please clarify if Fort Benning should be priced and if required to be priced, please update the price sheet to include a tab for this site.

Clarify pricing requirements Change Made. Attachment 0005 updated to add the Ft. Benning tab (Tab 5).

52 Attch_0005_Army_EITaaS_Price_Matrix_20 19_07_09.xlsx

Proposed Costs Tabs

N/A For Phase V, Transition, is the intent for the offeror to price a "Transition Out" per SOO section 6.5.a, or a "Transition to Production" as defined by SOO section 6.5.b?

Transition Out and Transition to Production are different activities and involve different price factors.

Change made. PPON para B.5.2.3.1 and C.4.3.2 NOTE 2 updated to state Offerors shall assume "Transition Out" for Phase V pricing.

53 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 21 N/A Step 1 proposal requests an Affirmation of Business Status Certification (ABSC) Form for the bidder and teaming partners/subcontractors to be provided during Step 1. Please clarify that bidders will be able to add and remove teaming partners/subcontractor until final proposals are submitted in Step 3.

Teaming partners may, at any time choose not to participate or become available as proposal efforts advance.

The ability to add and remove teaming partner/subcontractor benefits the government by making the strongest team available to execute the tasks of the solicitation

No Change.

1. To clarify, Yes, Subcontractors, with the exception of Cloud Services, can be added after the Part 1. Cloud Services, if proposed, are required in Part 1 Submission.

2. Submit any updates to Team Members as part of the Part 2. Submission. There is no limit to the number of ABSC Form submissions.

3. All Teaming Agreements shall be included in Proposal Part 2, Vol IV.

54 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 5 N/A Where does the one third of the "non Federal Government" funding come from?

Internal Planning No Change. Please refer to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b. If an Offeror is proposing a 1/3 Cost share, the funding does not come from the Government. Reference the OT Guide for Prototype Projects, dated Nov 2018 for additional information.

55 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 3 N/A What budget has been allocated to the 3 awards? Internal Planning No Change. The Government will not be disclosing the budget for the Army EITaaS program.

56 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 10 N/A Can the vendor select the order of the 3 sites listed (small, medium and large)?

Internal Planning No Change. Please review PPON page 7.

Paragraph A.1.4 Step 4. To respond directly, No, the Vendor will not select the order of the Pilot Sites.

57 Terms & ConditionsTerms_and_Conditions_1July201

22 N/A With regard to IL5 Certifications on Cloud delivered certifications, will the Government accept Pending approvals on these offerings? DISA is in the process of finalizing certification on certain solutions and we expect approval shortly.

In case DISA schedule is prolonged for review, to ensure we are not precluded from bidding HCS-D.

No Change. A pending IL-5 approval from DISA does not meet the minimum standard for Part 1 submission.

Submit the proposal per the instructions at B.5.1 E. with consideration of the C.2.1 Proposal Part 1 Minimum Acceptable Standards Defined: in E.

(EITaaS)

Solicitation Number: W15QKN‐19‐R‐06JL

58 Army_EITaas_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf N/A N/A Camp Roberts is listed as one of the three sites under review for this program. Based on their relationships with the 106th, and 21st Sig Bdes as well as the California Army National Guard and ARNG Headquarters. As part of their mission, we believe that Roberts has an Regional Hub Node and other atypical technical capabilities. Can you help define the scale of this effort within Camp Roberts for the purposes of supporting this RFP?

Trying to refine the scope and understand whether we can re-use ARNG licensing to support this activity or if there is a separate NEC ,etc., that would be involved from an AC side.

No Change. Please refer to SOO Enclosure 0003d1-2: Army EITaaS Camp Roberts Fact Sheets.

To clarify, Camp Roberts is only focused on Active Duty component operating on DODIN-A, 21st Signal Brigade and other DA Civilians.

59 Attch_0003_Army_EITaaS_Demonstrated- Performance-Record_2019_07_09x.pdf

1 2 Will the Government consider increasing the Page Limit for Table 1 from 4 or 6 pages?

Current formatting consumes 3 of the 4 pages allocated. 6 pages would better allow contractors to succinctly address each Qual and LOE by the prime and supporting teammates who have primed.

Ability to provide minimum but sufficient information for evaluation purposes within allocated pages. The additional space is needed for Offerors to demonstrate their full scope of EITaaS Qualifications.

No Change.

60 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9JULY2019.pdf 6 A.1.2 B.2.1.6

Will the Government allow more than one set of questions in Proposal Part 2? Recommend that contractor be allowed to send in rolling sets of questions during step two until 23 July. Request the Government respond weekly to submitted questions.

This allows the contractor to get rapid clarification to the solicitation. Waiting for answers to come after 23 July leaves insufficient time to adequately respond to the Government's answers

No Change. Please submit Part 2 Questions in accordance with the instructions.

61 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9July2019.pdf 21 C.2.1.D Commercial and non-traditional contractor cloud services are the fastest way to deploy a pilot program to validate technical solutions. Would the Army consider initially reducing the IL5 requirement for Cloud services with a time-bound path for IL5 achievement, since this is a pilot program/prototype OTA and the aggressive timeline lends itself to speed?

Time to value No Change.

To respond directly, No. Impact Level (IL) 5 is the requirement on Day 1.

62 Army_EITaaS_PPON_9July2019.pdf 21 B.5.1.D Will the Government allow the addition of new Cloud Services after Part 1 is closed?

Planning No Change. Offerors are not permitted to add/propose new Cloud Services after Part

1. Proposals submitted must include a Cloud Service solution meeting the minimum acceptable standards by the Part 1 submission (if proposing a cloud solution).

END of Part 1 Questions