W9124D26RA096 - Govt Responses to Industry Questions (16 June 2026).pdf

W9124D26RA096, Amendment 1 - Government Responses to Industry Questions (16 June 2026)

General Solicitation & Submission Instructions

Question 1: Pricing in Proposals - Attachment VI - PROPOSAL PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS –page 4, #2 – Content requirements

Question: Per the instructions to offerors, can you reconfirm that vendors will not need to provide any sort of pricing in their responses/proposals and that the chart on Page 2 of the main solicitation document is for reference only to be used with vendors who receive contract awards (i.e.: vendors do not need to fill in unit pricing on this chart as part of their response)?

ANSWER: Ref - SOLICITATION CLAUSES AND ADDENDUMS TO 52.212-1 and 52.212-2:

PRICING IN PROPOSALS: Confirmed. Per Attach. VI §III.D.2 and Attach. VII §II, pricing for establishment of IDIQ ordering vehicles is NOT requested and will NOT be considered at the IDIQ proposal stage. Do not submit unit pricing in your proposal.

Question 2: IDIQ Program Ceiling - Attachment 1 – Page 1, Sec. 1.1

Question: Does each resulting IDIQ issued have a value of $45M over the 5-year period, or is that the total amount for all IDIQs issued during that period?

ANSWER: Ref - SOLICITATION CLAUSES AND ADDENDUMS TO 52.212-1 and 52.212-2: No.

Per PWS §1.1, the Not-to-Exceed ceiling for this IDIQ program is $45,000,000 over the 5-year ordering period.

Question 3: Minimum Guarantee and Maximum Order Limits

Question: Is there a minimum threshold for ordering activity under these IDIQs? If so, what is that minimum threshold for ordering activity and will there be any ceiling on individual orders?

Ref: Solicitation Clause FAR 52.216-19 and CLIN Structure: MINIMUM GUARANTEE: The IDIQ minimum per contractor is $150.00, representing one (1) Post-Award Conference (CLIN 0003). Solicitation Clause, FAR 52.216-19 “Order Limitations” addresses the other questions in great detail, “(a) Minimum order. When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than $5,000.00, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract. (b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor- (1) Any order for a single item in excess of $10,000,000.00…”

Question 4: Anticipated Number of IDIQ Awards Question: How many IDIQs does the government anticipate awarding?

ANSWER: Ref - ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2, EVALUTION OF OFFERORS: The Government intends to award to ALL responsive, responsible offerors who meet the evaluation criteria.

This is a multiple-award IDIQ. The Government does not anticipate limiting the number of awards.

Question 5: Proposal Submission Recipients and Question Channel - RFP Section III.D.3, Paragraph(s) 1, Page(s) 4. Per Attachment VI

Question: Please confirm all four (4) attachments—Cover Letter, Volume I, Volume II, and Volume III—are to be submitted via email to Ursula Waibel, Terry Phillips, and Robert Woolsey.

W9124D26RA096 | Industry Questions & Government Responses

ANSWER: Ref - ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS Confirmed. All proposal volumes shall be submitted via email to all three specified individuals. IMPORTANT DISTINCTION: QUESTIONS must be submitted via Microsoft Forms ONLY. Questions sent by email will NOT be honored.

Question 6: Purpose of Estimated Quantities - Attachment VII - Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 - Evaluation of Offers, II. EVALUATION CRITERIA. Paragraph 1. Page 2. This clearly states, “Pricing for establishment of IDIQ ordering vehicles is not requested and will not be considered”. Yet in In IB08 Solicitation - W9124D26RA096 - Video Production IDIQ, Continuation of Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, Paragraph 1, Page 2, we see there are quantities listed on the pricing section (Item 0001: quantity of 1500 Jobs for scripting, Item 0002: quantity of 1500 jobs for Production and Item 0003: 50 quantity each for Post Award Conference.)

Question: Given we are not providing any pricing, what is the purpose of the quantities listed in the pricing section (1500, 1500, 50)?

ANSWER - Ref SOLICIATION CLAUSE 52.216-22: Per FAR 52.216-22(a), these are ESTIMATED ORDERING QUANTITIES for administrative and obligating authority tracking purposes ONLY.

They are NOT targets or guarantees. Offerors shall disregard these quantities for proposal purposes.

Sub-factor 1 — Experience & Capability

Question 7: Subcontractor Experience Eligibility - Experience / Capability, Product Samples, Past Performance, and Prime/Subcontractor Experience; Reference: Attachment VI – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section IV, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor one (1) – Experience / Capability, Page 4 of 7; and Attachment VII – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Section II, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor 1: Experience / Capability, Page 2 of 6.

Question: The solicitation requires the offeror to demonstrate experience/capability, including evidence of having been the prime on individual federal, state, government, or commercial contracts for projects individually exceeding $350K. If the offeror was not the contractual prime but was the production subcontractor with 100% responsibility for all video production work performed under a prime-held contract, including creative development, production, post-production, deliverables, production management, and quality control for federal agency work, defense contractor work, transportation-sector work, HHS-related work, or projects for federal and commercial end clients, may that experience be considered responsive for Sub-factor 1?

ANSWER: Sub-factor 1 Experience/Capability requires that offerors demonstrate they have had 100% responsibility on individual contracts for video production projects that individually valued at $350,000 or greater within the past 60 months (as required by PWS section 4.1). This is a mandatory Pass/Fail threshold. Experience as a production subcontractor, regardless of scope of responsibility, does NOT satisfy this requirement as written. The solicitation requires contractual prime status — not merely production responsibility.

The solicitation will be amended as follows:

1. Attachment VI (Instructions to Offerors) will be updated to replace, “…have been the prime…” with “demonstrate that they have had 100% responsibility for the performance of all phases of work involved with the production (i.e. Scripting, Pre- Production, Production, Post-Production Editing, and Distribution/Final Deliverables)…”

2. Attachment VI (Instructions to Offerors) will be updated to change the phrase "…projects individually exceeding $350k or greater" is replaced in its entirety with:

"…individually valued at $350,000 or greater"

3. Attachment VI (Instructions to Offerors) will be updated to add, “The document shall include an active YouTube or Vimeo website link to view the evidenced product in its entirety.”

4. Attachment VII (Evaluation of Offerors), Sub-factor 1, Pass definition will be updated to change the phrase "…individually exceeded >$350k within the last 60 months " to “…individually valued at $350,000 or greater"

5. Attachment VII (Evaluation of Offerors), Sub-factor 1, Pass definition will be updated to replace “…a prime contractor…” with “…100% responsibility for the performance of all phases of work…”

6. Attachment VII (Evaluation of Offerors), Sub-factor 1, Fail definition will be updated to remove reference to Prime and read as follows, “…failed to demonstrate the minimum required years of experience, 100% responsibility for performance, or dollar-value threshold.”

Question 8: Subcontractor Acceptability for Samples and Past Performance Attachment VI – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section IV, Paragraph A.2, Sub-factor two (2) – Product Samples, Pages 4–5 of 7; Attachment VI, Section V, Paragraph A.1, Submission of Past Performance, Page 6 of 7; and Attachment VII – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Section II, Paragraph A.2, Sub-factor 2: Product Samples, Pages 2–3 of 6.

Question: For Product Samples and Past Performance, the solicitation requires examples where the offeror had 100% responsibility for producing the work. Please confirm whether projects performed by the offeror as a subcontractor to a prime are acceptable for Product Samples and Past Performance, provided the offeror had 100% responsibility for the production work and can provide the required project details and customer/project POC information in the proposal.

ANSWER: PRODUCT SAMPLES (Sub-factor 2): Work performed as a production subcontractor IS acceptable for Product Samples, provided the offeror had 100% responsibility for producing the work. Prime contractor status is NOT required for Product Samples.

PAST PERFORMANCE (Vol. II): Similarly, past performance as a production subcontractor with 100% production responsibility is acceptable and Prime contractor status is NOT required in Volume II (Past Performance Proposal).

Question 9: Teaming Arrangements and Joint Ventures Attachment VI – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section I, Paragraph F, Offeror’s Declaration of Partnerships – Teaming Arrangements, Page 1 of 7;

Attachment VI, Section IV, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor one (1) – Experience / Capability, Page 4 of 7; and Attachment VII – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Section II, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor 1: Experience / Capability, Page 2 of 6.

Question: If the Government requires contractual prime status for Sub-factor 1, will the Government consider a teaming arrangement, joint venture, or prime/sub structure where one party satisfies the prime contract threshold and the offeror satisfies the 100% production responsibility, creative, technical, and execution requirements?

ANSWER: Teaming Arrangements (Attach. VI §I. F): Offerors who cannot demonstrate prime contract history independently may propose as a team or prime/sub arrangement. If proposing as a team, offerors MUST disclose the teaming arrangement, describe each partner’s roles and responsibilities, and indicate the percentage of effort and type of relationship (Partnership, JV, or Prime/Sub). The partner who holds prime contract history must be identified. Joint Ventures: For SBA-compliant joint ventures, the experience of individual JV members may be considered consistent with applicable SBA regulations.

Offerors proposing as a JV must disclose the JV structure per Attach. VI §I.F and may be required to provide further documentation before award.

The solicitation will be amended to add the following to Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 (I)(F):

“The Declaration of Partnerships shall include responsibilities of the partnerships with the submitting contractor demonstrating that they have had 100% responsibility for the performance of all phases of work involved with the production (i.e. Scripting, Pre- Production, Production, Post-Production Editing, and Distribution/Final Deliverables)”

Question 10: Measurement of the $350K Threshold - Attachment VI – Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section IV, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor one (1) – Experience / Capability, Page 4 of 7; and Attachment VII – Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Section II, Paragraph A.1, Sub-factor 1: Experience / Capability, Page 2 of 6.

Question: For Sub-factor 1, does “projects individually exceeding $350K” refer to the total prime contract value, the value of the video production portion performed by the offeror, or the value of the offeror’s subcontracted production scope?

ANSWER: The $350,000 threshold is measured against the total prime contract award value

— not the NTE/ceiling, not a sub-scope of production work, and not in-kind contributions.

The actual awarded dollar value of the contract is the measuring stick.

Question 11 & 12: Joint Venture Experience Evaluation - RFP Attachment VI, Section IV.A.1, Page 4;

Attachment VII, Section II.A.1, Page 2

Question A: For an offeror that is an SBA-compliant SDVOSB joint venture, will the experience of the individual joint venture members — including evidence of serving as prime contractor on projects individually exceeding $350K — be accepted to satisfy the Sub-factor 1 Experience/Capability requirements, consistent with 13 CFR 125.8(e)?

Question B: Similarly, may product samples (Sub-factor 2) and past performance projects (Volume II) reflect work performed by individual JV members instead of or in addition to the JV entity itself?

ANSWER: Sub-factor 1 (Prime Experience): For SBA-compliant joint ventures, the experience of individual JV members may be considered consistent with applicable SBA regulations (e.g., 13 CFR 125.8(e)). Offerors must disclose the JV structure. Product Samples & Past Performance: Yes, per Attach. VI §V.A.2, JVs or new entities without their own record may cite individual member performance. The JV will receive a Neutral/Unknown Confidence rating, which is acceptable for award.

As noted in the response to question 9 above, the amendment will include updates to the 52.212-1 and 52.212-2 to further clarify requirements for joint ventures / teaming arrangements.

Question 13: Prime Status vs. Production Responsibility - Definition of “100% Responsibility for Producing”; Attachment VI, Section IV.A.2, Pages 4–5; Attachment VI, Section V.A.1, Page 6

Question: - The solicitation requires that product samples and past performance examples reflect projects for which the offeror had “100% responsibility for producing.” Does this requirement:

Require the offeror to have been the prime contractor of record, or Permit submission of projects performed as a subcontractor, where the offeror had full responsibility for all production work?

ANSWER: For Product Samples and Past Performance, “100% responsibility” does NOT require prime contractor status. Work performed as a production subcontractor is acceptable, provided the offeror had 100% responsibility for producing the work of all final deliverables, which typically includes Scripting, Pre-Production, Production, Post-Production Editing, and Distribution/Final Deliverables. This is distinct from Sub-factor 1, which explicitly requires prime contractor experience.

See also above response to question 8.

Question 14: In-House Resources and Subcontractor Partners - Use of Subcontractors and Production Partners in Capability Demonstration; Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Section 4.1, Page 6; Attachment VI, Section IV.A.1, Page 4

Question: - For purposes of demonstrating capability under Sub-factor 1 (Experience/Capability), may offerors describe a combination of: In-house personnel/resources, and Established subcontractor or production partners, provided the prime contractor maintains overall management, quality control, and contractual responsibility?

ANSWER: Ref: PWS §4.1, p.6; ATTACH. VI §IV.A.1, p.4: YES. In-house capability is required — PWS §4.1 states the contractor shall possess "sufficient in” house resources, staff/equipment/facilities/etc." Subcontractors and established production partners may supplement this in-house capacity. Offerors should clearly describe both their in-house resources and their subcontractor/partner relationships in the Sub-factor 1 narrative, demonstrating the ability to manage and execute a variety of productions simultaneously.

See also above response to question 9.

Question 15: NTE Budget vs. Actual Award Value - Attachment I PWS; PART 4.1, Paragraph 2. Page 6 uses the term “valued at $350k or greater”.

Question: - Can we use the NTE budget versus the actual contract award? We bid $200 less than the 350K NTE budget on one project. We had in-kind/no-charge overages that would put the project value well over the $350K. Please advise if this would meet the $350K requirement.

ANSWER: No. See above response to question 10.

Question 16: Predecessor Experience and Cumulative Value

Question A: To meet the experience requirement, may offerors reference experience performed under a predecessor company if the proposed key personnel were responsible for performing and managing that work, and the same team remains intact and available for performance under this contract?

Question B: May offerors demonstrate qualifying experience through a continuous production program performed as the prime contractor for the same customer, where the work was executed under successive contract awards supporting the same ongoing initiative and the total program value exceeded $350,000?

ANSWER: Predecessor Company Experience: Experience under a predecessor company may be cited where the offeror is the legal successor entity. Offerors must clearly disclose and document the relationship.

The $350K threshold is for a single project that can cover the span a time period of up to 12 months.

Question 17: Clarification of $350K Threshold Language - Attachment I PWS; PART 4.1, Paragraph 2.

Page 6 uses the term “valued at $350k or greater”. Attachment VI, Proposal Preparation & Submission Instructions, Paragraph IV. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, A. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 1.

Sub-factor one (1) – Experience / Capability, Paragraph 6. Page 4. States “projects individually exceeding $350K”.

Question: - Did you mean to essentially state “$350K or greater” on both instances? We have a project that had an NTE budget of exactly $350K, hence our need for clarification to determine if it qualifies.

ANSWER: The Government acknowledges the inconsistency. The language in PWS 4.1 stands and the Addendums to FAR 52.212-1 and 52.212-2 are being updated to reflect the experience requirement of having preformed a contract at $350K or higher. See also responses to previous questions.

Question 18: Past Performance Project Value Threshold - Attachment VI, Proposal Preparation & Submission Instructions, V. Volume II – Past Performance, Para 2, 1. Submission of Past Performance.

Paragraph 5. Page 6.

Question: - Can you please confirm if at least one of the 3-5 Past Performance Projects we submit needs to have been $350K or greater budget? We understand the requirement for $350K projects in our Experience section (Vol I, Subfactor 1), but it isn’t clear that the Past Performance Projects need to include at least one with the $350K level budget.

ANSWER: The $350,000 threshold does NOT apply to Past Performance submissions

(Volume II). That threshold applies EXCLUSIVELY to Sub-factor 1 — Experience/Capability.

Sub-factor 2 — Product Samples

Question 19: Excerpts from Long-Form Productions - Attachment VI_Section IV Paragraph A_Subsection 2_'Product Samples'_Page 5

Question: We do a wide range of video productions from brief PSAs to long-form narrative films that you can find on streaming platforms. In Subsection 2 of Paragraph A (ii), it states 'Samples must be complete productions...' and that ""Sizzle"", ""demo"" or ""highlight"" reels are not acceptable..' May we use excerpts from long-form, completed productions as samples for Example Categories such as those 'featuring talent in a scripted scenario', 'featuring original art/animation and/or motion graphics' and 'featuring documentary-style presentation'? These are segments of a completed production and wouldn't typically be considered sizzles, demos or highlight reels.

ANSWER: ii. Samples must be complete productions and have been created within the past five (5) years. “Sizzle”, “demo”, or “highlight” reels are not acceptable and will not be reviewed or evaluated: (a) The underlying production is a bona fide finished deliverable — a completed, delivered production, not a promotional cut; (b) The submitted excerpt is self-contained and meaningfully demonstrates the required sample category capability; and (c) The accompanying 1-page document identifies the production title, client, delivery date, and clearly states the offeror’s 100% production responsibility. Sizzle reels, demo reels, and highlight reels assembled from multiple productions remain unacceptable per Attach. VI §IV.A.2.ii and will not be evaluated.

Question 20: Link Format for Product Samples - Attachment VI, PROPOSAL PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS, Page 5 – Sec. 2 - Product Samples

Question: Are embedded Vimeo or YouTube links on a vendor’s website acceptable or do samples need to be submitted as actual Vimeo or YouTube URLs?

ANSWER: LINK FORMAT: Samples must be submitted as direct, publicly accessible YouTube or Vimeo URLs per Attach. VI §IV.A.2.iii. Links embedded within a vendor’s proprietary website are NOT acceptable.

Question 21: Interactive eLearning Samples - Attachment VI, PROPOSAL PREPARATION & SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS, Page 5 – Sec 2 Product Samples/Sample Categories, item e.

Question: Are you looking for vendors to provide links to actual e-Learning interactives or just some completed audiovisual elements that were used within e-Learning interactives?

ANSWER: The Government acknowledges that Sample Category (e) — interactive eLearning

— cannot be submitted in a fully interactive format via YouTube or Vimeo. For Sample Category (e), offerors shall submit the following: A sample that must demonstrate, at minimum: the product's original audiovisual production elements (videography, motion graphics, animation, or equivalent); the interactive structure of the product, including branching navigation, user decision points, gamification mechanics, or IMI design; A working link and password if required to the active eLearning project shall accompany the submission for evaluation.

The solicitation will be amened to add the following to Addendum to 52.212-1 (VI)(A)(2)(ii)(d) clarifying that samples for interactive eLearning video products shall adhere to the following requirements:

1. The sample must demonstrate, at minimum: the product's original audiovisual production elements (videography, motion graphics, animation, or equivalent); the interactive structure of the product, including branching navigation, user decision points, gamification mechanics, or IMI design; and the overall production quality.

The submitted URL must be active and accessible to Government evaluators at time of proposal submission. A working link and password if required to the active eLearning project shall accompany the submission for evaluation.

2. A standard linear video showing only the audiovisual elements of an eLearning production, without demonstrating the product's interactive structure or IMI design, will NOT satisfy the requirements of Sample Category (e) and will be evaluated as non-responsive for that category. Only the link for the complete interactive product will meet the submission requirements.

Question 22: Subcontractor Work for Product Samples - Attachment VI, Section IV.A.2 (Page 4) and Section V.A.1 (Page 6). Sub-factor 2 and Volume II both require that the offeror had "100% responsibility for producing" the submitted work.

Question: Does this require the offeror to have been the prime contractor of record, or is work performed as a subcontractor acceptable where the offeror had full responsibility for all production work? Relatedly, if an offeror's most recent Department of War video production within the past three years was performed as a subcontractor, should it still be included in Volume II?

ANSWER: See responses to similar questions above. Work performed as a production subcontractor IS acceptable for Product Samples. Past Performance looks at projects that offerors have had 100% responsibility for the for ALL final video production deliverables within the past five (5) years.

Question 23: Category (e) Walkthrough Video - Attachment VI, Section IV.A.2.iii and Example Category (e), Page 5. Samples must be submitted via YouTube or Vimeo link, but Category (e) calls for an interactive eLearning product featuring IMI and gamification — formats that YouTube and Vimeo cannot host in interactive form.

Question: For Category (e), will the Government accept a screen-capture video walkthrough of the interactive product via YouTube/Vimeo, or alternatively a link to the interactive product on its native hosting platform?

ANSWER: The Government acknowledges the conflict. See response to question 21 above.

Question 24: Unlisted or Password-Protected Links - Attachment VI, Section IV.A.2.i, Page 5;

Question: Are unlisted or password-protected YouTube/Vimeo links acceptable for product samples that are not publicly released?

ANSWER: PRIVATE / UNLISTED / PASSWORD-PROTECTED LINKS: Unlisted or password-protected YouTube/Vimeo links are acceptable provided: (a) The URL is submitted in the proposal; (b) Any required password shall be submitted; and (c) The link is confirmed active.

Offerors assume full responsibility for ensuring Government access.

Question 25: Interactive eLearning Submission Options - Attachment VI, Section IV.A.2, Page 5

Question: - Category (e) requires submission of an “interactive eLearning video product,” while all samples must be submitted via YouTube or Vimeo links. For interactive products that cannot be meaningfully represented in a linear format, will the Government accept: A video walkthrough of the interactive product submitted via YouTube/Vimeo, or A link to the product hosted on its native interactive platform?

ANSWER: The Government acknowledges this conflict. See responses to questions 21 and 23 above.

Question 26: Budget Minimum for Product Samples - Attachment VI, Proposal Preparation & Submission Instructions, Paragraph IV. VOLUME I – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, A. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL, 1. Sub-factor one (2) – Product Samples, Page 5.

Question: Is there a budget minimum for our Product Samples?

ANSWER: No. There is no minimum budget requirement for Product Samples.

Sub-factor 3 — Mock Scenario Treatment

Question 27: Treatment Page Limit and Social Media Deliverables Question A: In preparing the treatment for 5 vignettes, is the maximum page count (2) for each vignette or (2) for the complete treatment?

Question B: Does each video have to connect to social media post reels, is the focus of each video connected to Social Media?

ANSWER: TREATMENT PAGE LIMIT: The 2-page limit applies to the COMPLETE TREATMENT covering all five (5) vignettes combined — not 2 pages per vignette. SOCIAL MEDIA DELIVERABLES: The mock scenario treatment (Sub-factor 3) has no required social media reels or companion cuts. It is the contractor’s business decision to propose a recommended treatment for evaluation purposes.

Performance Work Statement (PWS) & Contract Execution

Question 28: Distribution Channels and Unlimited Rights - Section IV, Paragraph 3 (Sub-factor three (3) –Treatment, Scope), Page 5

Question: Please confirm how all videos will be published and aired on both internal (owned channels) and public-facing (revenue-earning) sites.

ANSWER - PWS 1.16, 5.1, 5.5 AND SOLICIATION CLAUSE FAR 52.227-14/17: Each requirement is unique and associated communications objectives vary, which will be clearly communicated in the PWS for each individual requirement. The Government holds UNLIMITED RIGHTS to distribute all delivered materials on any channel - internal, public-facing, or revenue-adjacent - in perpetuity, without duration restriction or additional fees.

The contractor‘s licensing obligations must cover the Government’s BROADEST ANTICIPATED USE. Specific distribution channels for each production will be identified in the individual task / delivery order (PWS §1.3).

Question 29: Duration of Airtime and Revenue Sharing - Section IV, Paragraph 3 (Sub-factor three (3) – Treatment, Scope), Page 5

Question: Please confirm the duration of airtime on public-facing (revenue-earning) sites.

ANSWER - PWS 1.16, 5.1, 5.5 AND SOLICIATION CLAUSE FAR 52.227-14/17: Each requirement is unique and production duration will be clearly communicated in the PWS for each individual requirement. The Government holds UNLIMITED RIGHTS to distribute all delivered materials on any channel…in perpetuity, without duration restriction or additional fees. The contractor receives NO share of any revenue associated with Government use of the product (PWS §1.16).

Question 30: Union vs. Non-Union Talent Preference

Question: For productions that require the use of on camera professional talent, does the DoW have a preference or requirement for Union or Non-Union talent?

ANSWER - PWS 5.3, 5.5, AND 5.6.5: Each requirement is unique and may or may not request specific talent. In general, unless specified in task/delivery order request there is no preference for Union or Non-Union professional talent. The determination is entirely the contractor’s prerogative (again, unless specifically requested in the task/delivery order request)

Question 31: Stock and Library Assets Licensing - Rights and Licensing for Third-Party Production Assets;

Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Sections 1.16 and 5.1, Pages 3 and 7

Question: The PWS requires that the Government receive unlimited rights to all delivered materials and that the contractor secure rights and permissions for all production elements. Are commercially available stock or production-library assets acceptable when licensed for perpetual use within the production, provided that such licensing does not restrict the Government’s use of the final product, or is exclusive or full ownership of third-party assets required?

ANSWER: STOCK / LIBRARY ASSETS: Commercially licensed stock footage, photography, music, and graphics are ACCEPTABLE when the license grants the Government perpetual, unrestricted use within the delivered production. The Government holds UNLIMITED RIGHTS to distribute all delivered materials on any channel…in perpetuity, without duration restriction or additional fees.

Question 32: AI-Generated and AI-Assisted Elements - Rights and Ownership of AI-Generated or AI- Assisted Production Elements; Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Sections 1.16 and 5.1, Pages 3 and 7;

IB08 Solicitation (FAR 52.227-14 and 52.227-17), Page 14

Question: Given the requirement that the Government receive unlimited rights to all delivered materials, are AI-generated or AI-assisted production elements (e.g., graphics, voice, music, scripts) acceptable, provided that the contractor ensures such elements do not impose restrictions on the Government’s use, distribution, or modification of the final product?

ANSWER: AI-GENERATED / AI-ASSISTED ELEMENTS: AI-generated or AI-assisted production elements may be considered acceptable on a case by case basis, subject to the following conditions: (a) The contractor must ensure no AI platform, tool, or service retains intellectual property rights in the generated content that would restrict the Government’s unlimited rights; (b) Disclosure of all AI-generated content; and (c) The contractor assumes full responsibility for clearing any IP claims associated with AI-generated content.

Question 33: Script Changes and Delivery Order Modifications - CLIN 0002 Production Pricing – Variance from Initial Assumptions; Reference: IB08 Solicitation, CLIN 0002, Page 2; Attachment II (Ordering Guide), Chapter 1, Section 4, Page 7

Question: CLIN 0002 is structured as firm-fixed price with an NTE cost constraint, with a production breakdown submitted after script approval and evaluated by the COR. If the Government-approved script and associated production requirements (e.g., number of locations, shoot days, talent, or deliverables) materially differ from the assumptions underlying the original price quote, will the Government consider: A task order modification, An adjustment to the CLIN pricing, or Any other mechanism to address such variances?

ANSWER: Future video productions requirements will be competed in accordance with the procedures detailed in Attachment II, PAD Ordering Guide. The successful contractor is expected to write the script to their proposed/awarded value, so there should be no need for subsequent modification; however, should an aspect of the government's requirement change throughout the script writing process the COR will alert the contracting team to determine if a (within scope) modification would be allowable for unforeseen needs.

Question 34: Concise Production Assumptions in Pricing - Use of Assumptions in Future Task Order Pricing; Reference: Attachment IV (Example TOR), Instructions to IDIQ Holders, Pages 1–2; Attachment II (Ordering Guide), Chapter 4, Page 13

Question: - For future Task Order Requests (TORs), will vendors be permitted or encouraged to include concise production assumptions (e.g., number of shoot days, locations, crew size, post-production complexity) as part of their pricing submissions to support evaluation of cost realism and scope alignment?

ANSWER - Ref EXAMPLE TASK ORDER REQUEST AND PAD ORDERING GUIDE: Yes. As seen in the example Task Order Request (TOR) vendors will be requested to submit a detailed price quote against a task-order PWS. In almost all cases, the Government will publish its budget for the production requested in the TOR (so that vendors understand the magnitude of the production sought). It is the vendors responsibility for clearly quoting what they can provide within the stated budget for technical evaluation and award decision. Including concise production assumptions in the pricing narrative is permitted.

Question 35: Section 508 Deliverable Formats - Section 508 Deliverable Requirements at Task Order Level; Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Sections 1.4 and 1.17, Pages 1 and 3; Attachment II (Ordering Guide), Chapter 3, Page 11

Question: The PWS requires Section 508 compliance, including captioning and audio description. Will individual task orders specify the required deliverable formats (e.g., embedded captions, separate caption files, audio description formats, transcripts), or should offerors assume standard formats across all deliverables?

ANSWER - Ref: PWS 1.4 and 1.17: The baseline 508 requirement (closed captioning and audio description) applies to ALL final productions. Individual task orders will specify any additional or format-specific requirements (e.g., .SRT, .SCC). Where a TOR is silent, deliver embedded captions and an audio-described version as standard.

Question 36: Review Timelines and Consolidated Feedback - Government Review Timeline and Feedback Process; Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Sections 1.6.1 and 1.18, Pages 2–3; Attachment III (Production Guide), Section 3, Page 6

Question A: Will individual task orders define expected Government review timelines for key deliverables (e.g., treatment, scripts, rough cuts, final edits)?

Question B: Additionally, will feedback from customers, SMEs, and technical advisors be consolidated and transmitted to the contractor through the PAD Project Officer/COR as the single point of contact?

ANSWER - Ref: PWS 1.5 and PAD PRODUCTION GUIDE: Task/Delivery Orders will establish a delivery schedule for all deliverables (PWS §1.5). The PAD production guide details roles and responsibilities as well as the various reviews of deliverables required. The PAD Project Officer/COR is the SOLE point of contact for ALL approvals and deliverables. All Government feedback is consolidated and transmitted exclusively through the PO/COR (PWS §1.18).

Question 37: Military Installation Access Coordination

Question: For production on military installations, will the Government provide a POC for location coordination and assist with access approvals?

ANSWER - Ref PWS 1.7: Securing location permissions is the contractor’s primary responsibility (PWS §1.7). However, the Government will provide reasonable assistance through the PO/COR, who serves as the Government liaison for installation access coordination.

Question 38: Lead Times for Installation Access - Military Installation Access and Location Coordination;

Reference: Attachment I (PWS), Section 1.7, Page 2; Attachment II (Ordering Guide), Chapter 2, Pages 9–

Question: Can the Government provide typical lead times for processing installation access requirements, including: Background checks (NCIC/TSDB), AT Level I training verification, and Local access approvals, to support realistic production schedule planning?

ANSWER - Ref PWS TE1 para 2b: For non-CAC access requiring NCIC/TSDB adjudication (TE1 Para 2b), contractors should plan for a minimum of 2-4 weeks for processing. The PO/COR will facilitate Government-side coordination.

Question 39: AT Level I Awareness Training Timeline - Attachment I - PWS -PAD Video Production IDIQs (4 June 2026): TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 1, Antiterrorism / Operations Security Requirements. Paragraph 2.

Page 9.

Question: The requirement calls for all employees and subcontractor employees that plan performance within an Army controlled installation, facility or area to complete the AT Level I awareness training within 30 days after contract start date. Our experience has been some projects won’t be scripted and developed sufficiently by 30 days from award to know where shooting might occur or who might be needed on site. Can this requirement be adjusted to state: “This training shall be completed within 30 calendar days of contract award or within 10 calendar days of new employees commencing performance with the results reported to the COR NLT 14 calendar days.” or similar language?

ANSWER - Ref: PWS TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 1: The 30-day AT Level I clock runs from the start date of awarded task/delivery orders and is fixed as written. The recommended approach is for all personnel who may potentially access any Army installation to complete the online training within the 30-day window, without waiting for specific shoot location confirmation.

Question 40: iWATCH Training Applicability - Attachment I - PWS -PAD Video Production IDIQs:

TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 1, Antiterrorism / Operations Security Requirements. Page 10. Paragraph 1. 4.

iWATCH Training.

Question: Does iWATCH training apply to this contract?

ANSWER - Ref: PWS TECHNICAL EXHIBIT 1: YES. iWATCH training applies to orders places against established IDIQ’s (per Technical Exhibit 1, Para 4). Training must be completed within 30 calendar days of Task/Delivery Order issuance OR within 10 calendar days of new employees commencing performance for active orders.

Question 41: Key Personnel Identification - Attachment I - PWS -PAD Video Production IDIQs, PART 4,

4.1 Contractor Staff, Paragraph 2. Page 6. This mentions “Contractor shall provide professional personnel to perform the required work and identify, by name and qualification, individuals chosen to perform key scripting and production functions.”

Question: Is this simply referring to what we will need to do when a Task Order is being considered after award, or do you want us to include this information in our proposal now? If so, which Volume should it be part of?

ANSWER: IDIQ PROPOSAL STAGE: Describe the capability and qualifications of key personnel. Named individual identification is NOT required. TASK ORDER RFQ STAGE:

Named individuals for key functions will be identified in responses to individual task order RFQs.

Incumbency & Historical Information

Question 42-45: Incumbent Identities and Prior Work Links Questions: Who are the incumbents for this work? If no incumbents, how did DoW handle outsourced production work during the last 3-5 years? What companies has DoW worked with in the past for video productions in the past 3-5 years? Can you provide links to 3-5 productions produced under similar previous contracts in the past 3-5 years?

ANSWER: The Government will not identify specific prior contractors or provide links to prior productions. Historical contract information is publicly searchable on SAM.gov, USASpending.gov, and DiVIDS. This IDIQ vehicle is new requirement (not a follow-on).