Questions_W9128Z-26-R-DeCA-PAP with ACC response_DeCA 20260924.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 20 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) Planogramming-Assortment Planning Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) Solution
- Solicitation number
- W9128Z-26-R-DeCA-PAP
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers document addressing clarifications on the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) Call for Solutions for a Planogramming-Assortment Planning Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution issued by Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground. The Q&A addresses submission requirements, evaluation criteria, technical specifications, and contract terms for this full and open competition (NAICS 541511) anticipated to result in a Firm Fixed Price Firm FAR-based award.
The submission deadline is September 28, 2026, at 1600 EDT, with questions due by 10:00 AM EST on September 25, 2026, to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist. Phase 1 responses must be submitted as a single PDF (maximum 25MB via email, or through DoD SAFE if larger) containing a ten-page Solution Brief in 12-point Times New Roman with one-page executive summary, technical team description, Company Viability assessment, Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) pricing separating software licenses from implementation services, and project schedule. The ROM should address the anticipated period of performance of one base year plus four option years. Submissions may address one or more of three Areas of Interest: AOI 1 (Planogramming & Assortment Planning), AOI 2 (Store Layout & Design Integration), or AOI 3 (Enterprise Integration & Data Orchestration). Phase 1 evaluates Corporate Experience, Company Viability, and technical capability to integrate with DeCA's SAP/ARTS environment and support approximately 54,812 active items across 4,338 product categories for 235 commissaries globally. Key requirements include CMMC Level 2 self-certification (if handling CUI), Section 508 accessibility compliance, 99.5% monthly uptime SLA, 30-day Initial Operational Capability (desired, not mandatory), and unlimited government rights to DeCA-specific data exports and configuration scripts. Teaming is encouraged; resellers are not desired. A small business subcontracting plan is required at Phase 3 if the proposal exceeds $900,000 and the offeror is not a small business concern.
View the file
Other files
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
Questions
| Attachment / Document | Page or Section | Question | Response |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1(f), p.9; Section 10, p.12 | Section 6.1.1(f) requires Affirmation of Business Status Certification documentation for each participating company 'see Attachment 0002', and Section 10 lists Attachment 0002. The SAM.gov notice posts only the Call for Solutions and Attachment 0001. Please post Attachment 0002, and confirm whether each teaming partner and subcontractor completes its own copy. | This attachment is not required. Section 6.1.1(f) requires Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Analysis and Mitigation Plan. The posting has been updated. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 4, p.5; Section 5, p.6 | Section 5 says the general guidelines in Army Open Solicitation W9128Z-25-S-A002 also apply to this Call. Please identify which provisions of W9128Z-25-S-A002 apply (for example question procedures, proprietary markings or format rules), and state which document controls where the Call and the open solicitation differ. | The Call for Solutions is the controlling document. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Cover page, p.1; Section 6, p.6 | The Call does not state a deadline or a channel for questions. Please confirm that questions should be emailed to the Contracting Officer and the Contract Specialist named on the cover page, and state the last date and time questions will be accepted ahead of the 28 September 2026, 1600 EDT deadline. | Questions should be emailed to the Contracting Officer and the Contract Specialist named on the cover page. The deadline for questions is 10:00AM EST, Friday, 25 Sept. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 5, p.6 | Will the Government publish its answers to all interested parties by posting an amendment on SAM.gov? If an answer changes the Solution Brief content, the page limit or the scope of an AOI, will the Government extend the response date of 28 September 2026? | Government's response will be published in SAM.gov. The response date of 28 September 2026 is not extended. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6, pp.6-7; Section 7.1(b), p.11 | Section 7.1(b) assesses transition risk against the January 31, 2027 expiration of current services. Please give the anticipated dates for Phase 1 notifications, Phase 2 pitch invitations, the Phase 3 request for proposal and award, and state whether Phase 2 pitches will be held virtually or in person, and where. | This information will be decided by the Contracting Office, and is not required in order to submit a Phase 1 response. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1, p.8 | Section 6.1.1 sets a ten-page limit using 12-point Times New Roman. Please state the required page margins, line spacing and page size; confirm whether tables, figures, the ROM cost table in item c.iv and the project schedule in item c.v count toward the ten-page limit; confirm whether the one-page executive summary counts toward the ten pages; and state whether a smaller font size, for example 10 point, is permitted in tables, figures, captions, headers and footers. | Pages must be letter sized, 8.5 by 11. Please use your own business judgement in setting margins and line spacing. Smaller font may be used for tables, captions, headers, and footers. Tables and figures, the ROM, and the executive summary do count towards the page limit. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1, p.8 | If the Solution Brief takes the form of briefing slides (twenty-slide limit), what minimum font size applies on a slide, does a title slide count toward the twenty, and do the items excluded from the page limit (title page, intellectual property statement, Affirmation of Business Status Certification and OCI analysis) also sit outside the twenty slides? | Slides must be readable. The title slide, IP Statement, and OCI do not count towards the page limit. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6, p.6; Section 6.1.1, pp.8-9 | Section 6.1.1 asks for sections a through g in one PDF sent by email. Please confirm PDF is the only accepted file format, state any size cap on the email attachment, state whether a file that exceeds the cap may be sent through DoD SAFE, give any required file naming convention, and confirm whether the Government will acknowledge receipt. | PDF is the only acceptable file format. Maximum file size that can be accepted by our email system is 25MB. If files exceed that size limitation, you may request a DoD SAFE link from the contracting office. Please apply the naming convention for the email subjects to the Phase 1 files.The Govt intends to acknowledge receipt. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 3, p.3; Section 7.1(c), p.11 | Section 7.1(c) evaluates Viability 'in accordance with Section 6.2(d)', but Section 6.2 covers the Phase 2 pitch and Company Viability appears at Section 6.1.1(d). Please confirm Section 6.1.1(d) is the intended reference. Please also confirm that the three AOIs referred to in Section 3 as 'defined in Section 4' are those defined in Sections 3.1 to 3.3. | Section 6.1.1(d) is the correct reference for Section 7.1(c),and the correct reference for the AOIs is Section 3. Both references named in this question have been updated. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1(e) to (g), p.9; Section 9, p.12 | May the intellectual property statement, the Affirmation of Business Status Certification and the OCI analysis follow the evaluated pages as appendices inside the same PDF? May a proprietary information legend be placed on the title page and on each page carrying proprietary pricing or technical data? | Yes to both questions. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 1.0, p.1; Section 3.0, p.1; Call Section 4, p.6 | SOO Section 1.0 seeks 'a single, integrated, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) platform', while SOO Section 3.0 makes the three AOIs severable and Call Section 4 allows multiple awards to different offerors. If the AOIs are awarded to different companies, which awardee is responsible for integration between their platforms? May an AOI 2 or AOI 3 solution run on a platform separate from the AOI 1 platform, provided it exchanges data with it? | We are too early in the process to be able to address this possibility; this will be entirely dependent on the responses we get to the Call for Solutions. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, pp.2-3; Call Section 3, Required Attributes, p.3 | SOO Section 5.1 applies enterprise integration and SAP/ARTS compatibility to every AOI, and the same integration is the subject of AOI 3. For an offeror proposing AOI 1 or AOI 2 without AOI 3, what integration scope counts as 'a complete, end-to-end solution' for that AOI, and where does its boundary with AOI 3 lie? | For CSO Phase 1 White Papers, an offeror proposing AOI 1 or AOI 2 without AOI 3 satisfies the requirement for a 'complete, end-to-end solution' by conceptually demonstrating how their solution ingests and exports required business data (e.g., product assortments, store sales, compliance status) using standard, open methods (e.g., REST APIs, SFTP, automated flat-file exchange) compatible with enterprise environments like SAP/ARTS. The boundary lies between application-level data accessibility (AOI 1 & 2) and enterprise-wide orchestration (AOI 3). AOI 1 and 2 offerors are responsible only for exposing and consuming their own application's data. They are not required to propose the enterprise synchronization architecture, cross-system translation, or secure API governance required in AOI 3. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 3, Required Attributes, p.3; Section 5, p.6 | Section 3 highly encourages teaming, and Section 5 says resellers are not desired. Please confirm that a prime offeror delivering its own commercial SaaS platform, integration and program support, teamed with a commercial planogramming software company as a subcontractor, is not treated as a reseller. | Correct, a prime offeror delivering its own commercial SaaS platform, integration and program support, teamed with a commercial planogramming software company as a subcontractor, is not treated as a reseller. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 4.0, On-boarding, Deployment, and IOC, p.2; Call Section 3, Desired Attributes, p.3 | SOO Section 4.0 states the contractor 'must demonstrate' Initial Operational Capability within thirty calendar days of award, while Call Section 3 lists onboarding in under thirty days as a Desired Attribute. Is thirty-day IOC required or desired? Does 'all identified government users' mean headquarters category management users only, or also store-level and external supplier users? | The 30-day IOC is desired, not mandatory. 'All identified government users' refers strictly to internal DeCA Headquarters and Category Management personnel, not store-level employees or external suppliers. Bidders should align their Phase 1 conceptual timelines to this specific user scope. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 7.1(b), p.11; SOO Section 4.0, p.2 | Section 7.1(b) and SOO Section 4.0 refer to current services and legacy systems expiring January 31, 2027. Please identify the incumbent planogramming and assortment planning provider and product, the incumbent contract number and its current annual value, and state whether the incumbent may respond to this Call. | This information is not neccessary to provide a Phase 1 response. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 4.0, p.2; Call Section 7.1(b), p.11 | Is the incumbent funded and required to provide knowledge transfer before January 31, 2027, including export of existing planograms, store floor plans, fixture libraries, product images and assortment histories? Please state the approximate number of existing planograms and store layouts to be migrated and the file formats they are held in. | This information is not neccessary to provide a Phase 1 response. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Government Testing & Validation Support, p.3 | Do any open defects, open issues or POA&M items tied to the current planogramming service or its interfaces with SAP/ARTS transfer to the new contractor? If so, will a list be provided with the Phase 3 request for proposal? | This information is not neccessary to provide a Phase 1 response. The initial brief should focus strictly on high-level conceptual capability to integrate with enterprise systems (like SAP/ARTS) rather than legacy technical debt. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.2, Native Design Ingestion, p.3; Call Section 3.1, p.4 | Which native design file formats does DeCA hold for its 235 commissaries today (for example DWG, DXF, RVT or IFC)? Approximately how many store drawings exist, how current are they, are BIM datasets available for all stores or only some, and will these files be furnished at award? | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For the Phase 1 Solution Brief, vendors should identify their platform’s native ingestion capabilities for standard architectural and CAD/BIM formats (e.g., DWG, DXF, RVT, IFC). |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.4, Hierarchy Alignment, p.4; Call Section 3.3, p.5 | Please describe DeCA's current product hierarchy and its planned timeline for moving to the GS1 Global Product Classification standard, and state the approximate number of active items and product categories the platform must manage. | DeCA currently manages approximately 54812 active items across 4338 product categories; 230 merchandise POGs, and approximately 22424 items are merchandised across POGs . For Phase 1, bidders should focus on demonstrating their platform's baseline capacity to handle DeCA's active inventory scale and their general capability to map legacy hierarchies to GS1 standards. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Enterprise Integration, p.3; Section 5.4, p.4 | What government furnished information will be provided for integration, for example the SAP/ARTS release and modules, interface control documents, API specifications, the Oracle system name, the ordering and receiving and sales movement systems, test data and a non-production SAP/ARTS instance? Please list the government-furnished property, equipment and information a contractor may rely on, including network access and any Common Access Card requirement. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. Proposals should focus on demonstrating general system capabilities, standard API integration frameworks, and prior experience connecting with legacy ERP systems (like SAP). |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Enterprise Integration, p.3; Call Section 3, p.3 | Please name the 'successor ordering systems' referenced in SOO Section 5.1 and Call Section 3, give their expected go-live dates, and state whether integration with them belongs in the initial ROM or in a later option. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For Phase 1, bidders should only describe their platform’s adaptability and price future integration as a separate, conceptual option. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1(c)(iv), p.9; Section 6.3, p.10 | For the ROM, should each AOI's price be broken out into subscription licenses, implementation services by labor category and hours, and training and program support, or is a single price per AOI sufficient? What period of performance (base period and options) should the ROM cover, and is the Phase 3 award expected to be firm fixed price? | Please separate the software licenses from the service and training portions, but a detailed breakdown of the labor categories, hours, etc. is not required at this point. We anticipate making a Firm Fixed Price award. Anticipated period of performance is one base year plus four option years, though final contract paramenters will be established in Phase 3, and will be dependent on the results of Phase 1 and (if utilized) Phase 2. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 4.0, Target User Groups, p.2; Call Section 6.1.1(c)(iv), p.9 | Please state the number of users to be licensed by persona: headquarters category managers and store planners, store-level personnel across the 235 commissaries, and external supplier, manufacturer and broker users. May licensing be priced per named user, per concurrent user, per store or as an enterprise license? | This information is not neccessary to provide a Phase 1 response. Offerors should base their ROM on their own license pricing practices. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 7.1(b), p.11 | Section 7.1(b) assesses whether the ROM aligns with Government budget availability. Will the Government share a budget range or an independent Government cost estimate for each AOI? | No. We are looking for independent data on what it would cost to achieve the outcomes we are requesting. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Training, p.3 | SOO Section 5.1 requires initial live training sessions and quarterly refreshers. May live sessions be delivered virtually? If on-site sessions are expected at DeCA headquarters at Fort Lee, Virginia, or at commissaries in CONUS and OCONUS, how many locations and sessions should the ROM assume, and should travel be priced inside each AOI's ROM or as a separate line? | Offerors shall propose their own training plan. We are not looking for a detailed price proposal in Phase 1. The ROM should cover all costs necessary to provide your solution. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, pp.2-3; Section 5.4, p.4 | Who bears the cost of software needed on the Government side of an interface (for example SAP middleware or SFTP servers), of the dedicated non-production test environment in SOO Section 5.1, and of licenses for external supplier users? Should these be shown as other direct costs within the ROM? | Please note that we are only looking for a ROM in Phase 1, not a detailed price proposal. The ROM should cover all costs necessary to provide your solution. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 3, Cybersecurity (CMMC Level 2), p.3; SOO Section 4.0, p.2 | For CMMC Level 2, will the Government require a Final Level 2 (C3PAO) certification at award, or will a Conditional Level 2 (C3PAO) status or a Level 2 self-assessment posted in SPRS be accepted at award? Does the requirement flow down to a subcontractor that does not store or process CUI? | C3PAO certification requirements are currently suspended by the DoW; self certification will be sufficient. CMMC requirements only apply to vendors that handle FCI or CUI. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 3, Cybersecurity (CMMC Level 2), p.3; SOO Section 4.0, p.2 | DFARS 252.204-7012 requires a cloud service provider that stores CUI to meet security requirements equivalent to the FedRAMP Moderate baseline. At award, will the Government require a FedRAMP Moderate authorization, FedRAMP Moderate equivalency under the DoD CIO memorandum, or a DoD Cloud Computing Security Requirements Guide impact level such as IL4? For a platform that holds a FedRAMP High Readiness Assessment Report (RAR FR2104524844) and is pursuing FedRAMP 20x Class C, will that be accepted as the basis for authorization, and will the authorization boundary be the offeror's commercial cloud environment or a DoD environment? | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. Bidders must detail their current security posture, certifications, and path to compliance in their Phase 1 solution brief. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 4.0, Target User Groups, p.2; Section 5.3, Role-Based Access Control and Collaborative Ecosystem, p.4 | External suppliers, manufacturers and brokers will exchange planogram and assortment designs that the Call treats as CUI. What identity and access requirements apply to external users (for example ECA certificates, Login.gov, or company credentials with multifactor authentication), and will DeCA approve supplier access to CUI at the category level? | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. As clarified in previous responses, initial onboarding and Phase 1 scope focus strictly on internal DeCA Headquarters personnel. For Phase 1, bidders only need to confirm that their platform natively supports standard identity federation and multi-factor authentication (MFA) frameworks capable of role-based access control. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Program Support, Platform Usability & Availability, Government Testing, pp.2-3 | SOO Section 5.1 sets 99.5 percent monthly uptime. Please define the other service levels expected: help desk hours and time zones covered for OCONUS stores, response and resolution times by severity, the 'contract-defined severity timelines' for defects, scheduled maintenance windows, and any service credits. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For the Phase 1 Solution Brief, bidders only need to indicate their standard commercial SLA baselines and system availability support capabilities (such as standard help desk hours and support tiers). |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 3, Platform Accessibility and Usability, p.3 | Do the Revised Section 508 Standards apply to the platform, and if so, is an Accessibility Conformance Report expected with the Phase 3 proposal or at delivery? | Yes, Revised Section 508 Standards apply to the platform. Bidders are not required to submit an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR/VPAT) with their Phase 1 Solution Brief. Bidders should confirm in their Phase 1 brief that their commercial platform is built to support modern web accessibility standards (WCAG 2.1 AA / Section 508). |
| SAM.gov notice W9128Z-26-R-DeCA-PAP | Place of Performance (blank); SOO Section 2.0, p.1 | The SAM.gov notice lists no place of performance. Please confirm that implementation, integration and program support may be performed remotely at contractor facilities, identify any work that requires an on-site presence at DeCA headquarters or a commissary, and state who furnishes workspace, badges and equipment for that work. | These are details that wil be finalized at Phase 3. This information is not required to submit a Phase 1 response. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1(c)(iii), p.8; Section 6.3, p.10 | Section 6.1.1(c)(iii) asks for a technical team with the expertise to accomplish the objectives. Are resumes expected in the Solution Brief or only at Phase 3, will any roles be designated key personnel, and are there minimum qualifications? Must personnel with access to DeCA CUI be U.S. citizens, and does any background investigation requirement apply? | These are details that will be finalized in a later Phase. No resumes are expected in Phase 1. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 6.1.1(b)(iii), p.8; Section 7.1(c), p.11 | Phase 1 evaluates Corporate Experience and Viability but not past performance as a separate factor. If past performance is evaluated at Phase 3, may offerors cite CPARS records in place of past performance questionnaires? For Corporate Experience, may a teaming partner's commercial grocery and retail deployments be cited alongside the prime's federal experience? | Phase 3 requirements will be specified in any invitation(s) issued to submit a Phase 3 proposal. |
| SAM.gov notice W9128Z-26-R-DeCA-PAP | Set-aside, NAICS 541511, PSC DA10; Call Section 5, p.6 | The SAM.gov notice shows no set-aside, NAICS 541511 and PSC DA10. Please confirm that any FAR-based award from this Call is full and open with no small business set-aside, that NAICS 541511 and its size standard govern size representations, and whether a small business subcontracting plan will be required at Phase 3. | This action is full and open competition with no small business set-aside. NAICS 541511 and its corresponding size standard govern size representations. If the amount of the proposal exceeds $900,000, and the Offeror is other than a small business concern, a small business subcontracting plan will be required at Phase 3. |
| Call for Solutions, Planogramming-Assortment Planning SaaS Solution (16 Sep 2026) | Section 4, pp.5-6; cover page, p.1 | If the Contracting Officer selects an Other Transaction agreement, will it be a prototype agreement under 10 U.S.C. 4022 with a follow-on production option, and will the nontraditional defense contractor or cost share condition apply? | The Contracting Officer is anticipating awarding a FAR-based action. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 4.0, Data Rights & Internal Use, p.2; Call Section 6.1.1(e), p.9 | SOO Section 4.0 requires unlimited rights to 'database structures' generated for DeCA. Please confirm this covers DeCA-specific data exports, bespoke reports and configuration scripts, and not the commercial platform's underlying proprietary database schema, which stays under the commercial license identified under Section 6.1.1(e). | Confirmed. The 'unlimited rights' requirement applies strictly to DeCA-specific data, data exports, custom reports, tailored configuration scripts, and government-specific data schemas generated during the performance of the contract. It does not apply to the vendor's underlying, pre-existing commercial platform architecture or proprietary database schemas, which remain protected under the commercial licensing terms identified under Call Section 6.1.1(e) |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.2, Advanced Optimization Modeling, p.3; Call Section 3, Desired Attributes, p.3 | For machine learning placement recommendations, may DeCA sales movement and inventory data be used to train or tune models inside the contractor's platform, and must those models stay dedicated to DeCA? Separately, does the Government permit AI-assisted software development tools, for example GitHub Copilot or Claude Code, for custom configuration scripts and integration code built for DeCA, and does any disclosure requirement apply? | DeCA sales movement and inventory data constitute government data and may be used to train or tune machine learning models solely for DeCA’s operational use. All models, weights, and algorithms tuned or trained using DeCA proprietary data must remain dedicated to DeCA and cannot be incorporated into or co-mingled with commercial multi-tenant foundation models without express written government approval. Policies regarding contractor use of AI-assisted development tools (e.g., GitHub Copilot) and related disclosure requirements for custom scripting are not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. |
| Attachment 0001, Statement of Objectives (13 Aug 2026) | Section 5.1, Government Testing & Validation Support, p.3 | Must the dedicated non-production test environment be hosted separately from production and carry production-scale data, and may it use masked or synthetic data in place of production CUI? | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For Phase 1, offerors only need to confirm that their commercial platform provides an isolated non-production environment capable of supporting government acceptance and security testing. |
| The SOO (Section 4.0) states 30-day IOC is mandatory. The Call for Solutions (Section 3) lists the same 30-day timeline as a favorably evaluated Desired Attribute rather than a requirement. Could you confirm which statement governs? | The Call for Solutions Section 3 governs. The 30-day Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is a desired attribute that will be evaluated favorably, not a mandatory requirement for the Phase 1 submission. | ||
| IOC (SOO Section 4.0) is defined as including "a validated data exchange... established between the solution and the DeCA SAP/ARTS environment." No interface control document, API specification, or data dictionary for ARTS has been provided. Requesting this to scope the integration approach and schedule against real specifications rather than assumptions. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. Phase 1 proposals should focus on demonstrating general system capabilities, standard API integration frameworks, and prior experience connecting with legacy ERP systems (like SAP). | ||
| AOI 3 references integration with "Government-furnished platforms, including retail, ordering, inventory, and automated inventory replenishment environments" without naming which systems beyond SAP/ARTS and Oracle fall within that scope. Requesting the specific platform list to scope AOI 3's technical approach. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For Phase 1, bidders proposing on AOI 3 are only required to demonstrate their platform's baseline, conceptual capability to ingest and export data using standard, modern industry methods (e.g., REST APIs, flat-file transfers). | ||
| The documents refer to "successor ordering systems" to Oracle without naming them. Requesting to know which system, and the transition timeline, since it changes the integration architecture proposed. | This information is not necessary to provide a Phase 1 response. For Phase 1, bidders should only describe their platform’s adaptability and price future integration as a separate, conceptual option. | ||
| The GS1 GPC product hierarchy transition is required in both documents, but neither describes DeCA's current product hierarchy or the transition timeline. This is needed to know whether a dual-hierarchy state needs to be supported during migration, and for how long, since that directly affects the data mapping architecture proposed. | DeCA currently manages approximately 54812 active items across 4338 product categories; 230 merchandise POGs, and approximately 22424 items are merchandised across POGs. For Phase 1, bidders only need to demonstrate their platform's capacity to scale to this volume and outline their general technical methodology for mapping legacy hierarchies to GS1 standards. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .