AMP IPPSA 2nd Draft RFP Question and Answer 8 JAN 2024.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 50 KB Posted
- Attached to
- IPPS-A Army Military Payroll 2nd DRAFT RFP Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W91CRB-24-R-0003_DRAFT_RFP
About this file
This draft request for information (RFI) from the U.S. Army seeks industry feedback on a draft request for proposal (RFP) and associated documents to support the Army Military Payroll (AMP) program. The Army is requesting comments on draft contract data requirement lists (CDRLs), a quality assurance surveillance plan (QASP), and an anticipated contract line item number (CLIN) structure. Responses in Microsoft Excel are due by December 1, 2023 and should provide recommendations to streamline agile software development processes. The Army plans to use feedback to finalize an RFP for an indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract to develop an AMP solution integrated with the Integrated Personnel and Pay System - Army (IPPS-A) program.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Reference 003-IPPS-A AMP PI Notional Plan and PI 1 - 3 (22 NOV 2023).pdf | ||
| Reference 005-IPPS-A AMP Business Process Maps - Interfaces - Pay Data-20 NOV 2023.zip | ZIP file | |
| IPPS-A AMP DRAFT CDRLS.zip | ZIP file | |
| IPPS-A AMP DRAFT RFP_ Comments Feedback_22 NOV 2023.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | ||
| IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | ||
| DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RESPONSES
| Request for Information - Questions/Comments/Feedback on DRAFT RFP | |||||||
| # | Proprietary (Y/N) | Document | Page Number | Reference | Questions/Comments/Feedback from Potential offeror | Government Response | |
| 1 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 2 and 8 | Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices | On page 2, the table summarizing the anticipated CLIN structure identifies CLIN X007 for Licenses (ODCs) as CR and on page 8 this CLIN (0007) is identified as FFP. Can the Government please confirm that Licenses are CR, consistent with the CLIN type for ODC CLINs X008 and X009? | Licenses will be Cost reimbursable. This will be revised at the release of the final RFP. | |
| 2 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 2 and 7 | Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices | On page 2, the table summarizing the anticipated CLIN structure identifies CLIN X005 supporting Task 7: Capability Support Transition. The PWS dated 22-Nov-23 changed the name of this task to Task 7: Production Operations Transition. Can the Government please confirm that this will be updated in Section B to be consistent with the task title in the PWS? | This will be revised at the release of the final RFP. | |
| 3 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 2, 9-10 | Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices | On page 2, the table summarizing anticipated CLIN structure identifies CLINs X011 Contractor Manpower Reporting and CLIN X012 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) as Not Separately Priced. On pages 9-10, these CLINs are identified as FFP. Can the Government please confirm these CLINs are Not Separately Priced? | System requirements requires us to associate a type to NSP CLINs. The final RFP will indicate the Contractor Manpower Reporting and CDRLs as "Cost", but the description will state. "This CLIN is Not Separately Priced". | |
| 4 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 2, 4-6 | Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices | Pages 4-6 identify seven (7) SLINs under CLIN X003 (X003AA through X003AG). Can the Government please confirm that these are the only SLINs that will be used to calculate the one overarching NTE total value CLIN spanning 12 months, as identified for CLIN X003 in the table on page 2. | This will be revised at the release of the final RFP. | |
| 5 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 39 | Section M, Factor 3 - Cost/Price | Will the Government please explain how Total Evaluated Cost/Price will be calculated, or provide the xxxxCOSTxxxx.XLSX file to show how it will be calculated across all contract years. | The total evaluated price includes all CLINs. | |
| 6 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 27 | Section L, Volume III: Factor 3 - Cost/Price, Part 1; Section M, Factor 3 - Cost/Price | Section L, Volume III: Factor 3 - Cost/Price, Part 1, #2 states "Work under the Planning Interval (PI) CLINs shall be proposed in each offeror's estimate for standardized Small, Medium, and Large Agile Development teams." Can the Government please explain how the cost realism analysis and most probable cost adjustments will be applied, as described in Section M, Factor 3 - Cost/Price, given offerors propose their own unique estimates for the labor requirements associated with the PWS? | Cost realism analysis will be based on an application of any rates/factors to the offerors' proposals that the Government's analysis determines are more realistic than were proposed. This may include direct/indirect labor rates, ODCs, fees etc. as well as skill mix and/or level of effort as determined appropriate through cost/price and technical analyses. | |
| 7 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 33 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration - Element 2 (Technical), Section M, Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration | In accordance with the instructions for orals, subcontractor personnel can be key personnel. Will the Government allow Offeror's to propose existing Sub-Contractor staff for a subset of the Key Personnel positions to more closely align with the verbiage found within Volume 5: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration? "The presenting oral demonstration team shall include three (3) of the five (5) Key Personnel IAW PWS Section 1.7.8 and shall be the Prime Contractor or Sub-Contractor's existing employees." | Noted. | |
| 8 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 33 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration - Element 3 (Agile Methodology Demonstration), Section M, Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration | Within the Oral Demonstration section, Element 3 (Agile Methodology Demonstration) refers to addressing the use of the Offeror's proposed Agile tools. Would the Government permit Offeror's to conduct a live demonstration to show the proposed Agile tools in action for an AMP use case that would allow Offeror's to highlight the items cited within Element 3 (i.e., workflows, metrics, dashboards, progress tracking and backlog management) and augment the PowerPoint presentation? | Yes, the Offeror may use their own tools to execute the demonstration. | |
| 9 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 18 | 1.7.8 Key Personnel, 1.7.8.3 (Chief Scrum Master) | Recommend that the Government change item k within the Chief Scrum Master position requirements to "BS in Computer Science, Information Systems, or a related technical degree plus 10 years’ relevant experience in technical analysis, design, configuration, implementation, and integration experience; or Bachelor's degree in any field plus 14 years’ relevant experience in technical analysis, design, configuration, implementation, and integration experience; or no degree and 18 years’ relevant experience in technical analysis, design, configuration, implementation, and integration experience." | Noted. | |
| 10 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 18 | 1.7.8 Key Personnel, 1.7.8.4 (Lead Test Engineer) | Recommend that the Government change item o within the Lead Test Engineer position requirements to "Bachelor’s degree in Computer Engineering, Computer Science, Information Systems, Information Technology, or a related Engineering or IT discipline; or Bachelor's degree in any field plus 4 years’ additional relevant experience in software testing; or no degree and 8 additional years’ relevant experience in software testing." | Noted. | |
| 11 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 22 | Section L.1, General Instructions | Section L1.1 states that Proposal submissions are due no later than 10am Eastern on XX January 2024, however Section L1.2 references that all questions should be submitted via email no later than 10am Eastern on XX March 2024. reword for did you mean. Can the Government please clarify? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 12 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 23 | Section L.2, Proposal Contents | Would the Government consider a staggered delivery of proposal content in accordance with the Phase breakout cited within L.2 to allow Offeror's who are down selected to submit their Orals presentation slides after the delivery of the contents of Phase 1 (i.e. Agile Corporate Experience, Small Business, Cost/Price, and General). | See final RFP. | |
| 13 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 35 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration, Element 2 – Technical, g Key Personnel, i | Are letters of commitment outside of the resume page count? Also suggest the Government allow 3 pages per resume due to the number of specific requirements per key personnel position and to allow demonstration of key personnel qualification and relevance. Also, suggest the Government specify that "i. Key Personnel Resumes and signed letter of intent (limited to 3 pages for each Key Personnel, but is not included in the page/slide count; signed letters of intent are also not included in the page/slide or resume page count) | Letters of consent and/or commitment will not count against the stated page limits. See final RFP, for further details. | |
| 14 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 35 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration, Element 2 – Technical, g Key Personnel, ii Crosswalk | Does a crosswalk within each resume which demonstrates and explains how the proposed Key Personnel (KP) meet all of the experience and qualifications provided for each KP in PWS Section 1.7.9 fulfill this requirement, or is it a separate document? If separate document, suggest the Government state the crosswalk is not included in the page/slide count. | See final RFP. | |
| 15 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 34 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration | It is stated that "the volume shall not exceed 20 pages/slides," and the program roadmap is required. Can the government clarify if 20 slides are the maximum for the entire oral presentation inclusive of the other elements, or can the offeror have additional slides for the presentation? If so, how many slides can the offeror present? Ask for exclusion of the roadmap from 20 | See final RFP. | |
| 16 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 25 | Section L.2, Volume I: Factor 1 - Agile Corporate Experience | Suggest the Government add the statement: Copies of Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters are excluded from the corporate experience page count limit. | This will be revised at the release of the final RFP. | |
| 17 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 25 | Section L.2, Volume I: Factor 1 - Agile Corporate Experience | The final paragraph in this section requests detailed information about changes to schedule or technical performance requirements with explanation of revisions and other detailed information. Suggest the Government exclude response to this paragraph from the corporate experience page count limit. | This will be revised at the release of the final RFP. | |
| 18 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 22 | INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS | |||
| L.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS L.1.1 | Recommend the Government stagger the due dates for the proposal with Phase 1 requiring offerors deliver Volume I Corporate Experience 30 days after the release of the final RFP. Two weeks after Phase 1 submissions, recommend the Government announce the offerors selected for orals with dates defined for each offeror, and request the selected offerors submit Volumes II, III, IV, and V two weeks after the down select is announced. | Noted. | |||||
| 19 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 34 | VOLUME V: Factor 4 --- Oral Demonstration | Government allocated 20 pages only for the orals presentation. Can the Government please increase the page count to 40 given the offerors need to cover an extensive amount of information across the various elements. | See final RFP. | |
| 20 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 34 | Oral Demonstrations scheduled | Will the personnel participating in orals be granted a lunch break? Can the Government please include a lunch break in the schedule | See final RFP. | |
| 21 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 34 | VOLUME V: Factor 4 --- Oral Demonstration | Can offerors visit the site of the oral demonstration to assess the set up of the room prior to the date of the orals? | Under consideration | |
| 22 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 34 | VOLUME V: Factor 4 --- Oral Demonstration | Will the Government provide all of the equipment needed to conduct the oral demonstration or will offerors need to bring specific items with them? Will there be internet access for offerors? | This will be defined in the final RFP. | |
| 23 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Would the Government consider changing the Planned vs. Completed thresholds to be based on a '+' or '-' variance threshold as opposed to a straight calculation to incentivize the Pay vendor to be more transparent with respect to planned activities. | No. | ||
| 24 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Would the Government consider providing additional guidance and thresholds around Velocity Predictability? | Velocity Predictability has been removed. | ||
| 25 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS | General | Is the Government considering adding the 1 week Retrospective/Inspect and Adapt week to the CLIN structure to better align with the 13 week PI Interval (six 2-week Sprints, plus 1 week of Inspect and Adapt or four 3-week Sprints, plus 1 week of Inspect and Adapt) defined within the Notional PI Plan? | See final RFP. | ||
| 26 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Will the Government consider modifying the Defect Count measure that tracks the % of defects per lines of code given that it will be difficult to compute this value for PeopleSoft/PeopleCode given the proprietary nature of the language? | The Defect Count measurement was modified. The measurement is now Defect Density. Defect Density measures the number of defects per PI. | ||
| 27 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | With the PWS removing the EVM requirements, the QASP still refers to AQLs around CPI and SPI. Would the Government consider removing these AQLs? | SPI has been replaced by Schedule Performance and CPI has been replaced by Cost Performance in the QASP and each measure has been redefined. | ||
| 28 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | General | Would the Government consider a new PI Cadence of four 3-week Sprints, plus 1 week of Inspect and Adapt which still provides quarterly PIs but allows for longer Sprints Execution capacity/time better suited for ERP systems? | No. | ||
| 29 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 33 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration - Element 3 (Agile Methodology Demonstration), Section M, Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration | Will the Government evaluators be in the room or will there be evaluators that are watching the orals presentation remotely? | USG anticipates Oral Demonstrations to be face to face. | |
| 30 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Would the Government consider removing the Velocity AQL, as the intent of the quality metric (predictability) is met in the Story Points AQL when it comes to Planned vs Completed? | Noted. Velocity is now Story Point Velocity. | ||
| 31 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Would the Government consider removing or clarifying the Number of Blockers AQl, as a blocker or impediment may be outside of the team/ARTs control. This also may disincentivize total transparency. | Noted. The Government defines a blocker as anything that impedes completion of a story, activity or work item. | ||
| 32 | N | Attachment 2 QASP | General | Could the Government clarify the Delivered Value Points AQL? Would this be based on FMD/PMOs evaluation of Business Value vs Actual Value at the beginning of a PI and at the end? | "Delivered Value" has been modified to measure Customer Satisfaction using the following. |
Customer satisfaction score = (total survey point score / total achievable points)
| 33 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 6 | Figure 2 - AMP Notional Capability Groupings by Component Population | Can the Government clarify whether Offeror's are free to propose alternatives to the AMP Notional Capability Groupings and Incremental Releases identified within PWS Figure 2 provided that substantiating rationale was provided? | Yes, the Vendor may propose alternatives to the AMP Notional Capbility Grouping |
| 34 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 6 | Figure 3 - Notional 12-week PI | Does the Government intend to update the AMP PWS to reflect a 13 week PI (including a 1 week retrospective to be conducted following Sprint 6), as opposed to a 12 week PI? | See final RFP. |
| 35 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 2 | Section B - Anticipated CLIN Structure, PI CLIN, 12 week PIs incrementally funded via SLINs | Would the Government consider updating the RFP language around PIs to be a 13-week period versus 12-week period? The 1-week Retrospective/Inspect & Adapt week should be part of a PI and should be considered the last week. For example (six 2-week Sprints, plus 1 week of Inspect and Adapt or four 3-week Sprints, plus 1 week of Inspect and Adapt) | See final RFP. |
| 36 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 15 | 1.7.4 | Is the location of work for all or part of the contractor staff intended to be the Crystal City location on a daily basis? And if no, is there a limit to how far from the Crystal City location contractor personnel can work, i.e., work must be performed within 30 miles of Crystal City location. |
Recommend the following update to the language in the first paragraph of Section 1.7.4:
Change from:
1.7.4 Place of Performance
368 All activities requiring Government participation (e.g., planning, demonstrations, 369 reviews) will take place at the IPPS-A PMO facility, currently located at the Polk 370 Building, 2521 South Clark Street, Arlington, VA 22202, unless otherwise determined 371 based on the specific activity. For activities conducted at the IPPS-A PMO facility, the 372 Government will provide hotel-type space for Contractor use. The Contractor facility 373 may also be used for key events. Key events will be coordinated in advance to include 374 associated logistics.
375 All work related to Sensitive Activities (SA) will be performed at the designated IPPS-A 376 PMO secure area approved for classified discussion and work. The IPPS-A PMO 377 secure area is currently located at the Polk Building, 2521 South Clark Street, Arlington, 378 VA 22202.
379 Travel between the Contractor facilities and Government facilities will not be reimbursed 380 as a travel expense.
Change to:
The Government will be available at its core hours from 0900hrs to 1500hrs, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays or when the Government facility is closed due to local or national emergencies, administrative closings, or similar Government directed facility closings. All activities requiring Government participation will take place at the Polk Building, Arlington, VA unless otherwise stated based on the specific activity. For activities conducted at the IPPS-A PMO facility, the Government will provide temporary hotel-type space for Contractor use. The Contractor facility may also be used for key events. Key events will be coordinated in advance to include associated logistics.
The Polk building is the primary work location for personnel supporting the requirements of this PWS. The contractor PM, key personnel, and critical leadership (as defined by the Contractor and agreed by the Gov't) are expected to work primarily on-site at the Crystal City location, M-F, during core hours. The contractor PM has authority to allow employees to work at alternate locations to include unclassified development for the Sensitive Activity element. The Contractor shall comply with all rules, regulations, and policies to perform on site at the IPPS-A location.
The Contractor shall provide the Government with an estimate of the number of critical leadership/key personnel requiring space at the Government facility for planning purposes. This estimate shall include the number of offices, cubes, conferences rooms, collaboration spaces, etc. Travel between the contractor facilities and Government facilities shall not be reimbursed as a travel expense.
| Please see revised PWS Section 1.6.4 in the forthcoming final RFP. The normal duty station(s) are flexible and can vary. The radius from normal duty station is 50 miles. | ||||||
| 37 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 35 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration, Element 2 – Technical | Would the Government consider updating the Oral Demonstration, Element 2 - Technical instructions to include a Payroll specific sub-topic such as asking Offeror's to describe their approach to Retroactive Pay, or asking Offeror's to describe their approach to providing full coverage across the required AMP payroll elements? Applying these changes would provide the Government with increased confidence in the Offeror's ability to deliver against the AMP requirements from both an Agile and Military Payroll/Global Payroll perspective. | Noted. |
The Government does not preclude the Offeror from including this in their Oral Demonstration if they so choose.
38 N DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 34 Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration, Element 1 – Program Roadmap Would the Government consider modifying the instructions for Volume 5, Factor 4, Element 1 to require Offeror's to describe their approach for incorporate Software Reuse (PWS Task 5) into their PI Roadmap, to include a description of how this helps to accelerate delivery of incremental AMP releases? Noted.
The Government does not preclude the Offeror from including this in their Oral Demonstration if they so choose.
| 39 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 39 | Section 5.5, Task 5 – Government Software Reuse Integration | Can the Government clarify how Task 5 (Government Software Reuse Integration) integrates with the other tasks defined within the PWS? | Based on the program roadmap, the thinking is that the Contractor would analyze reuse potential when deemed most applicable to the roadmap. |
| 40 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 35 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration, Element 2 – Technical | Would the Government consider updating the Oral Demonstration, Element 2 - Technical instructions to include a sub-topic focused on asking Offeror's to describe their approach to supporting Army Military Payroll for Sensitive Activities? Applying this change would provide the Government with increased confidence in the Offeror's ability to deliver against the AMP requirements across both NIPR and SIPR domains. | Noted. |
The Government does not preclude the Offeror from including this in their Oral Demonstration if they so choose.
| 41 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 33 | Item 10 - Licenses, Travel, and ODCs | Are Offeror's expected to price any additional tools, subscriptions, licenses associated with their proposed solutions within their cost proposals (to exclude the GFE cited within Reference 001 - IPPS-A Software Baseline Applications and Tools.xlsx)? | Yes. |
| 42 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 8 | Other Direct Costs (ODCs) | Other Direct Costs (ODCs) states that "the contractor shall provide ODCs in accordance with PWS Section 1/.7.13." Will the Government consider changing this reference to 1.7.12 (Other Direct Costs)? 1.7.13 is currently Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI). | Noted. |
| 43 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 Nov 2023 | 34 | Section 5.2, Task 2 – Software Configuration, Development and Test, 508 Compliance | Does the Government intend to provide a 508 Compliance tool as GFE for use by the selected AMP awardee? | JAWS is the current tool available for use. |
| 44 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_22 NOV 2023 | 35 | Section L, Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration - Element 3 (Agile Methodology Demonstration) | Will the Government provide Jira and Confluence as the agile project management tool in the Government environment as GFE? Will this Jira instance include the necessary plugins such as Jira Align or Agile Hive, Structure, Plans, X-ray for test case management, Capacity Planner plug-ins? | See PWS Reference 001: IPPS-A Software Baseline Applications and Tools.xls |
| 45 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS (Draft – Oct. 27, 2023) - W91CRB-24-R-0003 | 6 | Section 1.2.3, Army Military Payroll Description | How does the Government intend to handle Pay related HR dependencies from a scope perspective? Is this work deemed to be within the scope of Capability Support, or does the Government consider this to be within the scope of the AMP contract? For example, Assignment functionality is listed in AMP but is currently in the scope of the Capabilities Support Contract that is active today and we recommend it remains in Capabilities Support as it is HCM functionality versus Pay. | See PWS Reference 004, AMP Functional Requirements List, in the AMP final RFP, for AMP requirements to be delivered. |
| 46 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS (Draft – Oct. 27, 2023) - W91CRB-24-R-0003 | 6 | Section 1.2.3, Army Military Payroll Description | How does the Government intend to handle infrastructure related payroll performance tuning? Is this work deemed to be within the scope of Capability Support, or does the Government consider this to be within the scope of the AMP contract? | Performance specific to AMP functionality is within the scope of the AMP contract. |
| 47 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS (Draft – Oct. 27, 2023) - W91CRB-24-R-0003 | 37 | Section 5.5, Task 5 – Government Software Reuse Integration | Our understanding is that Task 5 allows the Government to evaluate Government available payroll solutions deemed compatible with PeopleSoft Global Payroll implementation for reuse into the AMP solution to accelerate solution delivery. Can the Government clarify how this task integrates with the other tasks defined within the PWS, and how the Government plans to evaluate Offeror’s proposed approaches to Government Software Reuse Integration? | Task 5 requires the Contractor (not the Government) to evaluate Government available payroll solutions deemed compatible with PeopleSoft Global Payroll implementation for reuse into the AMP solution to accelerate solution delivery. |
Based on the program roadmap, the thinking is that the Contractor would concurrently analyze reuse potntial for functionality when that functionality is planned to be implemented within the roadmap.
| 48 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS (Draft – Oct. 27, 2023) - W91CRB-24-R-0003 | 27 | Section 5.2, Task 2 | Is the Government intending to rename "value streams" to "feature groups" so that bidders' solutions align to Agile terminology? | The term "Value Stream" is only used as part of an example; it is not intened to establish a naming convention for Agile terminology for the program. |
| 49 | N | Attachment 1 AMP PWS (Draft – Oct. 27, 2023) - W91CRB-24-R-0003 | 40 | Section L.2, Volume IV: Factor 4 - Cost/Price | Would the Government consider requiring only Major Subcontractors , those providing critical services or whose subcontract is more than 10% of the estimated contract ceiling, to provide sealed (unsanitized) subcontractor price and cost volume proposals? |
Each offeror may have multiple subcontractors to support the overall proposed technical solution. The subcontractor participations in the technical proposal may vary in size from 1 employee to many, based upon the technical expertise they provide. Requiring each subcontractor, of less than 10% of the estimated contract ceiling, to prepare sealed (unsanitized) to include a cost volume and pricing proposal may be extremely onerous on the subcontractors, as well as the government evaluation.
| Each offeror utilizing subcontractors is required to do a price analysis of all subcontractor's submitted rates (FAR 15.404-3(b)). This analysis is to determine proposed rates are realistic and reasonable. | See final RFP. | ||||||
| 50 | N | Draft RFP | |||||
| W91CRB-24-C-0003 | Page 25; Page 34 | TELEWORK, page 25; Section L.2, Volume I Factor 1 Element 3--Management Plan, page 34 | Given the importance and sensitivity, we recommend that all labor be required appropriately cleared CONUS personnel. OCONUS-based personnel represent a potential risk to the Government. | Noted. | |||
| 51 | Regarding the draft solicitation categorization of NAICS Code 541512 - Computer Systems Design Services, would the government consider adding NAICS Codes 519290 ( Web Search Portals and All Other Information Services ) and 517810 ( All Other Telcommunications )? | The NAICS for this requirement will remain 541512. | |||||
| 52 | Would the government consider soliciting a small business set-aside pool component for this work? | No. | |||||
| 53 | Would the government clarify if this solicitation will be an IDIQ Task Order multiple award, single award, or a stand alone prime contract? | This requirement is for a Single-Award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. | |||||
| 54 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 9-14 | 5.2 | Metrics for Accuracy, Timeliness, Compliance, and Soldier Satisfaction comprise an acceptable baseline, but we recommend the Contractor and Government update them collaboratively post-award and iteratively throughout the period of performance. Timeliness, for example, is highly dependent on computing capacity elements and other factors outside the control of the Contractor. Likewise, Soldier Satisfaction, while presumably driven by Accuracy and Timeliness, may also be influenced by pay amount and other factors outside the control of the Contractor. | The Government will consider updating metrics by Contractor and Government collaboratively post-award and iteratively throughout the period of performance. | |
| 55 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 9-14 | 5.2 | The Government would benefit from measuring program quality at the Solution and Agile Release Train (ART) levels of the program rather than at the Agile-team level. Measuring quality every 12 weeks based on PI Planning provides the Government with outcome-based visibility by adding efficiency to the COR's inspection checklist and reducing the amount of redundant, granular, team-level measurements. Our suggestions are contained in the following questions in this spreadsheet. We encourage Agile-team-level measurement as an internal evaluation, but not included in the QASP. Measurement of the quality of the team's activities will roll up into the program-level measurements we recommend. These program-level measurements are Number of Features Planned, Accepted, and Deployed into Production; Actual vs. Planned Team Velocity; and Defect Closure Rate. | The Government will review program quality every 12 weeks. The Government will monitor at the sprint and Agile Team levels and will identify actions needed to increase program quality and capacity. Use of agile tools will allow this level of monitoring. | |
| 56 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf |
| A002 IPPS-A AMP DD1423 Program Roadmap - Integrated Schedule - DRAFT 21 NOV 2023 | 9-10 | 5.2 | The Earned Value Management System (EVMS) was removed from the PWS. Given that SPI and CPI are EVMS-specific metrics, will the Government please confirm that they will be removed from the QASP and for CDRL A002? | SPI has been replaced by Schedule Performance and CPI has been replaced by Cost Performance in the QASP and each measure has been redefined. | |||
| 57 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 10 | 5.2 | Will the Government please clarify how Customer Satisfaction will be measured quantitatively and with what metrics? We recommend the Government work with the Contractor post-award to determine how to quantitatively and objectively measure Customer Satisfaction. | Customer Sataisfaction will be measured using the Delivered Value metric using the following. |
Customer satisfaction score = (total survey point score / total achievable points)
| 58 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 10 | 5.2 | Will the Government please consider removing the Velocity and Velocity Predictability measurements from the QASP and instead track a single Actual vs. Planned Team Velocity measurement at the program level? This would be a measurement of Features completed in a given timeframe across an Agile Team, measured at the end of every 12 week PI rather than at the end of each sprint. This change would provide program-level visibility of progress while requiring less granular inspection from the COR. | Noted. Velocity is now Story Point Velocity. |
| 59 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 10-11 | 5.2 | Will the Government please consider removing the Story Points and Story Completion Rate measurements from the QASP and instead measure the Number of Features Planned, Accepted, and Deployed into Production, with a minimum of 30 features in a release? Features are tied to the business value delivered at the program-level. Tracking their planning, acceptance, and deployment would provide program-level visibility of progress while requiring less granular inspection from the COR. | Noted. |
| 60 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 11 | 5.2 | Recidivism should not occur in an Agile program because stories do not progress unless they are first accepted and approved, meaning there is no return of stories to the team. Will the Government please consider removing the Recidivism measurement from the QASP? | Noted. |
| 61 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 11 | 5.2 | The First-time Pass Rate measurement in the QASP tracks story passage at the sprint level. Tracking story passage of the sprint level is not indicative of program quality. It is a common Agile practice for Stories to move from one sprint to the next sprint without it being indicative of poor quality. Will the Government please consider removing this measurement from the QASP and instead rely upon the Release Burnup metric to track program progress? | Noted. |
| 62 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 11 | 5.2 | The QASP describes "blockers" for the Number of Blockers as "...events that prohibit completion of an activity or work item." Will the Government please clarify what constitutes a "blocker"? | The Government defines a blocker as anything that impedes completion of a story, activity or work item. |
| 63 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 11-12 | 5.2 | The Defect Count and Test Coverage measurements in the QASP require granular inspection by the COR and have the same goal to monitor testing and defect resolution. Would the Government please consider removing these measurements and adding a measurement for Defect Closure Rate, which would track the percentage of total defects closed after each PI with the objective of >= 95% of Severity 1 and 2 defects closed before PI closure? The formula for Defect Closure Rate would be (Defects Closed/Total Defects per PI)*100. This change adds efficiency to the COR's inspection checklist and provides program-level insight into testing success and defect resolution. | Noted. |
| 64 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 12 | 5.2 | The Delivered Features (or Capabilities) measurement in the QASP tracks the percentage of delivered features versus planned, while the Delivered Value Points measurement tracks the percentage of value delivered versus value planned. These measurements are redundant of the Release Burnup measurement, which tracks the percentage of release work completed versus planned. Will the Government please consider removing the Delivered Features (or Capabilities) and Delivered Value Points measurements from the QASP to add efficiency to the COR's inspection? | Noted. |
| 65 | N | IPPS-A AMP QASP - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 14 | 5.2 | Will the Government please clarify how Soldier Satisfaction will be measured quantitatively and with what metrics? We recommend the Government work with the Contractor post-award to determine how to quantitatively and objectively measure Customer Satisfaction. | Soldier Satisfaction will be measured using the following. |
Soldier satisfaction score = (total survey point score / total achievable points) x 100
The Government will consider updating metrics by Contractor and Government collaboratively post-award and iteratively throughout the period of performance.
| 66 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 2 | B | Will the Government please consider moving CLINS X003 and X004 from CPFF to T&M? T&M provides the Government the same flexibility as CPFF with less contractual administrative burden, reduces the complexity of costs reports, and offers easier addition of resources. With T&M, the Government will have cost visibility through a rate card and will not have to manage a fee structure. | No. |
| 67 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 24 | L.2, Volume I | Will the Government please consider adding the following information element to the three (3) page corporate experience: "p. Description of the technical solution and/or services related to Military Payroll"? This added corporate experience information element will provide the Government with explicit detail(s) on project work relevant to Military Payroll program execution. | See revisions in Section L, Volume I: Factor 1, "l - Description of the technical solution(s)/requirement(s) and relevancy to the PWS scope of work and/or 1 – 5 focus areas, as stated above." |
| 68 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 41 | M.C, Factor 4 | The evaluation criteria for Factor 4 - Oral Demonstration informs the Offeror that the "Government will assess its confidence that the Offeror [has]...experience with agile processes..." Due to the U.S. Army's adoption of SAFe as their Agile approach, will the Government please consider updating the criteria to be inclusive of SAFe? For example, "The Government will evaluate demonstrated Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) capabilities and competency more favorably." | The Government will not prescribe SAFe Framework for the vendor. |
| 69 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.1.i-j | PWS 1.7.8.1i-j requires the Program Manager have 10 or more years of experience specifically in the Federal, DoD, Army, or Intelligence Community (IC) spaces, which excludes candidates with relevant commercial, state government, and local government experience. Will the Government please consider removing 1.7.8.1.i (since it is largely redundant of 1.7.8.1.h) and changing 1.7.8.1.j to "10 or more years of IT experience," which would promote competition and encourage the inclusion of highly qualified and experienced candidates? | PWS revised to Section 1.6.8.1, Program Manager (PM) with the following updated "i. IT experience in the Federal, DoD, Army, or IC" and "j. Project Management Professional Certification required". |
| 70 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.1.k | PWS 1.7.8.1.k requires the Program Manager to have a Project Management Professional certification with no allowance for equivalent certifications or experience. This requirement prevents the Government from benefiting from potential key personnel that do not have this certification. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.1.k to "Project Management Professional Certification, equivalent certification, or relevant experience required," which would promote competition and encourage the inclusion of highly qualified and experienced candidates? | Noted. |
| 71 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.1.l | PWS 1.7.8.1.l requires the Program Manager to have an Agile Project Manager certification with no allowance for equivalent certifications or experience. This requirement prevents the Government from benefiting from potential key personnel that do not have this certification. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.1.l to "Agile Project Manager Certification, equivalent certification, or relevant experience required," which would promote competition and encourage the inclusion of highly qualified and experienced candidates? | Noted. |
| 72 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.1.m | PWS 1.7.8.1.m prefers the Program Manager to have an Agile Product Owner certification with no allowance for equivalent certifications or experience. This requirement prevents the Government from benefiting from potential key personnel that do not have this certification. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.1.m to "Agile Product Owner Certification, equivalent certification, or relevant experience preferred," which would promote competition and encourage the inclusion of highly qualified and experienced candidates? | Noted. |
| 73 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.2.a | We recommend the key personnel requirements remain focused on Oracle Payroll while inclusive of experiences in other Oracle technologies, particularly for the PeopleSoft Global Payroll Systems Architect. By including candidates with a wider range of experience in Oracle technologies, the Government will benefit from a broader knowledge of Oracle technology and business transformation ideas for continuous improvement. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.2.a to "Proven experience of at least one full implementation experience with Oracle Payroll (either PeopleSoft, EBS, or HCM Cloud) working with multiple teams composed of technical and functional analysts"? | Noted. |
| 74 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.2.b | We recommend the key personnel requirements remain focused on Oracle Payroll while inclusive of experiences in other Oracle technologies, particularly for the PeopleSoft Global Payroll Systems Architect. By including candidates with a wider range of experience in Oracle technologies, the Government will benefit from a broader knowledge of Oracle technology and business transformation ideas for continuous improvement. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.2.b to "8 or more years of configuring business rules, and performing Configuration, Design and Development of Oracle HR and Payroll (either PeopleSoft, EBS, or HCM Cloud)"? | Noted. |
| 75 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17 | 1.7.8.2.c | We recommend the key personnel requirements remain focused on Oracle Payroll while inclusive of experiences in other Oracle technologies, particularly for the PeopleSoft Global Payroll Systems Architect. By including candidates with a wider range of experience in Oracle technologies, the Government will benefit from a broader knowledge of Oracle technology and business transformation ideas for continuous improvement. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.2.c to "Understanding of Oracle Payroll (either PeopleSoft, EBS, or HCM Cloud) and Military Business Processes and how they integrate with Core HR, Time & Labor, Oracle Financials and Supply Chain, and external general ledger systems"? | Noted. |
| 76 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 17-18 | 1.7.8.2 | The requirements for the PeopleSoft Global Payroll Systems Architect appear to span both functional Payroll and technical systems architect attributes. It is not common for someone in a Payroll functional architect role to have technical data modeling and system modeling tool experience. Will the Government please consider splitting these requirements into two key roles: one role focused on a PeopleSoft Payroll Functional Architect and one focused on a Technical Systems Architect, and align the PWS 1.7.8.2.k requirement to the proposed Technical Systems Architect role? | Noted. |
| 77 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 18 | 1.7.8.2.n | PWS 1.7.8.2.n requires the PeopleSoft Global Payroll Systems Architect to have a technical degree "...plus 8 years’ relevant experience with PeopleSoft HCM 9.2 implementation experience." This requirement is restrictive because it is limited to PeopleSoft HCM 9.2 and not inclusive of other pertinent HCM versions. This would limit highly qualified candidates from participating in this effort. Will the Government please consider updating the requirement to "...plus 8 years' relevant experience with Oracle/PeopleSoft (e.g., PeopleSoft HCM 9.2)," which would encourage the inclusion of otherwise highly qualified and PeopleSoft-experienced candidates who may not have 8 years' experience specific to PeopleSoft HCM 9.2? | Noted. |
| 78 | N | IPPS-A Army Military Payroll PWS - DRAFT - 21 NOV 2023.pdf | 19 | 1.7.8.3.k | PWS 1.7.8.3.k requires the Chief Scrum Master to have a "BS in Computer Science, Information Systems, or a related technical degree plus 10 years’ relevant experience in technical analysis, design, configuration, implementation, and integration experience." This requirement prevents the Government from benefiting from potential key personnel that do not have a technical degree. Will the Government please consider updating 1.7.8.3.k to "BS in Computer Science, Information Systems, a related technical degree, or equivalent (10 or more years) relevant experience in technical analysis, design, configuration, implementation, and integration experience"? This change would promote competition and encourage the inclusion of highly qualified and experienced candidates. | Noted. |
| 79 | N | Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | 1st tab | 6.3.1.10 | There is a functional requirement for the system to "provide the capability to capture, validate, and document prior creditable military service...and assignment and deployment history." Will the Government please clarify whether Applicant job history is restricted to the Army or other military branches, where this information is currently stored, and for how many years it has been/is to be stored? | Applicant job history includes all military service (i.e., all branches). iPERMS stores all personnel history for Army service members. The retention period for the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) is 62 years after the date of retirement, discharge, death in service, or completion of the military service obligation. |
| 80 | N | Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | 1st tab | 6.3.70.1-6.3.70.9 | There are functional requirements for the capability to process and pay additional payment amounts such as Hardship Duty Pay, Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay, and Hostile Fire/Imminent Danger Pay. Will the Government please clarify whether additional pay amounts are determined as a percentage, flat amount, or steps; and if calculated as steps, are there rules beyond adding steps within the member compensation ladder? | Flat amount. |
| 81 | N | Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | 1st tab | 6.3.107.6 | There is a functional requirement for the system to "provide reports and search capability to assist in the management of equal opportunity and sexual harassment prevention programs..." Will the Government please clarify what the scope is of the sexual harassment tracking currently used and what the current system is for doing so? | Scope is the Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Program Office directs the Army’s efforts in the prevention of and response to sexual harassment, sexual assault and associated retaliatory behaviors. It integrates Army SHARP policy and ensures effective communications with internal and external stakeholders. |
Integrated Case Reporting System (ICRS) is the sytem that tracks the Sexual Harassment cases.
| 82 | N | Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | 1st tab | 6.3.121.2 | There is a functional requirement for the system to "provide the capability to identify members eligible for Mandatory Retirements and transfer them" to appropriate lists based on their retirement variation. Will the Government please clarify whether Retirees in their different variations (Retired Reserve, Retired, Permanent Disability Retired, Temporary Disability Retired) will be part of payroll and payroll payments? | Not a requirement. | |
| 83 | N | Reference 004-IPPS-A Functional Requirements List-20 NOV 2023.xlsx | 1st tab | - | Will the Government please clarify whether PeopleSoft ePerformance is currently used? | IPPS-A is not currently using PS ePerformance. | |
| 84 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 22 | L.1.2 | Administrative: The requirements in Section L and for Volume V: Factor 4 - Oral Presentation state, "The Government intends to conduct a streamlined phased acquisition approach. Proposal Volumes I through V are required to be submitted by the above listed proposal submission due date and time." In the interest of Offerors providing the highest quality of presentation through a phased approach, will the Government please consider allowing Phase 2 file submission (Volume V) to occur after Phase 1 down selection has occurred? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 85 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 25, 26 | L.2 | Administrative: The instructions for Volume II: Factor 2 - Small Business Participation inform Offerors that the information provided "will be used to evaluate the Offeror’s proposed participation /commitment to use U.S. small businesses...relative to Section M, Volume III – Small Business Participation." Will the Government please confirm that Volume II will be evaluated based on Factor 2 in Section M, not Volume III (Factor 3 - Cost/Price)? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 86 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 31 | L.2, Volume IV, Element 1, bullet d | Administrative: The instructions for Volume IV, Element 1, Cover Letter include a reference in bullet d to a Section L.15.4.2.5. This section could not be located in the Draft RFP. Will the Government please provide this section to allow Offerors to comply with all instructions? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 87 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 31 | L.2, Volume IV, Element 1, paragraph e | Administrative: The instructions for Volume IV, Element 1, Cover Letter include a reference in bullet e to "RS3 base contract awards." Please note, this appears to refer to a different contract. | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 88 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 32 | L.2, Volume IV, Element 1, L.15.1.1 | Administrative: After the instructions for Volume IV, Element 1, Cover Letter (bullets a through h), there are two additional requirements, L.15.1.1 and L.15.1.2. Section L.15.1.1 requires Offerors to attach Section K submissions to the Cover Letter of this solicitation. As it is excluded for the Cover Letter page limit, will the Government please confirm that Section K submissions can be included as an Appendix to Volume IV - General? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 89 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 32 | L.2, Volume IV, Element 1, L.15.1.2 | Administrative: After the instructions for Volume IV, Element 1, Cover Letter (bullets a through h), there are two additional requirements, L.15.1.1 and L.15.1.2. Section L.15.1.2 requires signed SF 33 and SF 30(s), if applicable, in accordance with FAR 4.102. As they are excluded from the Cover Letter page limit, will the Government please confirm that Offerors can include the signed SF 33 and SF 30(s) as an Appendix to Volume IV? | This will be revised in the final RFP. | |
| 90 | N | DRAFT RFP W91CRB-24-R-0003_ 22 NOV 2023.pdf | 32 | L.2, Volume IV, Element 1, L.15.1.2 | Administrative: After the instructions for Volume IV, Element 1, Cover Letter (bullets a through h), there are two additional requirements, L.15.1.1 and L.15.1.2. Please note that Section L.15.1.2 includes the following sentences, which do not appear relevant to this solicitation: |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .