Requirement for providing ongoing support, maintenance, and/or product improvement for the Army Equipping Enterprise System (AE2S)

***NOTE: 11 DEC 2018 - Submittal email address has been updated to contact@example.gov . Offerors are requested to re-submit all Capabilities Statements to the new address by 2:00PM EST on 13 December 2018, as the previous email address has been retired.*** INTRODUCTION The Army Contracting Command - Aberdeen Proving Ground, 6515 Integrity Court, APG, MD on behalf of the Headquarters, Department of the Army Resource Management (HQDA G-8) is issuing this sources sought synopsis as a means of conducting market research to identify parties having an interest in and the resources to support the requirement for providing ongoing support, maintenance, and/or product improvement for the Army Equipping Enterprise System (AE2S).The intention is to procure these services on a competitive basis. Based on the responses to this Sources Sought Notice/Market Research, this requirement may be set-aside for small businesses (in full or in part) or procured through full and open competition. All Small Business Set-Aside categories will be considered. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted or acknowledged, and no feedback or evaluations will be provided to companies regarding their submissions. GENERAL INFORMATION Incumbent: DELOITTE CONSULTING LLP 1725 DUKE ST ALEXANDRIA VA 22314-3456 Contract number: W91CRB-15-C-0023 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE Fort Belvoir, VA DISCLAIMER This sources sought is for informational purposes only. This is not a "Request For Proposal (RFP)" to be submitted. It does not constitute a solicitation and shall not be construed as a commitment by the government. Responses in any form are not offers and the government is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. No funds are available to pay for preparation of responses to this announcement. Any information submitted by respondents to this technical description is strictly voluntary. Responses will not be returned to the responder. Not responding to this notice does not preclude participation in any future Request For Quote (RFQ) or Invitation For Bid (IFB) or RFP, if any issued. If a solicitation is released, it will be synopsized on the Government-Wide Point Of Entry (GPE). It is the responsibility of potential offerors to monitor the GPE for additional information pertaining to this requirement. PROGRAM BACKGROUND In 2015 the Army G-8 commissioned a system assessment of AE2S. That study outlined three major findings. First, AE2S was inefficient and unnecessarily costly. Second, as currently constructed, AE2S often drove business practices rather than facilitating them. Lastly, the AE2S user experience was poor. These results guided a complete redesign of AE2S that is scheduled to complete in December 2019. In 2018 AE2S moved from the Fort Belvoir Network Enterprise Center (NEC) to Amazon Web Services (AWS) as part of a large modernization effort. AE2S was redesigned from the ground up and deployed under the Program Optimization and Budget Evaluation (cPROBE) environment. As part of cPROBE, AE2S became an application under the cPROBE Risk Management Framework (RMF). As such, AE2S inherited appropriate cybersecurity controls. The effort was to share common resources within the Army G-8 in order to reduce the overall cost to the government. REQUIRED CAPABILITIES The Contractor shall provide services in support of the areas specified in Program Background (above). Further detail is provided in the draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) attached to this announcement (Attachment 1). If your organization has the potential capacity to perform these contract services, please provide the following information: 1) Organization name, address, email address, Web site address, telephone number, and size and type of ownership for the organization; and 2) Tailored capability statements addressing the particulars of this effort, with appropriate documentation supporting claims of organizational and staff capability. If significant subcontracting or teaming is anticipated in order to deliver technical capability, organizations should address the administrative and management structure of such arrangements. The Government will evaluate market information to ascertain potential market capacity to: 1) provide services consistent, in scope and scale, with those described in this notice and otherwise anticipated; 2) secure and apply the full range of corporate financial, human capital, and technical resources required to successfully perform similar requirements; 3) implement a successful project management plan that includes: compliance with tight program schedules; cost containment; meeting and tracking performance; hiring and retention of key personnel and risk mitigation; and 4) provide services under a performance based service acquisition contract. ELIGIBILITY The applicable NAICS code for this requirement is 541511 with a Small Business Size Standard of $27,500,000.00. The Product Service Code is D307. Businesses of all sizes are encouraged to respond; however, each respondent must clearly identify their business size in their capabilities statement. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND SUBMISSION DETAILS (CAPABILITIES STATEMENT) Interested parties are requested to submit a capabilities statement of no more than fifteen (15) pages in length in Times New Roman font of not less than 10 pitch that clearly details the firm's ability to perform the aspects of the requirement described within this Sources Sought and the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS). The deadline for response to this request is no later than 2 pm, EST 13 December 2018. All responses under this Sources Sought Notice must be e-mailed to contact@example.gov. The anticipated contract type is a firm fixed price (FFP) Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. This documentation must address at a minimum the following items: 1. What type of work has your company performed in the past in support of the same or similar requirement? 2. Can or has your company managed a task of this nature? If so, please provide details. 3. Can or has your company managed a team of subcontractors before? If so, provide details. 4. Does your company have interest as a prime or subcontractor? 5. Would industry consider hiring sub-contractors as part of the PWS? If so, how and in what areas would they be used? 6. From a personnel resource stance, does your company have sufficient human capital assets in the area of business process transformation to support a project of this size and scope? 7. What specific technical skills does your company possess which ensure capability to perform the tasks? 8. Does your company have a current approved DCAA Cost and Accounting System? 9. Please note that under a Small-Business Set-Aside, in accordance with FAR 52.219-14, the small business prime must perform at least 50% of the work themselves in terms of the cost of performance. Provide an explanation of your company's ability to perform at least 50% of the tasking described in this PBSOW for the base period as well as the option periods. 10. Provide a statement including current small/large business status and company profile to include number of employees, annual revenue history, office locations, DUNs number, etc. 11. Respondents to this notice also must indicate whether they qualify as a Small, Small Disadvantaged, Women-Owned, HUBZone, or Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern. 12. Include in your response your ability to meet the requirements in the Facility and Safeguarding requirements. 13. After reading the draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) and task order one for the Army Equipping Enterprise System (AE2S), what questions does industry have for the Government? 14. After reading the draft PWS and task order one for AE2S, is there any part of the contract that is unclear or requires additional clarification? a. Are there any ambiguities that require clarification? b. Are the standards of performance clear? c. Are there additional standards that should be incorporated? 15. What would the minimum contractor team structure industry recommends look like in order to satisfy the draft PWS and task order one requirements? a. How much would that cost on an annual basis? b. Given no new task orders, how much developmental effort could the government expect to see given this contractor team structure? c. What positions does industry recommend as part of this team structure? 16. Similar to question fifteen above, what would the recommended contractor team structure look like in order to satisfy the draft PWS and task order one requirements? a. How much would that cost on an annual basis (rough order of magnitude)? b. Given no new task orders, how much developmental effort could the government expect to see given this contractor team structure? c. What positions does industry recommend as part of this team structure? 17. Does your company believe a different NAICS code should be considered for this PWS? If so, please provide recommendations with supporting rationale. 18. How would industry recommend the government issues task orders as outlined in the PWS? Currently the government intends to issue task order one from the onset of the contract to a single contractor and additional task orders as needed. 19. The PWS and task order one are currently written as a stand-alone document for a contract that will start in January 2020. If the Headquarters, Department of the Army, G-8 decides to consolidate multiple contracts into one overarching G-8 contract (for example compete cPROBE and AE2S under one contract) how does industry recommend government proceed? a. What are the advantages of utilizing a single contract? b. What are the disadvantages of utilizing a single contract? c. What would industry's preference be? 20. The PWS describes the Agile development process as its preferred software-development method. Is this appropriate? Are other processes better suited for this type of activity? 21. Task order one describes two teams, a software development team that uses Scrum and a Kanban team to address system fixes. Is this too much structure for what AE2S needs? What does industry recommend? 22. The government is considering removing all development efforts out of task order one and issuing task orders for any further developmental efforts, no matter how large or small those development efforts are. Which is the preferred method? Should task order one allow for some product development, if so, how does the government know when it's best to issue a task order that's specific to a new developmental activity? 23. What does industry require from the incumbent contractor to assume task order one in January 2020? If a transition between contractors is required, how long will that transition take, when should it happen, and what should it entail? 24. The government is considering using a FFP ID/IQ contract. Is this reasonable given how the PWS is written? Should the government consider any other types of contract? 25. With AE2S housed in the AWS cloud in cPROBE, what further enhancements should the Army make to fully leverage the benefits of the cloud? Should the Army use artificial intelligence and machine learning to better execute its role in improving readiness and modernizing the Army? How would it best do this? 26. Please advise if industry believes that the scope identified within the included PWS would require labor categories that are subject to the Service Contract Act or Collective Bargaining Agreements. 27. Does industry have any other recommendations the government should consider in this effort? 28. Is the vendor aware of any General Services Administration (GSA) Schedules or Government-wide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) that could satisfy this requirement? The Government anticipates a possible five-year contract ordering period commencing in January 2020. Upon evaluation of the capability statements, if it is determined that this requirement will be an unrestricted competition, the Government intends to evaluate the Small-Business responses and conduct further market research to identify a subcontracting goal. Your response to this Sources Sought, including any Capabilities Statement, shall be electronically submitted to the Contracting Officer, Alexander S. Obriwin, in either Microsoft Word or Portable Document Format (PDF), via email only to contact@example.gov. All data received in response to this Sources Sought that is marked or designated as corporate or proprietary will be fully protected from any release outside the Government. No phone calls will be accepted. All questions must be submitted to the contracting officer identified above. The Government is not committed nor obligated to pay for the information provided, and no basis for claims against the Government shall arise as a result of a response to this Sources Sought.