AE2S Sources Sought NOTICE - Response to Vendor Questions Received with Sources Sought submission

The purpose of this update is to provide responses to questions asked by industry. The questions and answers are below.
General Questions
1. What contract type is the Government intending for this effort?
a. Cost Plus Fixed Fee

2. Is there an intended platform or technology the Government is considering for this effort? If so, that will help obtain more accurate work estimation and pricing from contractors. Or, is there a point in the effort where the Government is looking for a recommendation or analysis of alternatives? Is that part of the System Assessment in Section 3.2 or potentially part of the design effort in Section 3.3? Even giving an indication of an intent for a complete custom developed solution, a partial custom build, or a package that leverages out of the box functionality with minimal customization, will help ensure accurate pricing.

a. There is no intended platform or technology the Government is considering.

3. What software development process is the Government currently using (e.g. Waterfall, Agile) and is there any intent to move away from the existing process? Will the Government be looking for the contractor to recommend a process in their approach and how will this be evaluated when compared to the current process if not stated?

a. Spiral. The Government is open to other software development process that are within the constraints of budget and time.

4. One of the major differences between the previous PWS and this one is the inclusion of a significant number of requirements in Section 3.3. What is the intent of listing these requirements? Are these questions intended for background and context or will the Government ask offerors to respond to each requirement in their proposals? This extensive list seems to get into more details during the proposal phase than necessary and would provide an unnecessary competitive advantage to the legacy system incumbent contractor. It seems that the Government should ask offerors for their approach on how they would manage and execute the required effort to meet the general overall requirements for AE2S versus how they would address each individual detailed requirement.

a. The Government defined the overall requirement in this PWS in order to help industry better propose an offer
.
5. Referencing question #4 above, if these requirements are included, can they be consolidated into higher level tasks? Is it the Government's intention to incorporate our plan to address all of these into our proposal? Will there be page count to do so? There are currently approximately 10 pages of requirements; assuming the method for addressing each one is explained in a proposal response, it will require significant page count just to achieve compliance by acknowledging we will address it versus discussing our approach to designing the new AE2S.

a. The requirements can be consolidated into higher level tasks, as long as the higher level tasks properly demonstrate an understanding of the overall requirement.
Questions and Comments Specific to the PWS
6. Section 1.5 and Section 1.6: Recommend moving these tasks to the quote mark Specific Tasks quote mark section of the PWS, possibly under 3.5.4 Program Management or as their own section(s).
a. Noted

7. Section 1.21 OCI: Are any companies either conflicted out of competing for this requirement or currently have an OCI mitigation plan in place based on participation in any manner during development of any requirements, specification, or the PWS, or access to information that other competitors may not have? If so, please provide the details so all competitors have full knowledge of the circumstances surrounding this procurement to enable the preparation of the most competitive offers.

a. If an offeror thinks they may have an OCI this will be addressed at the time of proposal submission.

8. Section 1.22.4. Facilities: The Government will furnish the necessary workspace for a maximum of 38 Contractor's on-site staff within the NCR consisting of the Pentagon, Crystal City and Fort Belvoir to provide the support outlined in this PWS to include desk space, telephones, computers and other items necessary to maintain an office environment.
a. How many desks are at each facility?
There are 38 spaces available at Fort Belvoir, 2 spaces in the PNT, and 4 overflow spaces at Crystal City; however, the Crystal City spaces may be going away in the near future.
b. Are all sites performing the same work or is there a focus of each site?
No, the PNT spaces are for Helpdesk personnel. All other Contractors will work out of Fort Belvoir.
c. If there is a focus for each site, can the Government include this information in the PWS?
See above
d. Is the Government open to a subset of offsite work at contractor facilities as it presents cost efficiencies for the Government?
Yes
e. Will proposing offsite work negatively impact proposal evaluation?
No

9. Section 2.1. quote mark Key personnel identified as the Project Manager, Senior Analyst, Senior Developer, and SME shall be assigned at least ninety-five percent (95%) of their time to the AE2S program, unless otherwise stated. quote mark
a. The titles of these key personnel contradict the key personnel titles listed in section 2.1.1-2.1.3. Does the Government intend for all of the key personnel to work at least 95% of their working hours on this effort, or just the Subject Matter Expert?
Errors Corrected
b. Can years of experience be substituted for a Masters degree?
No

10. Section 2.1. quote mark There will be no substitutions of Key Personnel and SMEs until 120 days after the contract is awarded, unless waived by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). quote mark
a. Given the timeline from the J&A, the release and the submission of the proposal may be 4-6 months before the estimated start of work. Also, this provision provides the incumbent contractor for the legacy systems an unnecessary competitive advantage, in that the incumbent's personnel will be readily available to transition to the new contract on day one, whereas competitors will need to keep key personnel in a non-productive status to ensure availability for the new contract award up to 6 months after proposal submission. Would the Government consider allowing for substitutions of key personnel, as long as the substitutes meet all the labor category requirements of the position being filled, and with the approval of the Contracting Officer?
Any substitute of Key Personnel must be approved by the Government.
=
11. Section 2.1.4.1. The qualifications required for this position are extremely specific, including: (1) quote mark Army operational experience; quote mark (2) quote mark 5 years total experience in training curriculum and materials for development and execution; quote mark (3) quote mark 5 years total experience at HQ Dept. of the Army/Army Command level; and (4) quote mark [e]xperience in the Army Equipping process as a Force Development staff officer quote mark ). These required credentials significantly limit the ability of many contractors to credibly offer a resource for this position, and thus provide the legacy system incumbent with a competitive advantage. In order to bolster competition, will the government consider revising the requirements for this position to more generic requirements in the manner of Sections 2.1.1 through 2.1.3? The descriptions contained in these sections provide sufficient detail to illustrate the Government's requirement for highly-skilled personnel without limiting competition.

a. The Government requires these qualifications

12. Section 2.1.4.2.
13. Why is the Human Factors Engineer listed as key personnel and as a SME, especially at 50% time and even more so as needing the experience outlined in section 2.1.4(c)? Specifically, requiring quote mark 5 years of total experience at HQ Dept. of the Army/Army Command level quote mark for this position is not only very limiting and potentially non-competitive - but seemingly unnecessary for this skillset.
14. Section 2.1.5. General qualifications for non-key personnel: quote mark A Junior Developer/Analyst shall have a minimum of an Associate's degree in an information technology related field. They shall have and maintain industry-recognized credentials in their area of performance. An Information Support person shall have and maintain industry- recognized credentials in their area of performance. quote mark
a. Is there a broader listing of positions or descriptions that describes what the government means by quote mark Information Support person quote mark as an example?

15. Section 3.1. Phase I - Maintenance and Sustainment - Will the government provide a system inventory and certification of the operational status (e.g. excellent, good, poor) of the existing system?

a. The Government will provide a system inventory of equipment and if the equipment is operational.

16. Section 3.3. Phase II - quote mark New AE2S Design will be initiated upon notification from the COR. The new AE2S system design will incorporate all PWS requirements identified in Section 3.2 and any requirements obtained from the System Assessment. Phase II shall be initiated NLT the start of Option Year One Period of Performance (PoP). The Contractor shall maintain an uninterrupted continuation of the Legacy AE2S system functions, services, and deliverables. quote mark
a. When does the Government anticipate beginning the new phase? What requirements will the COR be looking for to approve this start? In order to accurately price the level of effort to support the modernization task, it would help to know or based on what entry criteria the Government anticipates starting the work.
The PWS identifies when the Phases start, they are aligned with the Option Years.
b. In reference to quote mark The new AE2S system design will incorporate all PWS requirements identified in Section 3.2 and any requirements obtained from the System Assessment quote mark , does the Government intend for the Contractor to gather and document requirements in Phase I? If so, this should be called out explicitly as a task as it is potentially a significant effort and standard for any development effort.
Any additional requirements the Contractor highlights in the system assessment that were missed in section 3.2 will be incorporated. This is not a formal requirements gathering requirement.
c. In reference to quote mark The new AE2S system design will incorporate all PWS requirements identified in Section 3.2 and any requirements obtained from the System Assessment quote mark , Section 3.3 states that requirements should be done as part of the system assessment, but then Section 3.3 includes a significant number of requirements. This seems to be contradictory. What is the intent of including all of the requirements in section 3.3 if they are to be determined in Phase I?
The requirements in 3.3 cover the overall new system requirement. Section 3.2 covers the system assessment, if the Contractor wants to propose any missing requirements discovered during the assessment they can do so at the end of Phase I.
17. Section 3.3.1.10 requires the contractor to develop a fielding plan that quote mark should contain at a minimum a schedule, estimated man-hours, and risks associated with execution of the plan. quote mark Should we include this in our proposal response, or will the man-hours associated with the execution of the plan be issued as a modification, incremental funding, or separate task?
a. No
18. Section 3.3.2.2 states an extensive listing of requirements, which brings up multiple questions:
a. Are these current requirements of the legacy system?
No
b. If so - are they to be incorporated into a new design or is the Government looking only to use these as context as we refresh the design?
A response cannot be provided at this time. Please stay updated to FBO for further information.
c. Is the Government confident that these will not change in several years when implementation begins?
We are confident they cover the current requirement.
d. How were these developed if the last two J&As are only intended to cover O&M tasks?
The Government developed the requirement during multiple GS-15 working groups, contractors were not involved in the developing of the requirements.
e. If they were developed prior to that, are they still valid? There's potentially 3-4 years between the start of the first J&A and the new system being implemented.
They are valid.
f. If they were developed by Government staff and not Contractor resources - should we anticipate the same level of support from Government staff in this contract?
Yes