Attachment_0016_QA_Matrix_20170510.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 425 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Logistics Automation (LOGAUTIO) Services
- Solicitation number
- W52P1J-16-R-0050
About this file
Q&A Matrix
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
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
Q&A - 14 April 2017
| Question Number | RFP / PWS / Attachment / CDRL Reference and Text | Page #, Paragraph # | Question/Comment | Answer |
| 1 | Para L.5 | 4 | Para L.5. states “PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL. All proposals and related information shall be submitted in the format identified above, to the Army at the address shown below, no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation. The Government will not accept e-mailed proposals for this RFP.” |
Para L.3.1. states “Offerors shall submit one copy on CD/DVD or electronically to the e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2., for each Volume of the proposal, which must be virus free.” And Para L.3 contains a table depicted # of copies for submission. Each volume shows the following, “1 each CD/DVD or electronic submission (both e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2).”
Para L.5. states “PROPOSAL SUBMITTAL. All proposals and related information shall be submitted in the format identified above, to the Army at the address shown below, no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation. The Government will not accept e-mailed proposals for this RFP.”
Para L.3.1. states “Offerors shall submit one copy on CD/DVD or electronically to the e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2., for each Volume of the proposal, which must be virus free.” And Para L.3 contains a table depicted # of copies for submission. Each volume shows the following, “1 each CD/DVD or electronic submission (both e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2).”
| Are email submissions permitted? | Yes email submissions are permitted and preferred. Section L has been revised to clear up descrepecies. | ||||
| 2 | RFP and Attachment 0004 | Page 2 Section A-3 and Page 4 Section M.1 | Instructions to Offerors states, "This acquisition will use the best value LPTA source selection process, IAW FAR 15.101-2; Department of Defense (DOD) Source Selection Procedures, dated March 2016". However, the last sentence in the same section states, "ACC-RI will make an award to the responsible Contractor whose offer conforms to the solicitation and is determined to provide the best value to the Government". Could you please clarify of this is going to be evaluated as an LPTA or a Best Value? | LPTA is a best value procurement strategy. | |
| 3 | Attachment 0003 | Page 1 Section L.1 | Solicitation states, "Offerors shall complete Box 12 of Standard Form 1449, Solicitation, Offer and Award, indicating its offer may be accepted within 180 calendar days of the solicitation closing date". However, Block 12 on the SF 1449 is for Discount Terms. Is this where the Government wants the Offerors to insert that statement? | Any discount terms as well as confirmation of the Offer being valid for 180 days should be entered into block 12. | |
| 4 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2 & 3 Section L.3.1 | Section L.3.1 states, "Offerors shall submit one copy on CD/DVD or electronically to the e-mail addresses listed in section L.2" and "All copies of an individual volume shall be identical". Does the Government require the contractor to submit one copy of each volumn or multiple copies? | Offerors are sending one pro two separate email addresses resulting in two copies being rec | |
| 5 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2 Section L.3 and Page 4 Section L.5 | The Table represented under Section L.3 (# of Copies) states, "1 each CD/DVD or electronic submission (both e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2)". However, under Section L.5 the Government states, "The Government will not accept e-mailed proposals for this RFP". Could you please provide clarification on how the offeror is to submit this proposal? | Email submission is the only allowable way to response to this solicitation. Section L.5 has been revised to reflect this. | |
| 6 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2 section L.3.1 | Can Volumns I and III be submitted in either MS Word or PDF formats? | PDF Documents are preferred. | |
| 7 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2 section L.3.1 | Is there a prescribed naming convention for the submission volumns? | Volumes should be named in accordance with Section L Instructions | |
| 8 | PWS | Page 2 Section 4.1 | The PWS states the Period of Performance is from 1 December 2013 - 30 November 2014 base, and two (2) Option Years. Is the stated Period of Performance correct? | PWS has been revised. | |
| 9 | PWS | Page 6 Section 4.4.5 and Page 9 Section 4.6.1 | For all plans, such as the LIS Rebuild Process and Property Plan, will current versions, if available, be provided to the contractor during transition for review and updating so that current processes that are working for the Government can continue? | Yes, all current plans that are available can be provided to the contractor. The process used to rebuild the systems is proprietary to the contract team with the only Army requirement being that they utilize theArmy supplied image and software updates. |
| 10 | PWS | Page 9 Section 4.6.2 | The section states a LIS baseline listing will be established NLT 30 days after contract award. Should this requirement be for Contract Start Date since the contractor may not have started performing work or completed a Transition period at that time. | PWS has been revised to Clarify. |
| 11 | PWS | Page 13 Section 4.8.6 | Does the Government intend to have the contract start date be within 5 days from contract award? | Transition will begin the date of award full performance will begin 3 months after date of award |
| 12 | PWS | Page 25 Section | Has the Government identified any positions as Key on this contract? | No, it is up to the Offeror to identify Key Positions |
| 13 | PWS 16.5 | pg. 27 | Are there any limitations on hiring foreign nationals? | See paragraph 5.3.1 |
| 14 | PWS 6.1 | pg. 19 | PWS 6.1 states, "The primary location for performance will be Camp Arifjan, Kuwait. The contractor shall be required to travel in support of this requirement to USARCENT locations." Is there life support for extended operations in any of the other USCENTCOM AOR? | When mission essential travel is required life support will be provided at the base of performance. |
| 15 | PWS 5.1 & 12.3 | pg. 23 | PWS 5.1 states, " In accordance with AR 25-2, Information Assurance, and AR 380-67, Personnel Security Program, Appendix K, the contractor personnel having access to unclassified Defense information and accessing Government computer systems under this award shall be subjected to, as a minimum, a National Agency Check (NAC)." PWS 12.3 states, "Contractor personnel shall be required to obtain SECRET clearances for all personnel prior to start date on the contract. " What are the positions that require a secret security clearance? | The National Agency Check (NAC) is the minimum requirement to have a |
user account on the Government network. Because there are systems located in secure facilities such as the one we work in here the secret security clearance is required to get in and perform work if needed on the system.
It is recommend the entire contract team have a secret clearance.
| 16 | PWS 6.3 | pg. 19 | PWS 6.3 states, " "Based on workload or during periods of surge conditions, the contractor may be required to | ||
| provide support for up to 72 hours per week." Will the government provide the historical workload data including past surge requirements? | Since 2008 the current contractor(awardee of two sucessive competitive LOGAUTO contracts) has provided sustainment training on a variety of systems for over 3,800 logisticians, fielded over 30,500 helpdesk calls from across the Coalition Joint Operational Area, and conducted 7,560 TLS Gunnery exercises. During the current contract performance surge effort hours (72 hours per week) were worked from the first date of perfomance (1 December 2013) through 18 June 2016. Since June 2016 the LOGAUTO Contractor has been working 60 hours per week. | ||||
| 17 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2, Paragraph L.3.1 and Page 4, Paragraph L.5 | Paragraph L.3.1 states that Offerors shall submit one copy on CD/DVD or electronically to the e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2., for each Volume of the proposal, which must be virus free. Paragraph L.5 states the Government will not accept e-mailed proposals for this RFP. Can you please tell me if proposals are to be submitted on CD/DVD or can they be submtted electronically to the email addressses listed? | Email submissions are permitted and preferred. DVD/CD offers can be mailed if the Offeror prefers. |
Q&A - 27 April 2017
| Question Number | RFP / PWS / Attachment / CDRL Reference and Text | Page #, Paragraph # | Question/Comment | Answer |
| 1 | Solicitation Document | Are representations, certifications, and other statements of offerors required in Volume I? | Yes, refer to Attachment 0003, Section L.6.2. This will be included by providing a completed and signed copy of the solicitation, including all sections and any amendments. | |
| 2 | Attachment 0003 | Page 2, Paragraph L.3, Table | In the table on page 2 of paragraph L.3 it states there is a 10 page Executive Summary required in volume I. Can you tell me what is expected in the Executive Summary? | Aside from what is specifically detailed in the Attachment 0003, Section L instructions, the content is the Offeror's discretion. It could include, for example, the Government with an outline of the different proposal volumes and any key points of the proposal Offeror submits in response to the solicitation. |
Q&A - 28 April 2017 (2)
| Question Number | RFP / PWS / Attachment / CDRL Reference and Text | Page #, Paragraph # | Question/Comment | Answer |
| 1 | Amendment 0002, Attachment 0016 | Since the solicitation document (“W52P1J16R0050_20170407.pdf”) includes Section B CLINs that require pricing information, yet “Attachment_0003-_SECTION_L_PROPOSAL_INSTRUCTIONS_20170420.docx” section L.3. forbids the inclusion of any pricing information in volumes other than Volume III – Price, how is the Offeror to submit the entire solicitation document with Section B CLINs information in Volume I and remain compliant with this requirement? | Refer to the "Supples or Services and Prices/Costs" Section of Solicitation W52P1J-16-R-0050 which states, "see attachment 0006 of the solicitation, which the offeror shall submit. If an offeror fails to proposal for all blue shaded cells in Attachment 0006, the Government may reject the Offeror's proposal". Attachment 0006 is how offerors shall submit pricing, which shall be included as a part of the Volume III submission. |
Q&A - 9 May 2017
| Question Number | RFP / PWS / Attachment / CDRL Reference and Text | Page #, Paragraph # | Question/Comment | Answer |
| 1 | Attachment 0003 - Section L Proposal Instructions 10 March 2017 | Para L.3.1; and Para L.5 | Issue: |
Paragraph L.3.1, it states "Offerors shall submit one copy on CD/DVD or electronically to the e-mail addresses listed in Section L.2., for each Volume of the proposal." However, in paragraph L.5, it states "The Government will not accept e-mailed proposals for this RFP".
Question:
| Does the Government require the proposal to be submitted on CD/DVD; or can we submit the proposal by e-mail? | Yes email submissions are permitted and preferred. Section L has been revised to clear up descrepecies. | ||||
| 2 | Section L/Attachment 0006 | L.8.1.2 | It appears the Government is asking contractors to propose the Other Direct Costs as FFP (SubCLINs 0002AA, 1002AA, 2002AA, 3002AA, 4002AA, and 5002AA). Will the Government consider changing the ODC line to Cost Reimbursable? Costs typically included in SUBCLINs for this type of work may range from Sponsorship, Housing, Vehicles, Phone Cards, Fuel, DBA Insurance, Department Of State Differentials and Allowances etc. On a 5 year contract and with the current OCONUS climate these costs could change significantly over the next 5 years. In addition we would like to request that the Government consider providing a plug number for these SUBCLINs. | This will remain FFP and a plug number will not be provided. | |
| 3 | Section L/Attachment 0006 | L.8.1.2 & L.8.1.3 | The Government outlined R&R travel as an item that should/may be included in the Other Direct Costs - should the for R&R travel be included in the plug number for travel vs. priced as an ODC? | IAW L.8.1.2, this should should be priced as an ODC. | |
| 4 | Section L/Attachment 0006 | L.8.1.2 & L.8.1.3 | Kuwait labor law provides specific guidance regarding termination of employees. |
Specifically:
a- The worker shall be entitled to a 10 days remuneration for each of the first five years of service and a 15 days remuneration for each year thereafter. The total of the end of service benefit shall not exceed one-year remuneration for employees who are paid on daily, weekly, hourly or piecework basis.
b- The worker shall be entitled to a 15 days remuneration for each of the first five years of service and one month remuneration for every year thereafter. The total of the end of service benefit should not exceed one and a half year remuneration for employees who are paid on a monthly basis.
| Will the Government allow these severance packages to be included in the ODC pricing? | As long as it is supported, this can be priced as an ODC. | ||||
| 5 | PWS | 4.5.2 and 6.3 | The PWS states the Contractor may have to surge up to 72 hours per week. As Kuwait labor law allows for a maximum of 8 hours per day and a maximum of 48 hours per week and further states that Overtime cannot exceed 2 hours per day, 180 hours per year, 3 days a week or 90 days a year at (1.25x their normal rate). The ability for contractors to "surge" will be extremely limited by the Kuwait labor law without additional staff on the ground in Kuwait to prevent Kuwait labor law violations. This may require additional travel costs and increased ODC costs to meet this demand. What is the normal work day/work week? What are the typical work hours during a surge period? | Since 2008 the current contractor(awardee of two sucessive competitive LOGAUTO contracts) has provided sustainment training on a variety of systems for over 3,800 logisticians, fielded over 30,500 helpdesk calls from across the Coalition Joint Operational Area, and conducted 7,560 TLS Gunnery exercises. During the current contract performance surge effort hours (72 hours per week) were worked from the first date of perfomance (1 December 2013) through 18 June 2016. Since June 2016 the LOGAUTO Contractor has been working 60 hours per week. | |
| 6 | PWS/Section L | 6.1 and L.6.3 | The PWS states their primary duty location will be Kuwait and they may travel for short periods of time. As DOS differentials will increase (from 10% to 70%) while the employee is performing work in Afghanistan and Iraq please provide guidance as to how many trips per year should be expected and the duration of each trip as these additional labor and ODC costs will need to be proposed. | Trips are not frequent in nature. For example, no trips have been made in the last year. | |
| 7 | PWS/Section L | 6.1 and L.6.3 | Contractors will not be able to mirror Government hours (72 hours) without sending multiple employees (due to Kuwait labor compliance requirements which will still apply to the TDY work) - Contractors will have to work shifts which may impact the hand-off on possible issues. Please verify the Government is aware of this concern. Will the Government consider a waiver to the Kuwait Labor Law requirements. | The U.S. Government will not provide a waiver to the Kuwait Labor Laws. | |
| 8 | PWS/Section L | L.6.3 | This paragraph states "offerors are responsible for complying with other host nation labor laws" as employees will be TDY to other nations vs "hosted" please confirm that only Kuwait Labor Law applies | Labors laws of the countries which the contractors are operating within apply. | |
| 9 | PWS/Section L | 6.1 and L.6.3 | As the Government is only requesting that we provide a statement saying that they will comply, how will the Government be able to perform a responsibility determination and a risk assessment? We recommend that a detailed pricing package and a detailed technical response be provided to accommodate this requirement. This will ensure that the Government is aware of the offerors knowledge and experience with Kuwait labor law and could be a major discriminator for the technical acceptability determination. Offerors without a detailed understanding of Kuwait labor law may provide an unrealistically low price and with a "total price" submission the Government would be unable to evaluate cost realism without a detailed pricing package. Will the Government consider revising section L and M to level the playing field for all offerors. | This language remains unchanged. |
Q&A - 10 May 2017
| Question Number | RFP / PWS / Attachment / CDRL Reference and Text | Page #, Paragraph # | Question/Comment | Answer |
| 1 | Attachment 0001 - LOGAUTO PWS | Paragraphs 4.4 - 4.5 | Issue: |
Paragraphs 4.4 LIS Maintenance Services and 4.5 LIS Support Services, have no workload to support the level of effort required for these services.
Question:
Will the Government provide workload data to help identify the level of effort required to perform maintenance and support services? Historical Workload Data provided in the embeded documents (12 total).
Microsoft_Excel_Worksheet4.xlsx
QAS&E 4.3.2
Performance
Contract Management 5
Plans
Deliverables
Cooperative Behavior
Task Order Management 5
Training
SASMO
Property
Information Assureance
Milestone Dates 5
Deliverables
Depth of Analysis 5
TLS Testing
Property Accountability
SASMO
Gunnery
Training
Information Assurance
Technical Compliance 5
TLS Testing
Training
Gunnery
Property Accountability
Information Assurance
SASMO
Quality Assurance 5
Training
Gunnery
SASMO
Information Assurance
Staff Effectiveness and Reliability 5
Resources
Cost and Realism Control 5
SASMO
Total Number of Trouble Calls by STAMIS Name LIS
LIS Name Walk-ins Site Visits Call-ins Email/Online Requests In Shop Total
PBUSE 0 0 19 36 0 55
SAAS-MOD 0 0 0 88 0 88
SAMS-1E 23 4 11 8 0 46
SAMS-2E 0 0 8 0 0 8
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0
GCSS-Army 0 0 0 0 0 0
ULLS-AE 0 0 0 0 0 0
CAISI 0 0 0 0 0 0
VSAT 0 0 0 0 0 0
Others (including Non-STAMIS) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 23 4 38 132 0 197
System Analysis and Trend Report
FEB 2017
LIS TYPE RFAs System Issue Actual Time to Repair (HR) Average Length of Outage (HR)
Hardware Software Communications Data Training Technical
SAAS-MOD 88 4 2 0 61 0 21 294.00 3.34
SAMS-1E 46 6 7 5 13 15 0 42.90 0.93
SAMS-2E 8 0 6 1 1 0 0 3.80 0.48
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
GCSS-Army 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
PBUSE 55 0 0 5 50 0 0 28.00 0.51
ULLS-AE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
CAISI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
VSAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
NON-STAMIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
TOTAL 197 10 15 11 125 15 21
Average 5-Feb-00 2.00 3.00 2.00 23.00 3.00 4.00 238.41 0.53
IA
IA Deliverables Status
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports 4.3.2 Bi-weekly X
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments 4.3.2.1 NLT 30 days after PM-LIS release X
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences 4.3.2.2 Bi-Weekly X
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook 4.3.2.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings 4.3.2.4 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs 4.3.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports -
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Compliance Reports
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments - Current
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences - Conducted Bi-weekly in conjunction with the ARCENT Log Auto teleconference
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Smart Book
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\LIS Network Architecture
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs -
Maintained locally
../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx
Training
Training Summary Metrics
Class Date Location Number of Students Scheduled/Present Average Pre-Test Average Post Test Student Involvement in LIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids No. AARs Percent of AAR
SAMS-1E 14-16 FEB Camp Arifjan 5 58% 96% 76% 92% 98% 100% 5 100%
PBUSE No Class Camp Arifjan 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 ERROR:#REF!
SAAS-MOD No Class Camp Arifjan 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 ERROR:#REF!
TACTICAL NETWORK 28 FEB 1 MARCH Camp Arifjan 2 0% 0% 95% 100% 100% 97% 2 100%
G-Army Supply 14-16 FEB Camp Arifjan 9 51% 87% 73% 85% 94% 94% 9 100%
G-Army Supply 21-23 FEB Camp Arifjan 13 49% 93% 79% 91% 93% 91% 13 100%
G-Army Maintenance 7-9 FEB Camp Arifjan 12 43% 94% 85% 87% 99% 95% 12 100%
Student Critique
SAMS-1E 14-16 February 17 Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 140 140 140 80 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 22 21 26 16 100 100 0
2 16 26 28 16 50 100 50
3 28 28 28 16 50 80 30
4 21 28 28 16 60 100 40
5 20 26 27 16 30 100 70
340 699 190 Total
Total 107 129 137 80 5 5 5 # of Students
Percent 76% 92% 98% 100% 58.00 96.00 38.00 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Supply 14-16 February 17 Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 252 252 252 144 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 12 26 26 16 45 90 45
2 20 18 21 12 54 90 36
3 28 26 27 16 36 86 50
4 15 20 23 13 59 90 31
5 21 27 29 16 40 86 46
6 28 22 23 16 59 77 18
7 28 25 24 16 50 90 40
8 14 25 28 15 40 86 46
9 23 21 22 15 72 86 14
Total 189 210 223 135 455 781 326 Total
Percent 75% 83% 88% 94% 9 9 9 # of Students
50.56 86.78 36.22 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Maintenance 7-9 February 17 Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 336 336 336 192 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 26 21 28 13 48 100 50
2 23 26 28 14 38 95 40
3 22 23 27 14 50 100 50
4 18 27 28 15 43 90 50
5 22 27 28 16 40 95
6 26 27 28 16 48 85
7 20 16 28 15 45 100
8 27 28 28 16 20 90
9 27 24 28 15 50 100
10 19 23 27 16 38 100
11 25 23 27 16 38 90
12 30 27 28 16 61 88
Total 285 292 333 182 519 1133 190 Total
Percent 85% 87% 99% 95% 12 12 12 # of Students
43.25 94.42 15.83 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Supply 21-23 February 17 Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 364 364 364 208 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 21 21 21 12 50% 86% 36
2 28 28 28 16 68% 100% 32
3 16 27 26 14 36% 95% 59
4 22 20 21 10 81% 95% 14
5 21 28 28 15 50% 95% 45
6 22 27 28 16 45% 100% 55
7 21 22 26 14 36% 100% 64
8 21 28 28 16 40% 72% 32
9 28 28 28 16 54% 81% 27
10 21 20 21 12 36% 95% 59
11 18 28 28 16 27% 100% 73
12 22 28 28 16 45% 95% 50
13 28 28 28 16 63% 95% 32
Total 289 333 339 189 6.31 12.09 578 Total
Percent 79% 91% 93% 91% 13 13 13 # of Students
0.49 0.93 44.46 Average
Student Critique
VSAT TACTICAL NET 28 Feb 1 March 17 Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 56 56 56 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 26 28 28 15
2 27 28 28 16
Total 53 56 56 31 0 0 0 Total
Percent 95% 100% 100% 97% 2 2 2 # of Students
0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average image4.emf
Microsoft_Excel_Worksheet5.xlsx
QAS&E 4.3.2
Performance
Contract Management 5
Plans
Deliverables
Cooperative Behavior
Task Order Management 5
Training
SASMO
Property
Information Assureance
Milestone Dates 5
Deliverables
Depth of Analysis 5
TLS Testing
Property Accountability
SASMO
Gunnery
Training
Information Assurance
Technical Compliance 5
TLS Testing
Training
Gunnery
Property Accountability
Information Assurance
SASMO
Quality Assurance 5
Training
Gunnery
SASMO
Information Assurance
Staff Effectiveness and Reliability 5
Resources
Cost and Realism Control 5
Total Number of Trouble Calls by STAMIS Name LIS
LIS Name Walk-ins Site Visits Call-ins Email/Online Requests In Shop Total
PBUSE 0 0 16 12 0 28
SAAS-MOD 1 0 3 109 3 116
SAMS-1E 36 33 21 0 0 90
SAMS-2E 3 3 2 0 1 9
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0
GCSS-Army 0 0 1 0 0 1
ULLS-AE
CAISI
VSAT
Others (including Non-STAMIS)
Grand Total 40 36 43 121 4 244
System Analysis and Trend Report
JAN 2017
LIS TYPE RFAs System Issue Actual Time to Repair (HR) Average Length of Outage (HR)
Hardware Software Communications Data Training Technical
SAAS-MOD 116 3 25 1 81 0 6 122.00 1.05
SAMS-1E 90 1 66 11 12 0 0 72.40 0.80
SAMS-2E 9 0 3 0 4 2 0 4.50 0.50
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
GCSS-Army 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0.50 0.50
PBUSE 28 0 0 10 18 0 0 23.70 0.85
ULLS-AE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
CAISI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
VSAT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
NON-STAMIS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
TOTAL 244 4 94 22 116 2 6
Average 238.41 0.37
IA Deliverables Status
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports 4.3.2 Bi-weekly X
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments 4.3.2.1 NLT 30 days after PM-LIS release X
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences 4.3.2.2 Bi-Weekly X
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook 4.3.2.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings 4.3.2.4 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs 4.3.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports -
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Compliance Reports
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments - Current
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences - Conducted Bi-weekly in conjunction with the ARCENT Log Auto teleconference
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Smart Book
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\LIS Network Architecture
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs -
Maintained locally
../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx
Training Summary Metrics
Class Date Location Number of Students Scheduled/Present Average Pre-Test Average Post Test Student Involvement in LIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids No. AARs Percent of AAR
SAMS-1E 17-19 Jan Camp Arifjan 6 67% 100% 74% 86% 88% 105% 6 100%
PBUSE No Class Camp Arifjan 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 ERROR:#DIV/0!
SAAS-MOD No Class Camp Arifjan 0 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0 ERROR:#DIV/0!
TACTICAL NETWORK 24-25 Jan Camp Arifjan 6 0% 0% 86% 95% 96% 284% 6 100%
G-Army Supply 24-26 Jan Camp Arifjan 7 33% 87% 71% 89% 89% 91% 7 100%
G-Army Maintenance 10-12 Jan Camp Arifjan 4 59% 86% 81% 88% 100% 91% 4 100%
Student Critique
SAMS-1E 17-19 January Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 168 168 168 96 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 21 22 25 16 60 100 40
2 21 27 28 16 60 100 40
3 24 28 25 16 100 100 0
4 19 19 21 16 40 100 60
5 19 27 28 16 70 100 30
6 21 21 21 21 70 100 30
340 699 200 Total
Total 125 144 148 101 6 6 6 # of Students
Percent 74% 86% 88% 105% 66.67 100.00 33.33 Average
Student Critique
PBUSE Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
No Enrollment
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
SAAS-MOD Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
No Enrollment
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0.00 Average
Student Critique
TACTICAL NETWORK SETUP 24-25 January Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 168 168 168 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 24 28 28 16
2 25 28 28 16
3 23 28 28 15
4 26 28 28 16
5 25 27 28 16
6 22 21 21 12
Total 145 160 161 91 0 0 0 Total
Percent 86% 95% 96% 284% 6 6 8 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
G-Army Supply 24-26 January Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 196 196 196 112 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 22 28 28 16 31 100 69
2 27 21 21 13 22 90 68
3 16 21 21 11 31 81 50
4 15 28 28 14 36 77 41
5 20 21 21 12 36 72 36
6 19 28 28 18 27 95 68
7 21 28 28 18 45 95 50
Total 140 175 175 102 228 610 382 Total
Percent 71% 89% 89% 91% 7 7 7 # of Students
32.57 87.14 54.57 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Maintenance 10-12 January Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 112 112 112 64 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 24 23 28 15 50 95 45
2 20 20 28 15 70 90 20
3 27 28 28 12 80 90 10
4 20 28 28 16 35 70 35
Total 91 99 112 58 235 345 110 Total
Percent 81% 88% 100% 91% 4 4 4 # of Students
58.75 86.25 27.50 Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average image5.emf
Microsoft_Excel_Worksheet6.xlsx
QAS&E 4.3.2
Performance
Contract Management 5
Plans
Deliverables
Cooperative Behavior
Task Order Management 5
Training
SASMO
Property
Information Assureance
Milestone Dates 5
Deliverables
Depth of Analysis 5
TLS Testing
Property Accountability
SASMO
Gunnery
Training
Information Assurance
Technical Compliance 5
TLS Testing
Training
Gunnery
Property Accountability
Information Assurance
SASMO
Quality Assurance 5
Training
Gunnery
SASMO
Information Assurance
Staff Effectiveness and Reliability 5
Resources
Cost and Realism Control 5
Total Number of Trouble Calls by STAMIS Name
STAMIS Name Walk-ins Site Visits Call-ins Email/Online Requests In Shop Total
PBUSE 1 0 34 17 12 64
SAAS-MOD 0 0 1 313 5 319
SAMS-1E 56 27 74 1 20 178
SAMS-2E 0 1 2 2 0 5
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0
GCSS-Army 0 0 0 0 0 0
ULLS-AE 0 3 7 0 0 10
CAISI 0 0 1 0 0 1
VSAT 0 1 0 0 0 1
Others (including Non-STAMIS) 0 0 0 0 0 0
Grand Total 57 32 119 333 37 578
System Analysis and Trend Report
JUNE 2016
STAMIS TYPE RFAs System Issue Actual Time to Repair (HR) Average Length of Outage (HR)
Hardware Software Communications Data Training Technical
SAAS-MOD 319 0 2 8 284 6 19 363.00 1.14
SAMS-1E 178 10 50 55 63 0 0 137.00 0.77
SAMS-2E 5 0 0 3 2 0 0 2.70 0.54
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
GCSS-Army 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 11.10 1.11
PBUSE 64 0 11 18 32 3 0 65.20 1.01
ULLS-AE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
CAISI 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1.20 1.20
VSAT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.00 1.00
NON-STAMIS
TOTAL 578
Average 0.75
IA Deliverables Status
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports 4.3.2 Bi-weekly X
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments 4.3.2.1 NLT 30 days after PM-LIS release X
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences 4.3.2.2 Bi-Weekly X
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook 4.3.2.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings 4.3.2.4 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs 4.3.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports -
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Compliance Reports
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments - Current
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences - Conducted Bi-weekly in conjunction with the ARCENT Log Auto teleconference
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Smart Book
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\LIS Network Architecture
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs -
Maintained locally
../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx
Training Summary Metrics
Class Date Location Number of Students Scheduled/Present Average Pre-Test Average Post Test Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids No. AARs Percent of AAR
SAMS-1E 26-28 July Camp Arifjan 1 40% 100% 157% 193% 200% 200% 2 200%
PBUSE 12-14 July Camp Arifjan 6 46% 98% 81% 96% 98% 98% 6 100%
SAAS-MOD 5-7 July Camp Arifjan 2 1% 100% 71% 100% 100% 100% 2 100%
TACTICAL NETWORK 19-21 July Camp Arifjan 2 N/A N/A 96% 100% 100% 97% 2 100%
Student Critique
SAMS-1E 26-28 July Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 28 28 28 16 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 22 27 28 16 40 100 60
22 27 28 16 93
340 699 153 Total
Total 44 54 56 32 1 1 1 # of Students
Percent 157% 193% 200% 200% 40.00 100.00 76.50 Average
Student Critique
PBUSE 12-14 July Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 168 168 168 96 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 25 28 28 16 50 100 50
2 24 24 26 14 45 100 55
3 17 25 27 16 15 85 70
4 23 28 28 16 75 100 25
5 19 28 28 16 40 100 60
6 28 28 28 16 50 100 50
Total 136 161 165 94 275 585 310 Total
Percent 81% 96% 98% 98% 6 6 6 # of Students
45.83 97.50 51.67 Average
Student Critique
SAAS-MOD 5-7 July Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 56 56 56 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 19 28 28 16 0 100 100
2 21 28 28 16 2 100 0
Total 40 56 56 32 2 200 198 Total
Percent 71% 100% 100% 100% 2 2 2 # of Students
1.00 100.00 33.33 Average
Student Critique
TACTICAL NETWORK SETUP 18-19 July Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 56 56 56 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 28 28 28 16 0 0 0
2 26 28 28 15
Total 54 56 56 31 0 0 0 Total
Percent 96% 100% 100% 97% 2 2 8 # of Students
0.00 0.00 0.00 Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average image6.emf
Microsoft_Excel_Worksheet7.xlsx
QAS&E 4.3.2
Performance
Contract Management 5
Plans
Deliverables
Cooperative Behavior
Task Order Management 5
Training
SASMO
Property
Information Assureance
Milestone Dates 5
Deliverables
Depth of Analysis 5
TLS Testing
Property Accountability
SASMO
Gunnery
Training
Information Assurance
Technical Compliance 5
TLS Testing
Training
Gunnery
Property Accountability
Information Assurance
SASMO
Quality Assurance 5
Training
Gunnery
SASMO
Information Assurance
Staff Effectiveness and Reliability 5
Resources
Cost and Realism Control 5
Total Number of Trouble Calls by STAMIS Name
STAMIS Name Walk-ins Site Visits Call-ins Email/Online Requests In Shop Total
PBUSE 47 36 15 98
SAAS-MOD 223 223
SAMS-1E 12 23 17 16 39 107
SAMS-2E 1 1 2
SAMS-IE 1 1
GCSS-Army 2 7 3 12
ULLS-AE 1 1
CAISI 0
VSAT 1 2 3
Others (including Non-STAMIS) 0
Grand Total 12 26 73 277 59 447
System Analysis and Trend Report
JUNE 2016
STAMIS TYPE RFAs System Issue Actual Time to Repair (HR) Average Length of Outage (HR)
Hardware Software Communications Data Training Technical
SAAS-MOD 223 5 199 7 12 265.00 1.19
SAMS-1E 107 1 12 64 30 101.60 0.95
SAMS-2E 2 2 1.00 0.50
SAMS-IE 1 1 0.30 0.33
GCSS-Army 12 12 14.10 1.18
PBUSE 98 14 27 57 56.90 0.58
ULLS-AE 1 1 0.30 0.33
CAISI 0
VSAT 3 2 1 3.70 1.23
NON-STAMIS 0
TOTAL 447
Average 0.79
IA Deliverables Status
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports 4.3.2 Bi-weekly X
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments 4.3.2.1 NLT 30 days after PM-LIS release X
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences 4.3.2.2 Bi-Weekly X
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook 4.3.2.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings 4.3.2.4 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs 4.3.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports -
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Compliance Reports
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments - Current
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences - Conducted Bi-weekly in conjunction with the ARCENT Log Auto teleconference
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Smart Book
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\LIS Network Architecture
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs -
Maintained locally
../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx
Training Summary Metrics
Class Date Location Number of Students Scheduled/Present Average Pre-Test Average Post Test Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids No. AARs Percent of AAR
SAMS-1E 28-30 June Camp Arifjan 10/10 36% 98% 87% 93% 96% 99% 10 100%
PBUSE 14-16 June Camp Arifjan 10/10 52% 81% 71% 94% 95% 93% 10 100%
SAAS-MOD 7-9 June Camp Arifjan 2/2 5% 100% 64% 91% 96% 100% 2 100%
TACTICAL NETWORK 21-22 June Camp Arifjan 1/1 N/A N/A 100% 100% 100% 100% 1 100%
Student Critique
SAMS-1E 28-30 June Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 280 280 280 160 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 18 28 28 16 70 90 20
2 28 28 28 16 80 100 20
3 25 27 28 16 10 100 90
4 28 27 28 15 10 100 90
5 22 28 28 16 10 100 90
6 25 24 24 16 10 100 90
7 28 21 28 16 30 100 70
8 21 28 28 16 60 90 30
9 28 28 28 16 60 100 40
10 21 21 21 16 20 100 80
340 699 620 Total
Total 244 260 269 159 10 10 10 # of Students
Percent 87% 93% 96% 99% 36.00 98.00 47.69 Average
Student Critique
PBUSE 14-16 June Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 280 280 280 160 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 20 28 28 12 50 70 20
2 13 28 28 16 50 90 40
3 22 27 27 16 70 90 20
4 28 28 28 15 60 85 25
5 21 26 28 16 35 85 50
6 13 28 28 16 50 80 30
7 18 21 21 12 60 80 20
8 28 28 28 16 45 90 45
9 22 21 22 13 60 90 30
10 14 28 28 16 40 45 5
Total 199 263 266 148 520 805 285 Total
Percent 71% 94% 95% 93% 10 10 10 # of Students
52.00 80.50 20.36 Average
Student Critique
SAAS-MOD 7-9 June Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 56 56 56 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 18 25 26 16 10 100 90
2 18 26 28 16 0 100 0
Total 36 51 54 32 10 200 190 Total
Percent 64% 91% 96% 100% 2 2 2 # of Students
5.00 100.00 30.00 Average
Student Critique
TACTICAL NETWORK SETUP 21-22 June Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 28 28 28 16 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 28 28 28 16 90 100 10
Total 28 28 28 16 90 100 10 Total
Percent 100% 100% 100% 100% 1 1 8 # of Students
90.00 100.00 10.00 Average
Student Critique
SAAS-MOD 31 May-2 June Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 56 56 56 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 21 21 21 12 50 100 50
2 23 27 27 15 25 100 75
Total 44 48 48 27 75 200 125 Total
Percent 79% 86% 86% 84% 2 2 2 # of Students
37.50 100.00 62.50 Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average
Student Critique
Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 0 0 0 0 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total
Percent ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! 0 0 0 # of Students
ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! ERROR:#DIV/0! Average image7.emf
Microsoft_Excel_Worksheet8.xlsx
QAS&E 4.3.2
Performance
Contract Management 5
Plans
Deliverables
Cooperative Behavior
Task Order Management 5
Training
SASMO
Property
Information Assureance
Milestone Dates 5
Deliverables
Depth of Analysis 5
TLS Testing
Property Accountability
SASMO
Gunnery
Training
Information Assurance
Technical Compliance 5
TLS Testing
Training
Gunnery
Property Accountability
Information Assurance
SASMO
Quality Assurance 5
Training
Gunnery
SASMO
Information Assurance
Staff Effectiveness and Reliability 5
Resources
Cost and Realism Control 5
Total Number of Trouble Calls by STAMIS Name LIS
LIS Name Walk-ins Site Visits Call-ins Email/Online Requests In Shop Total
PBUSE 0 0 22 18 0 40
SAAS-MOD 0 0 0 121 0 121
SAMS-1E 53 3 16 4 0 76
SAMS-2E 0 0 3 1 0 4
SAMS-IE 0 0 0 1 0 1
GCSS-Army 0 3 0 0 0 3
ULLS-AE 0 0 0 0 0 0
CAISI 0 0 0 0 0 0
VSAT 0 0 0 0 0 0
Others (including Non-STAMIS)
Grand Total 53 6 41 145 0 245
System Analysis and Trend Report
March 2017
LIS TYPE RFAs System Issue Actual Time to Repair (HR) Average Length of Outage (HR)
Hardware Software Communications Data Training Technical
SAAS-MOD 121 0 21 0 32 0 68 126.00 1.04
SAMS-1E 76 0 0 76 0 0 0 0.79 60.40
SAMS-2E 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 2.70 0.67
SAMS-IE 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.20 0.20
GCSS-Army 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 2.03 6.10
PBUSE 40 0 0 40 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
ULLS-AE 0.00 0.00
CAISI 0.00 0.00
VSAT 0.00 0.00
NON-STAMIS
TOTAL 245 0 21 124 32 0 68
Average 131.72 7.60
IA Deliverables Status
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports 4.3.2 Bi-weekly X
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments 4.3.2.1 NLT 30 days after PM-LIS release X
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences 4.3.2.2 Bi-Weekly X
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook 4.3.2.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings 4.3.2.4 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs 4.3.3 Updated NLT 5th each month X
(IA) Compliance and Trend Analysis Reports -
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Compliance Reports
(IA) Vendor Patches and Anti-virus Software Deployments - Current
(IA) Network Architecture Teleconferences - Conducted Bi-weekly in conjunction with the ARCENT Log Auto teleconference
(IA) Theater Standard Network Architecture Smartbook
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\Smart Book
(IA) Network Architecture Diagrams SharePoint Postings
I:\Theater_Support\TSC - ESC\SPO\Log Auto\Information Assurance\LIS Network Architecture
(IA) Comprehensive Database for all CSS-VSATs -
Maintained locally
../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx../../../../../../../AppData/Local/AppData/Roaming/Feb%2012/AppData/Local/Temp/Temp3_Feb%20Deliverables.zip/CDRL_4_2_2_Scorecard_Jan_2011_with%20Dollars.xlsx
Training Summary Metrics
Class Date Location Number of Students Scheduled/Present Average Pre-Test Average Post Test Student Involvement in LIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids No. AARs Percent of AAR
SAMS-1E 14-16 March Camp Arifjan 13 75% 100% 83% 89% 95% 96% 13 100%
PBUSE 7-9 March Camp Arifjan 5 42% 89% 86% 98% 100% 100% 5 100%
SAAS-MOD No Class Camp Arifjan 0% 0%
TACTICAL NETWORK No Class Camp Arifjan 0% 0%
G-Army Supply 28-30 March Camp Arifjan 17 43% 88% 84% 87% 88% 98% 17 100%
G-Army Maintenance 7-9 March Camp Arifjan 11 46% 91% 80% 93% 97% 563% 11 100%
G-Army Maintenance 21-23 March Camp Arifjan 13 45% 91% 82% 93% 98% 94% 13 100%
Student Critique
SAMS-1E 14-16 March Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 364 364 364 208 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 19 27 28 16 50 100 50
2 21 20 21 16 60 100 40
3 27 28 28 16 80 100 20
4 28 28 28 16 80 100 20
5 21 21 21 10 90 100 10
6 28 25 28 16 80 100 20
7 20 28 28 15 60 100 40
8 22 20 28 14 70 100 30
9 25 27 23 16 100 100 0
10 19 22 28 16 100 100 0
11 22 25 28 16 40 100 60
12 28 28 28 16 100 100 0
13 22 24 28 16 70 100 30
340 699 320 Total
Total 302 323 345 199 13 13 13 # of Students
Percent 83% 89% 95% 96% 75.38 100.00 21.33 Average
Student Critique
PBUSE 7-9 March Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 140 140 140 80 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 26 28 28 16 50 100 50
2 25 25 28 16 40 75 35
3 21 28 28 16 30 85 55
4 26 28 28 16 40 85 45
5 23 28 28 16 50 100 50
Total 121 137 140 80 210 445 235 Total
Percent 86% 98% 100% 100% 5 5 5 # of Students
42.00 89.00 13.82 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Supply 28-30 March Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 420 420 420 240 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 16 20 21 16 54 95 41
2 17 16 23 14 50 72 22
3 28 28 28 16 45 77 32
4 25 24 25 13 40 81 41
5 15 21 21 12 18 90 72
6 21 26 23 16 40 86 46
7 19 24 9 12 59 95 36
8 24 28 28 16 36 100 64
9 20 15 19 10 45 95 50
10 15 25 26 16 40 100 60
11 18 20 15 13 45 95 50
12 14 15 18 12 31 77 46
13 24 20 23 15 54 100 46
14 23 28 28 16 36 81 45
15 27 14 18 9 50 72 22
16 25 23 28 14 54 100 46
17 23 18 18 16 59 100 41
Total 354 365 371 236 756 1516 760 Total
Percent 84% 87% 88% 98% 15 15 15 # of Students
42.87 87.73 44.87 Average
Student Critique
G-Army Maintenance 7-9 March Student Involvement in STAMIS Quality of Course Material Quality of Instruction Quality of Training Aids
Max for class 308 308 308 32 Test Data
Pre Test Post Test Difference
1 24 25 28 16 45 95 50
2 19…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .