B08.03 Answers to Questions - W912HQ26RA010 - draft answers 2026.08.14.docx

Q1: Personnel Security Requirements: Are any personnel security clearances required for contractor personnel performing this requirement?

A1: Security clearances are not a requirement of this contract. See PWS Section 8.2 for security requirements.

Q2: January 2027 Training Start: Should offerors assume baseline training delivery will begin in January 2027 as reflected in Attachment 1, or is the January schedule subject to adjustment based upon the actual contract award date and CMP deployment readiness?

A2: The schedule is as reflected in Attachment 1. See answer below regarding contract award date.

Q3: TTT / Anticipated Award: Given the first TTT is scheduled for the week of December 7, 2026, please provide the Government's anticipated contract award date and expected mobilization period prior to the first TTT.

A3: Award is anticipated in mid-Sep and before 30 Sep.

Q4: Attachment 1 Training Quantities: Should offerors price Tasks 2 and 3 assuming all sessions identified in Attachment 1 be delivered, or are the weekly session quantities estimates that may increase or decrease during performance without adjustment to the FFP task price?

A4: Assume only the sessions identified in Attachment 1 will be delivered. Any variation from the weekly session quantities listed in Attachment 1 will be handled on an individual basis.

Q5: OCONUS Access: For OCONUS training, will the Government provide required installation/site access, country clearances, Government sponsorship, and/or other documentation necessary for contractor personnel to perform at the identified locations?

A5: Per PWS Section 8.2.4, contract personnel are required to comply with the DoD Foreign Clearance Guide, including country and theater clearance processes. Each location will have a government point of contact identified to assist contract personnel.

Q6: Legacy RMS Training Contract: Can the Government provide the contract number and name of the contractor that provided training on the legacy Resident Management System (RMS)?

A6: RMS was developed well in excess of 20 years ago. Training videos are posted to YouTube on occasional. There is no Contractor that provided training on the legacy system.

Q7: Key Personnel / Trainer Resumes: Based on the wording found in Section 5.7, Evaluation Criteria for Factor 2 – Key Personnel, in the Instructions to Offerors document, do offerors need to provide Key Personnel designations and resumes for at least five (5) trainers?

A7: Yes.

Q8: Cost/Price Proposal Template: Will the Government provide a cost/price proposal template for submission as part of the Cost/Price Proposal?

A8: No template will be provided, the price proposal must price per task for the base tasks, per subtask for the options and include the grand total price. Additionally, the level of effort per labor category or person should be detailed per task and the fully burdened labor rate for each.

Q9: Solicitation – SF 33 Block 9. We request that the Government extend the proposal due date 2 weeks, to September 10. The additional time is needed for collection of past performance questionnaires from Government clients who are taking time off in the second half of August.

A9: No extension will be given. Award is anticipated in mid-Sept to 30 Sept at the latest.

Q10: Solicitation – Section I – DFARS 252.204-7012. What Covered Defense Information, if any, is anticipated to be handled under this contract?

A10: “With respect to DFARS 252.204-7012, this is a mandatory clause regardless of whether CDI is present or not. There is no authority to remove this clause or change the language of the clause. If CDI is present, the requirements are triggered. If CDI is not present, the clause is simply inactive.” Covered Defense Information is not anticipated to be handled under this contract.

Q11: Solicitation Section E, Inspection and Acceptance, Instructions to Offerors, Section 5.6. What objective criteria will the Government use to determine successful completion and acceptance of each training session and associated deliverables?

A11: See PWS Section 4 for course criteria and Section 6 for deliverable performance requirements.

Q12: Solicitation Section E, Inspection and Acceptance, Instructions to Offerors, Section 5.6. Contractors are evaluated on instructor quality, successful student learning, and reporting, yet acceptance criteria and performance thresholds are not clearly defined. Are there minimum student satisfaction ratings, attendance thresholds, completion rates, learning effectiveness measures, reporting accuracy standards, or other quantitative performance standards that will be used to assess contractor performance?

A12: See PWS Section 4 for course criteria and Section 6 for deliverable performance requirements.

Q13: PWS Attachment 1 – End User Training Schedule. For all in-person training sessions, is the contractor required to provide staff in addition to the instructor(s), e.g., to take notes and or to assist trainees?

A13: Offerors should account for the personnel and administration to meet contract performance requirements. Also see A17.

Q14: PWS Attachment 1 – End User Training Schedule. Is the contractor expected to develop and execute a knowledge test as part of the training sessions?

A14: The Contractor is not expected to develop training materials, including knowledge tests. Knowledge tests may be included within facilitator guides and presentation slides and addressed in a session-level manner, not at an individual level.

Q15: PWS Attachment 1 – End User Training Schedule. What is the maximum number of instructor-led training sessions that may be delivered concurrently during any single week? Is it allowable for a single instructor to deliver multiple session types within the same week?

A15: The Government will provide the session schedule for in-person instructor-led sessions post-award. There is no limitation on the maximum number of virtual instructor-led sessions that may be delivered concurrently during any single week beyond the constraints and coordination required in PWS Section 4.7 and related sections. A single instructor may deliver multiple session types within the same week if all contract conditions are met.

Q16: PWS Attachment 1 – End User Training Schedule. If CMP functionality or procedures change during deployment, what level of curriculum revision, training-material update, trainer retraining, and revalidation is included within the fixed-price scope?

A16: Changes to training materials are anticipated to be minor during the course of this contract. If significant changes to training materials must occur a change order may be issued at the Contracting Officer’s discretion.

Q17: PWS 2.4 Scope – Target Audience Training Delivery. The scope indicates that questions from trainees will be referred to USACE POCs. Will the USACE POCs participate in each training session?

A17: Frequently asked questions will be provided to the trainers for their reference during training. Additionally, USACE SMEs/POCs will be available in virtual forums (Teams meetings/chats, etc.) to answer critical questions in near real time.

Q18: PWS 2.4 Scope – Target Audience Training Delivery. Is the Government responsible for classroom A/V support and WiFi access for instructors during in-person training events at Government facilities? Will GFE (i.e., laptops) be provided to enable contractors to work on USACE's network, participate in USACE Teams chats, etc.

A18:

GFE (laptops) will not be provided to trainers. Other mechanisms for maintaining chats will be explored for real time access to USACE SMEs. The government will provide all facilities for training.

Refer to PWS Section 7 for equipment information. WiFi access will be provided for train-the-trainer sessions. The Government may provide WiFi access for instructor use during in-person training sessions but WiFi access is not guaranteed. Offerors should anticipate a need to provide internet access for instructors for in-person training sessions unless otherwise coordinated post-award.

Q19: PWS 3.4.2 Travel. Travel is reimbursed at actual cost. Does reimbursement apply only to travel expenses, or is labor associated with travel time also compensable under this CLIN?

A19: Travel costs will be reimbursed in accordance with the Joint Travel Regulation. Labor associated with travel time is not compensable under this CLIN.

Q20: PWS 4.2 and 4.3 Delivery Responsibilities. Will instructors only facilitate training or will they also be responsible for session setup, learner troubleshooting, producer support, attendance capture, or follow-up notes?

A20: Bidders should account for the personnel and administration to meet contract performance requirements, including program management, administrative, and logistical support as outlined in the PWS.

Q21: PWS 4.4 – Scope. “For each subtask, provide weekly instructor capacity to deliver up to an additional 70 hours of training sessions.” Does this instruction mean that, for each exercised Task 4 subtask, the contractor must provide aggregate instructor capacity to deliver up to 70 additional virtual training-session hours per week, above the baseline Attachment 1 schedule?

A21: The optional training delivery in PWS Section 4.4 outlines training above the baseline in the Attachment 1 schedule.

Q22: PWS 4.4 – Scope. Are the 70 hours mentioned in the instruction delivered session hours or instructor labor hours? Will payment be made for reserved weekly capacity or only for training sessions/hours actually scheduled and delivered?

A22: The hours listed are training session hours. Payments will be made as a JOB item without regard to session hours actually scheduled and delivered.

Q23: PWS 4.8 Trainee Registration and Session Coordination. Section 4.8 describes a trainee registration platform for management of training sessions, session cancellation, waitlist management and overall capability to manage the training program. Should the same platform be used for training content management?

A23: The Government will provide training materials to the contractor. Management of training materials after Government provisioning is the responsibility of the contractor.

Q24: PWS 4.8 Trainee Registration and Session Coordination. Are there requirements for the training registration platform or virtual training platform relating to FedRAMP authorization, DoD cybersecurity, Section 508 accessibility, hosting, data-storage location, or integration with Government systems?

A24: There are no unique cybersecurity or accessibility requirements for this solicitation. 508 compliance will be required.

Q25: PWS 4.8 Trainee Registration and Session Coordination. Will USACE use their own internal CMA2 platform for training content management?

A25: The Construction Management Administration Application website (CMA²) will not be utilized to directly support instructor-facilitated training sessions, but will house materials trainees can reference post-training.

Q26: PWS 4.9 Travel and SF 33. Does FAR 52.228-3 Workers' Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) apply to this requirement?

A26: This contract is not a “public-work” contract under the definition found at RFO 28.305. The Defense Base Act is not applicable to this requirement.

Q27: PWS 4.9 Travel and SF 33. If travel is booked and a training event is subsequently cancelled or relocated by the Government, how will unrecoverable costs and schedule impacts be handled?

A27: This would be handled on a case-by-case basis in accordance with PWS 3.4.2.

Q28: PWS 4.9 Travel and SF 33. Will contractor personnel require SOFA status, SOFA visas, or other country-specific authorizations?

A28: See response A5.

Q29: PWS 4.9 Travel and SF 33. If performance will require SOFA, will the Government provide assistance or liaison support for SOFA processing?

A29: See response A5.

Q30: PWS 4.9 Travel and SF 33. If so, can this process begin upon award of the contract to ensure adequate time for processing prior to any SOFA related required travel?

A30: Final locations will be communicated no less than eight weeks in advance of the training sessions, but the government will assist with coordination of these efforts as soon as destinations are finalized and trainers are identified. (JCH)

Q31: PWS 4.8.1.2. Information Collected During Registration. Will any registration, attendance, completion, or trainee data be designated as CUI?

A31: No.

Q32: Instructions to Offerors 1.1 Organizational Conflicts of Interest. Does the OCI requirement apply only to organizational conflicts or also to individual instructors and SMEs proposed under the contract?

A32: OCI would tend to apply to both organizations and individuals, however, See A67.

Q33: Instructions to Offerors 2.0 Proposal Submission Requirements Section 2.0 states proposals comprise three volumes, while Section 2.1 identifies five volumes. Please clarify.

A33: I will answer this when I clean up this section. This is for contracting mostly.

Q34: Instructions to Offerors 3.4, Volume IV – Price. “Offerors shall submit a price sheet which includes hourly rate and details the proposed level of effort and labor rates for each category proposed.” Because this instruction limits required pricing to labor rates and level of effort, please confirm that offerors are not required to submit proposed pricing for travel or other direct costs (ODCs), as those costs will be reimbursed at actual cost.

A34: Travel costs will use a not to exceed amount of $140,000 for Task 1; and a not to exceed amount of $800,000 for Task 2. Printing costs may be included under the ODC for Materials, which is a not to exceed amount of $15,000 on Task 2.

Q35: Instructions to Offerors 3.4, Volume IV – Price. If offerors are required to include ODCs in the pricing proposal, please specify details on training locations outside of USA to provide a basis for estimating travel costs.

A35: The updated Attachment 1 lists the number of sessions for each district for each week of in-person sessions. Anticipated Honolulu district training will occur on Oahu, HI, and Caribbean training will occur in Puerto Rico. Specific training locations will be provided post-award.

Q36: Instructions to Offerors 3.4, Volume IV – Price. Please confirm that allowable indirect costs, such as G&A, may be applied to reimbursable travel and ODCs in accordance with the contract’s cost reimbursement provisions.

A36: That is correct.

Q37: Instructions to Offerors 3.4, Volume IV – Price. Please provide examples of allowable ODCs beyond travel. Are any ODC categories that are excluded from reimbursement?

A37: Reference PWS 3.4 for ODC categories, to include Materials and Travel.

Q38: Instructions to Offerors 3.4, Volume IV – Price. Please confirm that Defense Base Act Insurance (DBA) for OCONUS in person training will be reimbursed at cost similar to the ODCs and travel costs.

A38: See A26.

Q39: Instructions to Offerors 5.6 Evaluation Criteria. Evaluation Criterion B states that "Offerors shall demonstrate the virtual training platform will provide a suitable platform for student learning." Yet PWS Section 4.8 does not require a virtual training platform, only the trainee registration platform and not the virtual training platform. Please clarify whether offers should include provision a virtual training platform. If so, please update the PWS.

A39: PWS Section 4.8 covers both in-person and virtual session registration and session coordination. A virtual training platform is required to deliver virtual sessions as required by PWS 4.3-4.6 and 7.2.

Q40: Instructions to Offerors 5.6 Evaluation Criteria. Will the Government furnish the course content, training materials, exercises, demonstration environment, CMP system access, and user scenarios, or is the contractor responsible for developing and maintaining any of these items?

A40: The Government will furnish course content, training materials (including exercise guides as appropriate), and access to the CMP system (training environment) for instructor-led demonstrations. PWS 4.2 requires the contractor to pre-configure the training environment (CMP) using CMP Developer-provided materials for each in-person session.

Q41: Instructions to Offerors 5.6 Evaluation Criteria. Please clarify ownership, retention, privacy, security, records management, and disposition requirements for trainee registration data, waitlists, attendance records, completion records, and reports maintained by the contractor.

A41: See PWS Section 5 and the associated list of deliverables. The Government will be responsible for records management following contract completion.

Q42: In accordance with PWS, Page 4, Section 4.2, it states, “Payment: Payment will be allowed based on the percentage of completed training sessions/hours when compared to the total training sessions/hours required for completion of the task.”

· Does the Government intend to only pay for a portion of the trainees who attend training?

· If so, how will the Government handle cancellations that occur?

· Will the registration list be confirmed at least 30 days ahead of scheduled trainings?

A42: Payment will be made on a completed session basis, not a trainee attendance basis. Session cancellation or rescheduling, if any, will be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Refer to PWS 4.8 for information on registration list timelines.

Q43: In accordance with ITO, Page 10, Section 5.2 and ITO, Pages 14-15, Section 5.7, can the Government please clarify the list of key personnel role(s) and the number of each role(s). The language in the document is ambiguous and requires validation.

A43: The Government will not mandate required positions for this solicitation beyond the language included within the RFP.

Q44: In accordance with PWS, Page 14, Section 7.2, can the Government please confirm that all training-related physical spaces, furniture, logistics, and materials will be provided by the Government to the Contractor to include meeting room(s), audio/visual equipment, high-speed internet access, and other necessary assets and services?

If the Government intends for the Contractor to provide services such as high-speed internet, will the Government provide an ODC line for each related expense?

A44: Refer to PWS Section 7 for equipment information. WiFi access will be provided for train-the-trainer sessions. The Government may provide WiFi access for instructor use during in-person training sessions, but WiFi access is not guaranteed. Offerors should anticipate a need to provide internet access for instructors for in-person training sessions unless otherwise coordinated post-award. A separate ODC line will not be added for providing internet access.

Q45: In accordance with PWS Attachment 1 and PWS Attachment 2, the two PWS attachments do not specify specific days and locations for training delivery. Without specific locations and days for each type of in-person training, offerors will not be able to develop detailed resource planning and costs associated with travel and delivering in-person training multiple locations both in CONUS and OCONUS.

Can the Government please provide a detailed schedule for training evolutions, including specific days and locations for each in-person training evolution?

Additionally, can the Government please provide a detailed daily schedule for training sessions scheduled to be conducted concurrently at specific locations?

A45: Reference PWS 4.8.5 and 4.9 for information on in-person session timing and locations. In-person training will typically be held on weekdays (Monday-Friday) unless local work hours differ. Also see revised Attachment 1.

Q46: In accordance with PWS Attachment 1, are the user group sessions limited to 15 (in-person) and 20 (virtual) students per session? Class size limits are needed to provide detailed resource planning and pricing.

A46: Virtual sessions will be limited to 20 students with one instructor. In-person sessions will generally be limited to 15 students but may be combined with other sessions to have up to 45 students in one large session, with an appropriate number of instructors required to ensure the 15 students to one instructor ratio is not exceeded. Combined sessions with up to 30 students would count as two sessions, while combined sessions with up to 45 students would count as three sessions.

Q47: In accordance with PWS Attachment 2, the instructor to student ratio is cited as one instructor for each class (15 students for in-person, 20 students for virtual). Industry best practice for in-person training is two instructors per class for intensive in-person training, which allows for better coverage to answer student questions. Is the Government providing a second instructor for each class being taught or is the intent to only have one contractor instructor cover each user group session alone?

A47: The student ratio is a minimum requirement. The Government will not be providing an instructor but intends to have a method to assist with answering student questions, whether that be a local or remote resource. Also see A17.

Q48: In accordance with PWS Page 10, Section 4.10, it states, “Instructors must possess professional certifications to facilitate adult learning (e.g., Certified Professional in Training Management (CPTM), Certified Professional in Training Development (CPTD), or equivalent certification demonstrating competency to perform as an instructor) and a minimum of 3 years of demonstrated experience in delivering effective training OR must possess a minimum of 5 years of experience in adult training facilitation and a proven track record of delivering effective training, demonstrable through documented training evaluations.” The majority of training evaluations are focused at the classroom level to receive a broad training assessment, not specific to instructors. Additionally, evaluations are not consistent across multiple and different trainings. Will the Government accept 5 years of documented training experience on an instructor’s resume in lieu of documented training evaluations?

A48: Training experience may be supported with classroom level training evaluations.

Q49: In accordance with ITO, Page 6, Section 3.2.3, in paragraph 3.2.3.3, it states, “A copy of the CPARS or PPQ must accompany the company effort submitted under Past Performance in 3.2.2.” In paragraph 3.2.3.5 it states, “Offeror shall submit PPQs and/or CPARS with their proposals.” The normal practice is that a PPQ is provided by the Government for the submitting contractor to distribute to the contractor’s Government client for the past performance reference being used. The Government client fills out the PPQ, signs it, and sends it directly to the contracting officer for the current effort. It is not generally sent back to the contractor who is submitting the bid. This prevents a contractor from possibly modifying the PPQ before it is received by the contracting officer. Can the Government please clarify whether the PPQ is to be sent from the Government client to the contracting officer for the bid or if indeed the Government wants the PPQ returned to the contractor and included in the contractor’s bid submission.

A49: Please request Government POCs send completed PPQs to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer.

Q50: In accordance with ITO, Page 6, Section 3.2.3.1 and ITO, Page 7, Section 3.2.3.5, it states that PPQs and/or CPARS must be submitted with the proposal and that late PPQs will not be evaluated.

Can the Government please provide clarification on whether CPARS can serve as a substitute when the customer does not complete the PPQ.

If a project owner does not return a PPQ before the proposal deadline, may we submit a CPARS report instead or provide evidence that we requested the PPQ?

A50: CPARS are preferred over PPQs. PPQs may be used in lieu of CPARS where there is no CPARS – it is an elective choice. Evidence of requested PPQs will not be considered.

Q51: In accordance with ITO, Page 8, Section 3.3.4, the last sentence in the paragraph states “…in paragraph (a) immediately above.” We do not see paragraph (a). Can the Government please clarify this reference?

A51: This should have said 3.3.3 above.

Q52: Can the Government please confirm whether shipping/freight costs for distribution of printed participant guides are (a) reimbursable as an ODC under the Materials category, or (b) to be included in the Task 2 FFP price as administrative support costs for delivery of in-person training.

A52: Shipping/freight costs for distribution of printed participant guides should be included in Task 2.

Q53: In accordance with PWS, Page 4, Section 4.2, can the Government please confirm that the developer-generated participant guide is within the scope of the current CMP contract?

A53: Materials for printing will be provided to the contractor.

Q54: In accordance with ITO, Page 5, Section 3.2.2, it states a not to exceed limit of 5 pages for Volume II (not including CPARS/PPQs). Because of the extent of the information being requested for each past performance reference (Required Information items 1 - 15) and a page limit of just 5 pages for up to 5 contract references, we recommend the Government consider allowing 2 pages per contract reference for a total of 10 pages (excludes CPARS/PPQs). This will allow room to more fully answer all the information requested in items 1 - 15.

A54: The page count has been revised to 10 pages.

Q55: In accordance with PWS, Page 2, it states, “On rare occasions the Contractor may be responsible for adapting these materials to specific audience needs, ensuring accessibility, and maintaining a repository of updated materials.”

Can the Government please clarify to what extent, if any, is the Contractor responsible for knowledge management?

To facilitate more precise pricing, will the government accept that 100 hours is sufficient to meet the requirement of, “On rare occasions” as referenced above?

A55: Anticipate a minimal, incidental, level of effort.

Q56: In accordance with PWS, Page 10, Sections 4.12, if USACE does not have a way to mandate training completion for all users and all training sessions, will the Government consider removing the attendance requirements on payment and performance terms?

A56: Low course completion rates will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine root cause. The intent of this requirement is to ensure the instructor is providing a welcoming course environment and satisfactorily delivering training content in a manner that keeps students engaged.

Q57: Can the Government please confirm whether contractor personnel must be U.S. citizens or U.S. persons, or whether non-U.S. citizens who are legally authorized to work in the United States may perform under the contract.

Please also identify any citizenship, residency, security-screening, or system-access restrictions applicable to instructors or other contractor personnel.

A57: Refer to PWS Section 8 for personnel requirements.

Q58: In accordance with PWS, Page 3, Section 4.1 and PWS, Page 10, Section 4.10, can the Government please provide the anticipated contract-award and Notice-to-Proceed dates and confirm that the contractor will receive sufficient mobilization time to identify personnel and submit the instructor list at least 45 days before the train-the-trainer sessions scheduled for the weeks of December 7, 2026, and January 11, 2027.

A58: See A3 above.

Q59: In accordance with PWS, Page 7, Section 4.7 and PWS, Page 9, Section 4.9, can the Government please confirm the contractor will be compensated for all non-refundable costs occurred prior to Government-directed training cancellation including committed labor, nonrefundable travel, printing, or other costs resulting from Government-directed changes.

A59: This would be handled on a case-by-case basis in accordance with PWS 3.4.2.

Q60 SOLICITATION SCHEDULE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 1.3 and 1.4]:

Will the Government consider extending the proposal due date by 14 calendar days, to 10 September 2026, and correspondingly extending the deadline for solicitation questions? If a 14-calendar-day extension cannot be accommodated, will the Government consider a minimum 7-calendar-day extension, to 3 September 2026?

A60: See A2, A3, A9 and A60.

Q61 SOLICITATION SCHEDULE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 1.4; PWS "Training Session Parameters" and Deliverables table]:

If the proposal due date is not extended, will the Government confirm that the pre-performance lead times keyed to the start of training — the Instructor List due 45 calendar days prior to train-the-trainer training (approximately 23 October 2026), the draft virtual session schedule due 90 calendar days prior to session start (approximately 5 October 2026), the final approved session schedule due 75 calendar days prior (approximately 20 October 2026), and registration opening 60 calendar days prior (approximately 4 November 2026) — will be adjusted for the initial tranche of sessions to reflect the actual date of contract award and Notice to Proceed? As written, several of these milestones may precede or immediately follow award.

A61: See A2, A3, A9 and A60.

Q62 SOLICITATION SCHEDULE | Reference: General]:

Is any portion of this requirement currently being performed under an existing contract or task order? If so, will the Government identify the incumbent contractor, the contract number, and the current contract value?

A62: This is a new requirement.

Q63 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: PWS, "Background"; PWS, "Train-the-Trainer Participation" and "Materials"]:

The PWS Background section states that "RMS will be replaced by the new Construction Management Platform (CMP) application, powered by Kahua." Will the Government confirm that Kahua is the underlying commercial platform on which all training under Tasks 1 through 6 will be delivered, and that the facilitator guides, presentation slides, and reference materials to be furnished by the CMP Developers will be Kahua-based? Relatedly, will the Government identify the "System Developers," "CMP Developers," and "Training Content Creators" referenced throughout the PWS, with whom the Contractor is required to coordinate under the Program Management task? Confirmation of the platform and of the developer entities will allow offerors to propose trainers, staffing models, and coordination approaches calibrated to the actual application rather than to a generic construction management system, and will materially improve the precision of the technical proposals the Government receives.

A63: CMP is a USACE-configured version of Kahua. The Government will facilitate interactions between the contractor and other entities involved in CMP development and deployment.

Q64 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: PWS, "Materials"; PWS, "Train-the-Trainer Participation"; PWS, Program Management requirements]:

Will the Government confirm whether the Contractor is responsible only for delivering Government- or developer-furnished training materials, or whether the Contractor is expected to revise, supplement, validate, or maintain those materials during performance? If revisions are required, will the Government identify the review and approval process and expected turnaround times?

A64: PWS Section 2 addresses training material updates. Timeframes for training material revision will be dependent on the scope of changes to be made but is anticipated to be a quick process.

Q65 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 5.6 (Factor 1) and 5.7 (Factor 2); PWS, "Instructor Qualifications"; PWS, Task 1 and Task 2]:

The PWS "Instructor Qualifications" paragraph states that "Instructor experience training users on new software platforms is preferred." Given that the PWS identifies the CMP as “powered by Kahua,” will the Government confirm whether platform-specific construction management system experience, including Kahua training, implementation, adoption, or support experience, may be considered favorably under Technical Capability, Key Personnel, and/or Past Performance where relevant to successful performance? This clarification would help offerors understand how to present application-specific experience within the existing evaluation criteria while preserving the Government’s discretion to evaluate the depth and relevance of each offeror’s experience.

A65: Experience with Kahua may be considered favorably.

Q66 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 5.8, Past Performance Relevancy table]:

The Past Performance Relevancy table defines "Very Relevant" as an effort involving "essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires," and identifies "similarity of service/support" and "complexity" among the relevancy criteria. Will the Government treat prior contracts involving the implementation of, configuration of, or end-user training on the Kahua platform as bearing directly on "similarity of service/support" and "complexity," and that such efforts may be assessed as Relevant or Very Relevant notwithstanding a smaller dollar value or trainee population than this requirement?

A66: The scope must be similar and all criteria must be met to be rated Very Relevant.

Q67 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 1.1; PWS, "Train-the-Trainer Participation" and "Materials"]:

The PWS provides that train-the-trainer instruction, curriculum, and all training materials will be furnished by the System Developers and CMP Developers. Will the Government advise whether it considers an Offeror’s business relationship with the CMP developer — whether as a teaming partner, subcontractor, reseller, certified implementation partner, or holder of platform certifications — to create an organizational conflict of interest requiring disclosure or mitigation under 1.1?

A67: An Offeror’s business relationship with the CMP developer does not create an organizational conflict of interest.

Q68 PLATFORM IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF PLATFORM-SPECIFIC EXPERIENCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 5.6, "Feasibility of Approach"]:

Paragraph 5.6 states that the proposal will be evaluated "to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete future Task Orders as required by the mission." Section B establishes a single set of base and option line items. Will the Government confirm that this is a single firm-fixed-price contract with priced option line items and not an indefinite-delivery vehicle under which future task orders will be issued?

A68: This text was erroneously carried over from a template. Proposals will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully completed this contract as required by the PWS. This is a single FFP contract with priced option line items and is not an IDIQ contract.

Q69 PAST PERFORMANCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 3.2.3.5; Attachment 3 (USACE PPQ)]:

Paragraph 3.2.3.5 requires that Past Performance Questionnaires be received before the proposal due date and places responsibility on the Offeror to ensure the reference submits them, but Attachment 3 does not identify a submission address. Will the Government confirm that references should email completed PPQs directly to Mr. Kaplan with a copy to Mr. Pohlman, and confirm the required email subject line? Will the Government further confirm that a PPQ received directly from a reference after an Offeror submits its proposal, but before the proposal due date and time, will be accepted and evaluated?

A69: PPQs must be received prior to the proposal due date and time. PPQs must be submitted directly to Mr. Kaplan and Mr. Pohlman. There is no required email subject line. It should reference the RFP by number or the requirement name.

Q70 PAST PERFORMANCE | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 3.2.3.1]:

Paragraph 3.2.3.1 requires a completed CPARS evaluation where one exists and a PPQ where one does not. Will the Government confirm the treatment of a contract for which a CPARS record exists but the evaluation for the relevant period is not yet finalized — specifically, whether the Offeror should submit a PPQ, the draft CPARS, or both?

A70: An interim CPARS (or draft) signed by the assessing official is preferred over a PPQ.

Q71 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: Instructions to Offerors, 3.4 and 5.10; Solicitation Section B]:

Paragraph 3.4 requires a price sheet with hourly rates, proposed levels of effort, and labor rates for each labor category, with "a column required per each task in the PWS," while Section B establishes lump-sum firm-fixed-price line items priced as "1 Job." Will the Government:

· Provide a pricing template or Excel schedule aligned to the Section B line item structure;

· Confirm how the labor-hour and rate build-up is to be reconciled to the firm-fixed-price line items; and

· Confirm whether the proposed labor rates are submitted for price analysis purposes only, or will be incorporated into the resulting contract for use in pricing changes or option exercises?

A71: No template will be provided. We only require the fully burdened rates for each labor category or person with the estimated LOE per task for each. This helps with price analysis. This data may be used later for change orders if needed as compared to options which are priced prior to award with the proposals submitted in response to this solicitation.

Q72 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: Solicitation Section B, line items 1002, 1003, 2002, 2003, 3002 and corresponding option line items; Instructions to Offerors 5.10]:

Travel and Other Direct Costs are established as cost-reimbursable line items with no fee or profit. Will the Government establish a common not-to-exceed plug amount for each travel and ODC line item, to be used by all offerors, so that Total Evaluated Price is comparable across proposals? Absent a directed amount, offeror estimates for worldwide travel and printing may vary substantially based on differing assumptions, which may reduce comparability across price proposals for purposes of the price reasonableness determination under 5.10.

A72: See A34

Q73 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: PWS, Task 2; PWS, "Other Direct Costs – Materials"; PWS Attachment 1]:

Task 2 requires printing and providing an approximately 60-page, color, spiral-bound participant guide to all in-person trainees, stated as approximately 3,500 to 4,000 copies across four printing events. Attachment 1 reflects approximately 271 CONUS and 58 OCONUS in-person sessions — approximately 329 sessions — which at the maximum 1:15 ratio would accommodate up to approximately 4,935 in-person trainees. Will the Government confirm the 3,500 to 4,000 quantity and the assumed fill rate underlying it? Will the Government also confirm that printing costs are reimbursable as material Other Direct Costs under the "Other Direct Costs – Materials" paragraph rather than included in the Task 2 firm-fixed price?

A73: Approximate fill rate is confirmed. Printing costs may be included under the ODC for Materials. Material distribution cost should be included under Task 2. See also A72

Q74 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: PWS, Option Task 4]:

Option Task 4 is titled "Additional Virtual Sessions and Reserve Instructors During Deployment" and requires the Contractor to "provide weekly instructor capacity to deliver up to an additional 70 hours of training sessions," expressly stating that this capacity may not be used to cover instructor absences. The payment provision, however, allows payment "based on the percentage of completed training sessions/hours when compared to the total training sessions/hours required for completion of the task." Will the Government clarify how the Contractor is compensated for reserve instructor capacity that is held available in accordance with the task but is not scheduled by the Government? Clarification would help offerors understand whether the intended pricing basis is capacity made available, hours actually delivered, or another approach, and would allow offerors to price reserve instructor availability consistently.

A74: See A21 and A22.

Q75 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: PWS, Option Tasks 4, 5, and 6]:

Will the Government confirm that each Option Subtask under Tasks 4, 5, and 6 is to be priced as a single lump sum covering the entire stated date range at the stated weekly ceiling — up to 70 hours per week for Task 4 subtasks, up to 140 hours per week for Task 5 subtasks, and up to 105 hours per week for Task 6 subtasks — and will the Government state the number of weeks to be assumed for each subtask for pricing purposes?

A75: Each option subtask should be priced separately. The PWS specifically states that there is no guarantee to exercise all subtasks, therefore they must be priced individually. The PWS states the start and end dates of the subtasks.

Q76 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: PWS, Task 2; PWS, Training Delivery requirements; Solicitation Section B]:

Will the Government clarify how Contractor-incurred costs will be handled for Government-directed cancellations, postponements, rescheduling, or location changes after instructors, travel, facilities, printed materials, or other direct costs have been committed?

A76: See A27.

Q77 PRICING AND CONTRACT LINE ITEMS | Reference: Solicitation Section B Option Line Items 4001-6006; FAR 52.217-7 Option for Increased Quantity-Separately Priced Line Item]:

Will the Government confirm the minimum notice period for exercising each option subtask, particularly where instructor capacity must be reserved or travel must be arranged?

A77: The minimum notice is specified by specific date in the PWS.

Q78 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS Attachment 1; PWS Attachment 2]:

Based on the session schedules in Attachment 1 and the session durations in Attachment 2, certain deployment weeks appear to require a substantial volume of concurrent training delivery, including multiple simultaneous in-person Construction sessions across CONUS and OCONUS locations. Will the Government confirm that the session quantities reflected in Attachment 1 are correct as published and represent the anticipated maximum concurrent training workload? Additionally, will the Government confirm whether offerors should plan for delivery of up to approximately 18 concurrent in-person Construction sessions in a single week, including OCONUS sessions? Attachment 1 also appears to provide training capacity in excess of the stated training population. Will the Government confirm the anticipated session fill rate and any assumptions regarding attendee participation used in developing the deployment schedule?

A78: See A15.

Q79 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS Attachment 1; PWS, "Travel"]:

Attachment 1 identifies districts by CMP deployment phase but does not map districts or training locations to specific weeks, while the "Travel" paragraph provides that locations will be communicated to the Contractor only eight weeks in advance. Will the Government provide the anticipated number of distinct in-person training locations per week, or a district-to-week mapping, so that offerors may estimate travel with reasonable accuracy? The absence of this information is a principal driver of variance in proposed travel costs.

A79: See revised Attachment 1. Offerors should assume trainings will be held at various locations throughout the District’s area of responsibility. District information can be found at https://www.usace.army.mil/Locations/.

Q80 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS, Task 2 – Training Delivery (In-Person); PWS, Government Furnished Equipment/Information; PWS Attachment 1]:

For in-person sessions, will the Government provide classrooms, audiovisual equipment, internet or network access, local badging or facility access support, and onsite points of contact, or should offerors include any of these items in their technical and price proposals?

A80: See A18. Each District has an in-person training point of contact assigned who will be able to provide points of contact for each distinct location within a District. These individuals can assist with local badging and access.

Q81 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS, "Instructor Qualifications" - Quantities]:

Will the Government confirm that the session quantities reflected in Attachment 1 are correct as published and represent the anticipated maximum concurrent training workload? Additionally, will the Government confirm whether offerors should plan for delivery of up to approximately 18 concurrent in-person Construction sessions in a single week, including OCONUS sessions?

A81: Yes to all.

Q82 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS, "Instructor Qualifications" - Employment]:

Will the Government confirm whether the five or more trainers proposed under Factor 2 must be current employees of the Offeror or its subcontractors at the time of proposal submission, or whether contingently committed personnel supported by signed letters of commitment are acceptable?

A82: Signed letters of commitment would be acceptable.

Q83 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, Task 3 – Training Delivery (Virtual); PWS, Contractor Furnished Property; PWS, Virtual Training requirements]:

Will the Government furnish the virtual training delivery platform, or should offerors include the cost of a Contractor-furnished virtual classroom platform? If Contractor-furnished, are there required security, accessibility, recording, attendance tracking, or Government-network access requirements?

A83: See A39.

Q84 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, "Trainee Registration"; PWS, "Session Roster Coordination"; PWS, "Contractor Furnished Property" - Cybersecurity]:

The PWS requires the Contractor to provide a web-based registration platform and maintain training rosters accessible to Government personnel. To support accurate pricing and implementation planning, will the Government clarify any applicable cybersecurity, privacy, accessibility, and authentication requirements for these systems, including ATO/RMF, FedRAMP, CAC or ICAM authentication, Section 508 compliance, and any anticipated approval timelines?

A84: See A24.

Q85 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, "Trainee Registration"; PWS, "Session Roster Coordination"; PWS, "Contractor Furnished Property" - Preferred Platform]:

Will the Government furnish a preferred platform for registration and roster management, or is a Contractor-furnished solution required?

A85: See A39.

Q86 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, Task 2; PWS, "Instructor CMP Access"; PWS GFE list]:

Task 2 requires the Contractor to "pre-configure the training environment for each session by populating sample data, actions and tasks." The GFE list identifies "CMP system user licenses for trainers" only. Will the Government confirm that a dedicated CMP training environment or tenant, trainee licenses, and the administrative permissions necessary for the Contractor to populate sample data will be furnished by the Government or the CMP Developer at no cost to the Contractor? Will the Government also confirm the number of concurrent trainee licenses that will be available?

A86: See A40. Access to CMP for the proposed and accepted number of trainers and support staff will be provided by the Government.

Q87 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, "Security and Safety"; PWS Attachment 1]:

Attachment 1 reflects approximately 58 OCONUS in-person sessions across multiple geographic regions. To support consistent travel assumptions among offerors, will the Government clarify:

· Any Government sponsorship requirements for instructor travel (e.g., LOAs, theater clearances, or country clearances);

· Whether any locations require special security, background investigation, or CAC access requirements;

· Whether Government lodging, transportation, or other support services may be available at any locations; and

· Any known restrictions or conditions that offerors should consider when developing OCONUS travel estimates.

A87: See A5.

Q88 PLATFORMS, SYSTEM ACCESS, AND SECURITY | Reference: PWS, "Security and Safety"; PWS Attachment 2]:

Will the Government provide a preliminary mapping of districts, regions, or deployment phases to anticipated OCONUS training locations for proposal purposes?

A88: See A30. A map will not be provided at this time.

Q89 MATERIALS, RISK ALLOCATION, AND PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT | Reference: PWS, "Course Completion Rate"]:

A minimum user course completion rate of 90% is required, with acceptance "determined by a review of training attendance records." Will the Government identify the denominator used in this calculation — registered trainees, trainees holding confirmed seats, or trainees who begin the session — and confirm that no-shows, trainee-initiated cancellations, and Government-directed cancellations or rescheduling are excluded? The Contractor manages registration and communication but does not control whether a trainee attends.

A89: See A56.

Q90 MATERIALS, RISK ALLOCATION, AND PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT | Reference: PWS, "Program Management"; PWS, Deliverables and Delivery Schedule]:

The Scope section states that program management includes "submitting monthly progress reports," while the Deliverables table requires Weekly Progress Reports due "every Monday following the reporting period." Will the Government confirm the required progress reporting cadence, and confirm whether both a weekly and a monthly report are required?

A90: Language was revised.

Q91 TRAINING VOLUME, SCHEDULE, AND STAFFING | Reference: PWS Attachment 1; PWS Attachment 2 - Simultaneous]:

Is there an…