W911S0-17-T-0001_-_RMADS_Questions_ _Responses.docx

Rapid Mobile Applications Development W911S0-17-T-0001 Questions and Responses

1. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 1, paragraph 1.4 Period of Performance, page 1; and Attachment 4 Pricing Worksheet.

a. Issue: PWS states, “The period of performance shall be for one (1) year from date of award. Pricing Worksheet contains base year plus two (2) one year options.

b. Question: Could the Government clarify its intent for the period of performance?

RESPONSE: The period of performance shall be for one year, there will be no option years, pricing worksheet has been revised.

2. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 1, paragraph 1.6 Quality Control; page 1; and Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers

a. Issue: PWS states, “The Contractor shall submit the Quality Control Plan (QCP) with its proposal.” Instructions to Offerors fails to address it inclusion in the Offeror’s response

b. Question: Could the Government clarify its intent to require Offerors to submit a QCP within its submission? If required, would the Government consider the QCP outside of page limitations?

RESPONSE: Similar to question 37, same response applies to both question 2 and 37.

3. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 1, paragraph 1.13 Contractor Travel, page 2 and PWS paragraph 1.15.1.1, page 5; and Attachment 4 Pricing Worksheet.

a. Issue: PWS states, “The Contractor shall be required to travel to attend meetings, conferences, and training. Contractor will be authorized travel expenses consistent with the substantive provisions of the Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) and Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 31.205-46 with the limitation of funds specified in this contract. All travel requires Government approval/authorization prior to travel by the COR.” This includes requirement for, “A post award or kick off meeting will be held for each mApp requirement requested by the Government”. The Pricing Worksheet only address FFP or labor and associated labor tasks and does not address a CLIN structure to support reimbursable travel.

b. Question: Could the Government clarify its intent and proposed CLIN structure to support Contractor travel?

RESPONSE: $10,000 should be included for Contractor travel.

4. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 1, paragraph 1.14 Key Personnel:

Question: Could the Government clarify if the offers are required to submit resumes for key personnel. If so, which of the labor categories defined in this section require resumes to be submitted?

RESPONSE: Yes resumes are required for all eight (8) Key Personnel listed in the PWS and shall be provided in Volume IV, General Information and the Quality Control Plan.

5. Reference: Instructions to Offers, Page 4, Factor 2 – Management and Staffing Approach: Element 1, Management Approach: clearly describe the phase-in plan that adheres to the timelines identified in the PWS and to accomplish the tasks specified in the PWS.

a. Issue: Instruction states “clearly describe the phase-in plan that adheres to the timelines identified in the PWS and to accomplish the tasks specified in the PWS.” But there are no timelines identified in the PWS

b. Question: Could the Government clarify what timelines are required to be adhered to?

c. Question: Should the phase-in period be separately priced? If yes, would the Government release an updated pricing sheet with a CLIN to accommodate this.

RESPONSE: See response to question 69

6. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 1, paragraph 1.14.2 (Instructional Designer and Technologist), 1.14.3 (Multimedia Artist and Animator), 1.14.7 (Software Developer -Mobile Application), and 1.14.8 (Video Game Designer), pages 3 and 4; and, Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers

a. Issue: PWS states for these four (4) designed key personnel positions select criteria for qualification through, “Proposal shall indicate degree of successful .....”. As written the paragraph seem out of place as it is asking for related PWS requirements not specifically relevant to individual knowledge, skills or abilities.

b. Question: Could the Government clarify why it included this criterion into Key Personnel section of four (4) positions? If the Government requires Offerors to address these factors where does it the Government intent to seek the responses in via Instructions?

c.

RESPONSE: In identification of each member of key personnel, there is an education level expected – this is why it is identified under each personnel title. Again, for validation of skill level for each type of development.

7. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 2, paragraph 2.1.15.4 and 2.1.15.5 mApp Category 4 and mApp Category 5 and Pricing Sheet ITEM No 4 and ITEM No 5

a. Question: The pricing sheet requires FFP for the development of 1 native application each in Category 4 and 5. Can the Government clarify if the pricing is for one application for a single platform (i.e. iOS, Android or Windows)? If yes, which platform should be assumed for pricing purposes?

RESPONSE: In the case of full app development, expectation is for delivery package to be done in HTML5 or another acceptable cross platform language that can be packaged under TRADOC mobile licenses and posted to the commercial marketplaces. This is a single file type, there is no need for specification of iOS, Android, or Windows.

8. Reference: Performance Work Statement, Part 2, paragraph 2.1.15 mApp Categories

a. Issue: Description for each of the mApp Category states “Development time for this level is approximately … days”

b. Question: Could the Government clarify if the development time referred to in the description is for the complete cycle beginning from requirements gathering and analysis or only for the application (software) development phase?

RESPONSE: Development times have been determined by app developers, and is based on the fact that the contracted developers will only be working on the requested product. CAT 1, for example, should take about a month to develop (possibly a month and a half) which would leave 2-4 weeks for evaluation and delivery so that would be correct and possible.

9. Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers, Factor 3, 1), Past Performance, page 5.

a. Issue: Instructions state, “The Past Performance evaluation will review the recent and relevant past performance, as defined in this RFQ, of the Offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners or joint venture partners proposed to perform at least 51% of the requirement based on the total proposed price. As written it could imply that subcontractors/teaming partners have to perform 51% in order to qualify for review of its past performance.

b. Question: Could the Government clarify that the restriction for performance of at least 51% of the requirement based on the total proposed price only applies to joint venture partners and not to subcontractor? Could the Government clarify that past performance from any subcontractor/teaming partner, regardless of workshare, allowed for submission and review?

RESPONSE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers, Factor 3, 1), Past Performance wording has been changed. Offerors shall only submit past performances for Prime contractors, teaming partners or joint venture partners proposed to perform at least 51% of the requirement.

10. Is there an incumbent? If so, which company and what is their award amount?

RESPONSE: There is no incumbent.

11. What is the dollar limit on this procurement?

RESPONSE: There is no dollar limit on this procurement. Offerors are to propose their pricing accordingly.

12. What is the expected number of FTEs to work on this contract?

RESPONSE: That is up to the offeror to decide. We require the Key Personnel that are identified in the PWS.

13. Are personnel working on the contract expected to be residents of the US or can they reside outside the US?

RESPONSE: Offeror personnel shall reside in the U.S.

14. Is citizenship required for personnel under this contract?

RESPONSE: Offeror personal shall be U.S. citizens.

15. Is security clearance required for personnel under this contract?

RESPONSE: No, all mApps developed under this contract will be ‘UNCLASSIFIED”

16. What is the definition of "Mobile Application (mApp) Category 1", "Mobile Application (mApp) Category 2" etc. listed as line items in the pricing worksheet?

RESPONSE: mApp Categories are defined in Section 2 of the PWS.

mApp Category 1 – Mobile friendly website (Responsive Web Design (RWD) Passive; Basic Informational Application).

•User Interface (UI) built with web standard technologies.

•Available at a Uniform Resource Locator (URL).

•Not installed on mobile device.

•Not available in the marketplace.

•Detects device family accessing website and provides appropriate view format.

•Different views created for mobile and desktop device families to take advantage in difference in screen size.

•Development time for this level is approximately 60 days.

mApp Category 2 – Hybrid; HTML5/HTML/CSS/JS in mobile app wrapper with no network access (after initial download).

•Installed on mobile device.

•Available in the marketplace.

•Inserted graphics, photographs, illustrations, small videos, simple charts and diagrams.

•Use of non-network data device features (e.g. accelerometer, camera, compass, Bluetooth, touchscreen, SD card-storage.)

•Development time for this level is approximately 120 days.

mApp Category 3 – Hybrid; HTML5/HTML/CSS/JS in mobile app wrapper with network access (after initial download).

•mApp Category 2 capabilities.

•Use of network data device features (e.g. internet, GPS-Mapping.)

•Posting to Social Media sites (YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.)

•Push notifications.

•Rich Site Summary (RSS) feeds for updated content.

•Report status (xAPI).

•Development time for this level is approximately 120 days.

mApp Category 4 – Native; Games and or visualizations involving 3D models with no network access (after initial download).

•mApp Category 2 capabilities.

•Initiate complex animated demonstrations, operations and/or procedures and games.

•Development time for this level is approximately 180 days or longer based on circumstances.

mApp Category 5 – Native; Games and or visualizations involving 3D models with network access (after initial download).

•mApp Category 3 capabilities.

•Complex combining of device features (e.g. mashup such as geolocation combined with social networking for location-based gaming.)

•Initiate complex animated demonstrations, operations and/or procedures and games.

•Development time for this level is approximately 180 days or longer based on circumstances.

17. In Attachment 2, it states “The Mission Capability Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the PWS”. What precisely does the phrase “in a form consistent with the PWS” mean?

RESPONSE: In a logical order, in order of tasks/development requirements.

18. In Attachment 2, it states “The Mission Capability Volume shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the PWS”. Given that the evaluation criteria is LPTA FFP, what must an Offeror do to be technically acceptable with the text quoted to the left?

RESPONSE: An offeror will be determined technically acceptable or unacceptable based on the information that is required in the Evaluation Criteria.

19. In Attachment 2, it states “The volume shall be prepared in an orderly format and in sufficient detail to enable the Government to make a thorough evaluation of the Offeror’s technical competence and ability to comply with the contract requirements specified in the PWS.” To what portion of the PWS does the term “contract requirements specified in the PWS” refer? The PWS (Attachment 3) only uses the term “requirements” in the headings for Section 1.10 (“security requirements”), 2.1.10 (“DISTRIBUTOR’S HOSTING REQUIREMENTS (DHR)”), 6.2 bullet 7 (“Section 508 Compliance and Accessibility Requirements”), 6.3 (“DISTRIBUTOR HOSTING REQUIREMENTS”), and 6.5 Part 7 (“TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSETS”). The term “requirements” is also used in several sentences of Attachment 3. However, the precise statement of what “contract requirements specified in the PWS” is ambiguous.

RESPONSE: Contract requirements specified in the PWS means the entire PWS.

20. In Attachment 2, it states “iii. Cross Reference Matrix. This matrix shall cross‐reference the proposal paragraphs to the applicable Factors and PWS paragraphs / RFQ requirements.” Does the statement to cross-‐reference to proposal paragraphs mean that individual paragraphs in the proposal must be numbered?

RESPONSE: No.

21. In Attachment 2, it states “iii. Cross Reference Matrix. This matrix shall cross‐reference the proposal paragraphs to the applicable Factors and PWS paragraphs / RFQ requirements.” Can Offerors cross‐reference section heading numbers instead of individual paragraphs within a section heading?

RESPONSE: Yes

22. In Attachment 2, it states “The Offeror’s overall technical approach shall demonstrate its knowledge and understanding of the magnitude and complexity of this requirement and its capability to perform all tasks in the PWS.” To what precisely does “this requirement” refer? The antecedent of “this” is unclear.

RESPONSE: This requirement for Rapid Mobile Application Development.

23. In Attachment 2, it states “The Offeror’s technical approach shall also concisely and clearly address the Offeror’s approach to plan, organize, control and perform the major performance objectives below.” The two bullets that follow the colon in the quoted text on the left are not stated as objectives. For example, the first bullet is “Analysis Products – Reports and other documentation,” which is not an objective. Could the Government please restate them as objectives?

RESPONSE: Attachment has been revised to make these objectives.

24. In Attachment 2, it states “Analysis Products – Reports and other documentation. Data in these products are used to define the current situation and requirements”. To what moment in time does “current” refer? If Reports are produced at different times, then then the moment in time to which “current” refers is ambiguous.

RESPONSE: Current refers to present day…….. PRESENT/ EXISTING

25. In Attachment 2, it states “Analysis Products – Reports and other documentation. Data in these products are used to define the current situation and requirements, and to make decisions on what products are needed”. The quoted text to the left says that a vendor will use Products (from “Analysis Products”) to the “make decisions on what products are needed.” That looks like circular reasoning: use products to decide what products are needed. Could the Government please clarify?

RESPONSE: Wording has been revised in Attachment 2.

26. In Attachment 2, it states “Mobile applications include reference material, performance support/job aids and supplemental training material for delivery on multiple mobile device platforms such as Android, Windows, and iOS.” Offerors cannot respond to the RFQ with a firm fixed priced because the quoted statement does not specify definitively how many delivery platforms are to be priced: just one (e.g. Android only), just two (e.g., Windows and iOS, or Android and Windows), or even a platform not named here are possibilities, and each possibility has a different price.

RESPONSE: In the case of full mobile application development, expectation is delivery in HTML5, capable of being run on all current operating systems. This is only one product but will be cross platformed by Government agency.

If the Government requires only Android, or only Android or Windows, or Only Android and iOS”, etc. as delivery platforms. The firm fixed price depends on which platforms are needed for delivery. Could the Government please restate the quoted statement and any other such statement in the RFQ to provide a definitive list rather than a “such as” list?

RESPONSE: Again, to reiterate, in the case of full app development, expectation is for delivery package to be done in HTML5 or another acceptable cross platform language that can be packaged under TRADOC mobile licenses and posted to the commercial marketplaces. This is a single file type, there is no need for specification of iOS, Android, or Windows.

27. In Attachment 2, it states “Offeror will determine, in Attachment 4, Pricing Worksheet (resulting in Schedule B of award), to price or not separately-‐ price the eCMRA requirement.” Given that the evaluation criteria is LPTA-‐ FFP, can the Government provide consistent instructions to all Offerors so that our price proposals will be exactly comparable?

RESPONSE: It is up to the offeror if they will charge for the eCMRA CLIN or not.

28. In the PWS, could the Government please define 100% of all acronyms used in the PWS? For example, IMI and LCO on page 3 are not defined.

RESPONSE: Definitions added to PWS for IMI and LCO

29. In the PWS, could the Government state for what version or versions of each platform (Android, Windows, iOS) the mApps are to be developed, tested, and delivered? For example, is the work done only for the latest operating systems for each platform, or for multiple platforms (especially if the platform is updated during the time a Contractor is developing, testing, and delivering a mobile app)?

RESPONSE: HTML5 capable of being run on all current operating system versions, in certain cases this will allow backward compatibility for older versions.

30. In the PWS 1.11, “The Contractor shall be responsible for safeguarding all Government equipment, information, and property provided for Contractor use.” Will the Government provide mobile devices for the Contractor to use for development and/or testing?

RESPONSE: No. The Government will be provided the app in a packaged format and vet and test the item itself.

31. In the PWS 1.14.3, “In ADDITION to the degree, the Multimedia Artist and Animator shall specify that he or she has five (5) years’ paid experience developing Army IMI and 3D models for digital LCOs”. Could the Government please define/explain this phrase?

RESPONSE: Offerors can view this statement as 5 years developing Army IMI and 3D models professionally.

32. In the PWS 1.14.7, “ Software Developer (Applications) shall prove that he or she have five (5) years’ experience developing successful Mobile Learning DL applications and two years’ paid experience developing successful Mobile Learning DL.” The phrasing does not make sense. What is the difference between the five year’s and the two years’ experience?

RESPONSE: The statement is for mobile application hobbyists who have an understanding of making mobile applications, but have not done it professionally. Offerors can view this statement as 5 years developing app, minimum of two doing it with a company professionally.

33. In the PWS 1.14.7, “Software Developer (Applications) shall prove that he or she have five (5) years’ experience developing successful Mobile Learning DL applications and two years’ paid experience developing successful Mobile Learning DL.” The phrase “Mobile Learning DL” is not specifically defined in the PWS. Could the Government please define/explain the term?

RESPONSE: Same as above, but with an understanding of adult learning theory.

34. In the PWS 1.14.8, “In ADDITION to the degree, the Video Game Designer shall specify that he or she have five (5) years’ paid experience developing successful Army Games For Training (AGFT) scoring DL that must have included successful development using VBS2 and VBS3”. What is the definition of the terms VBS2 and VBS3?

RESPONSE: Virtual Battle Space 2 and 3.

35. In the PWS 1.14.8, “Army Games For Training (AGFT) scoring DL”. Could the Government please provide an explanation of what this phrase is referring to?

RESPONSE: Built video gaming for the Army either in or out of VBS2 and VBS3, but built a smart scoring engine into the code of the game which allows feedback mechanism for learning which shows an understanding of cognitive load theory as well as other adult learning theory tied to game design.

36. In the PWS 1.14.8, “In ADDITION to the degree, the Video Game Designer shall specify that he or she have five (5) years’ paid experience developing successful Army Games For Training (AGFT) scoring DL that must have included successful development using VBS2 and VBS3”. This requirement would prohibit use of personnel who would otherwise be highly qualified video game designers, and restricts the competition to respond to this procurement. The number of video game designers with 5 years’ paid experience is tiny. Could the Government please reduce this requirement?

RESPONSE: Please follow what is stated in the PWS.

37. In the PWS 1.6, "The Contractor shall submit the Quality Control Plan (QCP) with its proposal." What Volume and Section should this be included in, and is it exempt from the page limits?

RESPONSE: Quality Control Plan will not be included in the page count of the proposal.

Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001 has been amended to add Volume IV, General Information and the Quality Control Plan will be submitted in that volume.

38. In the PWS 1.17, “OCI”. Is an OCI statement required in the proposal (and if so in which volume)?

RESPONSE: Offerors are to address OCI in Volume IV, General Information and the Quality Control Plan

39. In the PWS 2.1.8, “DELIVERABLE. Anything that can be physically delivered, but may include non-‐manufactured things such as meeting minutes or reports.” Are deliverables to be made in electronic form or physical delivery (e.g., paper or CD/DVD)?

RESPONSE: All products and packages should be delivered digitally via AMRDEC. In the case of large 3D model files or video game interfaces, either a hard drive or disks should be delivered (which would fall more on the side of physical delivery)

40. In the PWS 2.1.10, “Distributor’s Hosting Requirements are in Paragraph 6.3 of this PWS.” Could the Government state the hosting requirements in an amendment, because section 6.3 in the PWS contains references that describe user interface style for each mobile platform?

RESPONSE: We host apps on the TRADOC Apps Gateway as well as all commercial marketplaces.

41. In the PWS 2.1.13, “When key personnel are used as an evaluation factor in best value procurement, an offer can be rejected if it does not have a firm commitment from the persons that are listed in the proposal.” Why is this sentence referring to best value procurement included in an LPTA RFQ?

RESPONSE: This PWS section has been revised.

42. In the PWS 2.1.15.1, “Development time for this level is approximately 60 days.” Does the 60 days include or exclude the time required for the Contractor to get the mApp through the process to publish in the Android/Windows/Apple marketplace?

RESPONSE: Development times have been determined by app developers, and is based on the fact that the contracted developers will only be working on the requested product. CAT 1 should take about a month to develop (possibly a month and a half) which would leave 2-4 weeks for evaluation and delivery so that would be correct and possible.

43. In the PWS 2.1.15.2 and 2.1.15.3, “Hybrid; HTML5/HTML/CSS/JS”. Does the Government envision that only the listed languages are used to access device features listed in these sections, such as accelerometer or Global Positioning System? We note in section

2.1.14 that device specific programming languages are only in mobile application categories 4-‐5 and not for the sections cited here (categories 2 and 3).

RESPONSE: No – those items could be specific to the app/platform, but main vision is to build assets for the apps, not necessarily full applications all the time. It could be possible for cat 2 and 3 to have specific items like GPS or accelerometer, but it should be compatible via HTML5 for cross platformed development.

44. In the PWS 5.5.2, “Support other languages (right to left (RTL) reading order) as required.” Could the Government please specify what languages are required for each category of mApp for Offerors to have a basis to estimate the Firm Fixed Price requested? We develop multi-‐lingual interfaces for other Federal agencies, and the effort is significantly impacted by the choice and number of languages supported.

RESPONSE: Many applications come with requests for specific languages. So each app would not be multi-lingual, but could be the same app done several times in single languages which would be single application development each time. Currently Spanish is the highest request, but other languages such as Farsi, Tagalog, etc. have been discussed.

45. In the PWS 5.5.3, “(e.g., ONIX)”. What is the definition of the acronym ONIX, and could the Government provide a reference to explain this term?

RESPONSE: This PWS section has been revised.

46. In the PWS 5.5.3, “The Contractor shall provide all metadata as required by the Distributor’s Hosting Requirements and Accessibility metadata”. Could the Government please provide a reference to define what is “required by the Distributor’s Hosting Requirements and Accessibility metadata”? PWS Section 6.3 would seem to be the PWS location to find this, but the links there do not discuss hosting requirements, and not metadata.

RESPONSE: Any applicable metadata identified by proponent for identification in commercial marketplaces.

47. In the PWS 5.6.1, “PROOF OF TESTING: Emulator logs from a representative number of devices from each device family (for example, an app for both tablets and smartphone for all three platforms (Android, Apple, and Windows) would require 6 versions).” Could the Government please restate the proof of testing requirements to precisely specify what number of devices and what device families are to be used, to enable Offerors with a basis of estimate to produce a firm fixed price cost? The language is ambiguous because it cites an example rather than specifying on what devices and for how many platforms proof of testing must be done.

RESPONSE: HTML5 packaged apps for each platform will be gathered and tested on Android, iOS and Windows devices in the case of full mobile application development. Assets will be inserted into products and evaluated for compatibility/usability.

48. In the PWS 6.3, “6.3 DISTRIBUTOR HOSTING REQUIREMENTS:” None of the 3 links provided under the bullets in section 6.3 describe hosting requirements. They describe user interface design for each platform. Please provide links to define what the Government requires for “hosting requirements.” Could the Government please provide links that address the hosting requirement to provide Offerors with a basis to estimate the work and quote a firm fixed price?

RESPONSE: Those documents provide guidelines for posting to each commercial marketplace, which is correct. The contractor will not host any products, but will have them submitted to be posted to the commercial markets under centralized TRADOC licenses. These guidelines are what is needed for submittal to the markets.

49. In the PWS Part 7, “PART 7 - TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ASSETS” The table under Part 7 appears after the reference list. How does this table fit the rest of the PWS?

RESPONSE: In delivering mobile applications, following guidelines identified in the documents of Part 6, these are additional expectations in naming conventions and asset file types needed for delivery.

50. In the PWS Part 7, “each asset must be in its own file (e.g. not inserted in a PPT file)”. If the table in Part 7 describes how mApps are to be packaged, what is the reason for referring to a PPT (PowerPoint) file? How are PowerPoint files related to delivery of mApps?

RESPONSE: Some utilize PPT as a mode of delivery with links or embedded. This is not acceptable – all assets must be passed to the government as an individual file.

51. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, the RFQ contains insufficient information to estimate the level of effort for each Item No, and therefore to firm fixed prices.

Although characteristics of mApps in each category are defined in the PWS, there is no statement Attachment 4 as to the number of features that must be implemented for each mApp.

For example, section 2.1.15.2 states that an mApp Category 2 will include “Use of non-‐network data device features (e.g. accelerometer, camera, compass, Bluetooth, touchscreen, SD card-‐storage.)” Would the firm fixed price quote be based on using one such device feature, 2 features, 3 features, etc.? The level of effort is proportional to the number of features used, and thus it is impossible to quote a single firm fixed price to cover any mApp in Category 2.

Even if 1 feature were specified, the level of effort varies in the coding and testing required to implement, for example, an accelerometer versus the camera. In addition, the PWS provides insufficient information to estimate the level of effort because Offerors do not know how many screen designs, what is the business logic for each mApp, etc. The answers to those questions affect the level of effort and hence the firm fixed price.

There is also no statement of the volume of voice narration, the amount of video production, the size of storyboards, etc. to enable Offerors to define a labor mix from among the labor categories listed in the RFQ.

We request the Government revise the RFP to provide a specification for one sample app of each category with sufficient information for Offerors to quote the cost of those apps for the basis of the LPTA award.

RESPONSE: Please provide pricing in Attachment 4 for each mApp category based on the characteristics that are stated in the PWS.

52. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, because the RFQ contains insufficient information to estimate the level of effort for each Item No, and therefore to quote firm fixed prices, can the Government please provide an estimated labor mix and number of hours for each Item No?

RESPONSE: It is up to the Offeror to determine their labor mix and the number of hours to price the CLINS.

53. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, the Periods of Performance in the document cover three years, from 01 Dec 2016 to 30 Nov 2019. However, the “Attachment_3_-‐_Performance_Work_Statement.docx” states “1.4 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: The period of performance shall be for one (1) year from date of award.” The statements are inconsistent. What is the period of performance?

RESPONSE: Period of Performance is for one (1) year.

54. The Attachment 3 PWS says in section 1.13 “The Contractor shall be required to travel in support of the contract.” However, there is no Item No for travel – will a travel Item No be part of the contract? Is travel cost to be included in the firm fixed price quote, and is there a dollar value that Offerors should use for each year (option year) for travel?

RESPONSE: $10,000. For one year.

55. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, “Item No. 0001 “Quantity 3, Unit: Each”, please clarify what Offerors should quote. Is the request in Item No 0001 the firm fixed price to build 3 mobile applications in category 1?

RESPONSE: Yes.

56. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, “Item No. 0001 “Quantity 3, Unit: Each”, to what does “Each” refer? Item No 0001 appears to be requesting the price to build 3 mobile apps, not the price to build each mobile app. Please clarify.

RESPONSE: Requesting the price to build three mobile apps.

57. In Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet, “Item No. 0009 “Contractor Manpower Reporting”, what do Offerors put in the blank in Attachment 4 for Item No 0009? The manpower reporting description appears to be a report due after an award is made; thus it is unclear what goes in the blank in the cost proposal.

RESPONSE: The Government is asking if the Offeror would charge for Contractor Manpower Reporting. If an offeror will charge for this, then provide your price.

58. Element 1, Management Approach requires "clearly describe the phase-in plan that adheres to the timelines identified in the PWS and to accomplish the tasks specified in the PWS." However, there is no mention of phase-in in the PWS. Will the Government please clarify this requirement?

RESPONSE: The phase-in plan in Element 1, Management Approach has been removed.

59. The Government did not specify in the instructions inclusion of Resumes and Letters of Commitments in the instructions. Please confirm that Resumes and Letters of Commitments are not required with proposal submission (Reference: Attachment_2_-_Addendum_FAR_52_212-1_Instructions_to_Offeror (1).docx).

RESPONSE: Resumes are required and any Letters of Commitments should be submitted as a part of Volume IV, General Information and the Quality Control Plan.

60. Please confirm that Resumes are not evaluated factors for award (Reference: Attachment_2_-_Addendum_FAR_52_212-1_Instructions_to_Offeror (1).docx).

RESPONSE: - Resumes for Key Personnel shall be used to evaluate Factor 2, Element 2 – Staffing Approach.

61. If resumes are evaluated factors for award, please confirm that Letters of Commitment are not evaluated factors for award (Reference: Attachment_2_-_Addendum_FAR_52_212-1_Instructions_to_Offeror (1).docx).

RESPONSE: Letters of Commitment shall be used to evaluate Factor 2, Element 2 – Staffing Approach.

62. The PWS appears to be missing sections between 5.3.1.1 to 5.4.9.1.2. Please provide a revised PWS to either include the missing sections or correct the PWS section numbering.

RESPONSE: PWS has been corrected to address numbering discrepancy.

63. PWS 1.6, will the Quality Control Plan be included in the page count of the proposal, or will it be considered an Appendix excluded from the page count?

RESPONSE: Quality Control Plan will not be included in the page count of the proposal. Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001 has been amended to add Volume IV, General Information and the Quality Control Plan will be submitted in that volume.

64. Typically a BS in Computer Science does not offer computer graphics as a part of the program. A degree in Computer Graphics is typically a BA in computer graphics or a Bachelors of Fine Arts (BFA) with the emphasis in computer graphics. Please confirm that the Government will accept a BA or a BFA with an emphasis in computer graphics as acceptable educational criteria for Multimedia Artist and Animator. (PWS 1.14.3)

RESPONSE: The Government will accept Bachelors of Art (BA) or Bachelors of Fine Arts (BFA) with an emphasis in computer graphics as acceptable educational criteria for Multimedia Artist and Animator. PWS 1.14.3 has been revised to reflect this change.

65. Typically a BS in Computer Science does not offer computer graphics as a part of the program. A degree in Computer Graphics is typically a BA in computer graphics or a Bachelors of Fine Arts (BFA) with the emphasis in computer graphics. Please confirm that the Government will accept a BA or a BFA with an emphasis in computer graphics as acceptable educational criteria for Video Game Designer. (PWS 1.14.8)

RESPONSE: The Government will accept Bachelors of Art (BA) or Bachelors of Fine Arts (BFA) with an emphasis in computer graphics as acceptable educational criteria for Video Game Designer. PWS 1.14.8 has been revised to reflect this change.

66. PWS 1.14, is the Government expecting all Key Personnel to be available 100% of the time over the course of the 12 month period of performance?

RESPONSE: The Government does not anticipate all key personnel be available 100% of the time.

67. Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001, RFQ Table 1, As the Attachment 4 Pricing Worksheet was provided in Microsoft Word, will the Government please confirm that Volume III, Factor 4 Price is to be submitted as a Microsoft Excel file?

RESPONSE: Per Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001 has been revised. Offerors will provide Volume III in a Word or PDF format.

68. Attachment 1 Clauses and Provisions, The Government has requested that offerors supply either a completed copy of their Representations and Certifications with their quotation or completion of the Representations and Certifications online at the System for Award Management (SAM) website. If completing the Representations and Certifications online via SAM, does the Government have a specific Volume reference or other location for communicating this information to the Government?

RESPONSE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001, amended to request Offerors provide Volume IV-General which will consist of response to FAR 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items. (Oct 2016)

69. Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001, RFQ Element 1: Management Approach, the instructions say to clearly describe the phase-in plan that adheres to the timelines identified in the PWS, however we did not see a section which included the timelines referenced. Would the Government please clarify?

RESPONSE: This is a new requirement and phase-in plan is not required. The Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers RFQ: W911S0-17-T-0001, has been amended to remove phase-in plan language.

70. Given the questions and concerns we've presented, we respectfully request the Government extend the proposal due date 2 weeks.

RESPONSE: Quotes are now due by 2:00 PM EDT, on November 18, 2016.

71. FBO website annotates The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code is 541511 - Custom Computer Programming Services, with a size standard of 500 Employees. The requirement is being solicited as a 100% small business set-aside. The Instructions to Offer document states NAICS code is 541511, Custom Computer Programming Services, with a small business size standard of $27.5 million. The previous solicitation under W911S0-16-T-0015: Army Rapid Mobile Application Development Services and proposal submitted were under NAICS code is 541511 - Custom Computer Programming Services, with a size standard of 500 Employees. Please confirm the NAIC code is 541511 - Custom Computer Programming Services, with a size standard of 500 Employees?

RESPONSE: The correct size standard for NAICS Code 541511 – Custom Computer Programming Services is $27.5M.

72. Does the Government expect resumes for all 8 Key Persons?

RESPONSE: Yes.

73. Section 2.1.15 identifies the 5 mApp Categories. It further explains the “Development Time” for each level being approximately a certain number of days depending on category. Without a reasonable understanding of Level of Effort for each mApp, how can the Contractor price out 60, 120 or 180 days’ worth of effort? Are we to assume that, for example, a 60-day Cat 1 mApp would include development time, Government review time, and then final delivery within 60 days?

RESPONSE: Development times have been determined by app developers, and is based on the fact that the contracted developers will only be working on the requested product. CAT 1 should take about a month to develop (possibly a month and a half) which would leave 2-4 weeks for evaluation and delivery so that would be correct and possible.

74. Was it the Governments intent to leave out the $10,000 in Travel that was part of the original solicitation?

RESPONSE: No, the $10,000 in travel should be included. Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet has been revised to include the Travel CLIN.

75. It is stated within the RFQ that this is the FY17 issuance of another solicitation (W911S0-16-T-0015). Was that solicitation awarded and to whom?

RESPONSE: There was no award issued under W91120-16-T-0015. Reference of this solicitation was made to notify industry that this requirement under this solicitation was the same as the cancelled W911S0-16-T-0015 solicitation.

76. Is there a minimum commitment/guarantee for this award?

RESPONSE: There is no minimum commitment/guarantee for this requirement.

77. When is the start period for the awarded contract? What is the conclusion date? Is there/will there be a renewal clause? (Attachment 1, FAR 52.217-9)

RESPONSE: One year period of performance from date of award or start date as indicated in award. There will be no Option to Extend Services clause (FAR 52.217-9).

78. It is stated in “FAR 52.212.-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items” that one of the evaluation criteria is “Technical Ability”: Does your evaluation criteria include rating for “ability to execute”?

RESPONSE: As stated in Attachment 2 – Addendum FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offeror, the evaluation criteria for Technical Ability states “the Offeror’s overall technical approach shall demonstrate its knowledge and understanding of the magnitude and complexity of this requirement and its capability to perform all tasks in the PWS.”

79. What is the plan for supporting and evolving the applications once they are delivered? Will there be a separate solicitation for application sustainment & maintenance?

RESPONSE: The apps will be maintained and sustained by Government after initial development and delivery. A separate solicitation will be requested should the need arise for these capabilities.

80. Whether companies from Outside USA can apply for this (like from India or Canada)?

RESPONSE: Offerors submitting quotes for this requirement shall be in the USA.

81. Whether we need to come over there for meetings?

RESPONSE: No meetings will be conducted at this time.

82. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside USA (like from India or Canada)?

RESPONSE: Tasks are to be performed in the USA.

83. Can we submit the proposals via email?

RESPONSE: As stated in Attachment 2 – Addendum FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offeror, quotations shall be submitted by email to the following addresses: Primary Contract Specialist: curtis.arthur.civ@mail.mil and Contracting Officer: rhoda.c.harrison-spence.civ@mail.mil

84. Is there an incumbent performing part of the work solicited in the RFQ?

RESPONSE: There is no incumbent contractor.

85. Is the cover page excluded from page limits for each volume?

RESPONSE: Yes

86. May Offerors submit a cover letter in Volume I, and is it excluded from 40 page limit?

RESPONSE: Yes

87. In what volume should Attachment 5, DFARS_252.209-‐7999, be submitted?

RESPONSE: Please include in Volume IV, General Information and Quality Control Plan.

88. Are offerors to complete and include Attachment 1 'Clauses and Provisions' in the proposal, and in which Volume should this be included?

RESPONSE: Include in Volume IV, General Information and Quality Control Plan

89. Should the file name include the volume name? Is the format “Company Name -‐ Initial -‐ Volume Name" acceptable? Otherwise multiple volumes could have the same file name (unless the differed in file types).

RESPONSE: Yes

90. Can the Government please provide an Excel spreadsheet for Volume III?

RESPONSE: Please provide your pricing using Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet in a Word or PDF format.

91. Why is an Excel format file required, when Attachment_4_–_Pricing Worksheet.docx just contains one blank per Item No to be filled in, which could be done in the .docx file?

RESPONSE: Please provide your pricing using Attachment 4 – Pricing Worksheet in a Word or PDF format.

92. Can Offerors use more than one term (e.g., SDVOSB and HUBZone) to designate the business type?

RESPONSE: Yes

93. “Government will not accept any changes to the contractor’s quotation after the closing date”. This statement appears to contradict 2.A.4, “The file name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision.” Could the Government please clarify?

RESPONSE: This is statement refers to offerors submitting changes without the Government asking for them. If the Government needs an offeror to make any changes, then “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision” will be used.

94. What is the difference between the glossary and the table of acronyms?

RESPONSE: Both are the same.

95. “Responses will be evaluated against the factors defined in the ‘Basis for Contract Award and Evaluation Criteria’ see Addendum FAR 52.212-‐2, Evaluation Factors.” The FAR clause cited contains blanks. What goes in the blanks?

RESPONSE: Wording in Attachment 2 – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors has been revised.

96. “Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary”. Why is binding discussed, if the submission is via email only?

RESPONSE: Wording in Attachment 2 – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors has been revised.