Description
Q1. Is there an incumbent contractor or is this a new requirement? If there is an incumbent, can you please provide the contractor, contract number, award date and award amount? I am aware of contract INN06PC10435, which was awarded to IBM; however I thought that contract expired in 2014. A1. There is not a current incumbent. However, DOI did a pilot with SAP's BusinessObjects as a proof of concept to gain support for this effort to inquire about a new reporting tool. However, BusinessObjects is not in production. Q2. Can you provide Program Officer information (for reference purposes only). A2. It is unclear as to the intent of this question. The RFI was issued by the contracting office and the program officer information will not be provided at this time. Potential offerors are instructed to contact only the contracting point of contact identified for any information. Prospective offerors are cautioned against contacting government technical personnel in regard to this RFI or any request for quote/solicitation prior to potential award for this acquisition. If such a contact occurs and is found to be prejudicial to potential competing offerors, the offeror making such a contact may be excluded from any further consideration. Accordingly, all communications must be direct to the contracting point of contact. Q3. Is there an estimated contract value or maximum amount for this program? A3. The Government does not intend to disclose the Government cost estimate for this effort. Also, the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Q4. Can you provide an estimated award time-frame or anticipated start date for this program? A4. The purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Once the determination has been made an estimated award time frame will be specified in the resultant request for quote/solicitation document. Q5. Based on the information provided in the draft, our company can provide pricing for the business intelligence licenses but requests a one-week extension to allow us to obtain the necessary internal approvals. Without an extension, our company can only provide our pricing model, rather than an actual price estimate. A5. As stated above, the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Therefore, no pricing information is to be submitted with the capability statement submissions. Q6. DOI has only provided user counts for business intelligence but has also asked for software license and implementation pricing for activity based activity based costing, budget formulation, and consolidated financials. There is not enough information to provide price estimates for software and implementation. We could provide our pricing model for this additional functionality with the one week extension requested above. If DOI's intent is for respondents to provide software license estimates for this additional functionality please provide the information under "Users in addition to BI Users" so that we can accommodate your request. If DOI does want pricing for these additional features, our company requests a three-week extension, which will allow time for you to respond with the counts and for us to price and obtain internal approvals. A6. As stated above, the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Therefore, no pricing information is to be submitted with the capability statement submissions. Q7. The documents that have been posted do not provide detailed requirements for activity based activity based costing, budget formulation, and consolidated financials so we have insufficient information on which to base an implementation estimate. Will DOI defer the request for implementation pricing until you are able to provide detailed requirements so that vendors have the information they need to provide DOI with realistic estimates? A7. As stated above, the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Therefore, no pricing information is to be submitted with the capability statement submissions. Q8. DOI has included a table with 80 requirements and has also imposed a 10-page limit on vendor responses. Are you expecting vendors to indicate line-by-line if they meet the requirement or may we omit the table from our response and respond generally that we do / do not meet the requirements? A8. No, the Government is not expecting the capability statement to be a line-by-line response. The intent of the capability statement is to provide sufficient information in order for the Government to make a determination regarding the potential vendor's ability to successfully perform. The capability statement should provide a description of the experience and capability of the organization's ability to do the work and meet the requirements. In addition, it should demonstrate an understanding of the overall requirements and any prior experience of similar scope. Q9. Does DOI already own and have they implemented the SAP Budget Formulation and Planning COTS software or does DOI want vendor's to provide an offer for a similar COTS software product? A9. DOI does not currently have the SAP Budget Formulation and Planning software. Please keep in mind this RFI is not a request for quotes, offers, or proposals. The purpose of this RFI is intended only to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. If a vendor feels they have a product that will meet the needs they should ensure their capability submission clearly demonstrates this ability. Q10. Besides CompuSearch PRISM, are there any other data sources that DOI bureaus need to report off that are NOT already located inside the SAP BW environment listed in figure 2 and 3?If our offer is unable to be deemed 100% compatible with and in uniformity with SAP's Netweaver Roadmap will this disqualify our offer? A10. The basis for FBMS reporting is data sourced from R/3 and PRISM. We currently do not support any other data sources, such as legacy systems. The technical basis for FBMS reporting is SAP BW. Any reporting tool has to be compatible with SAP BW as a data source. Q11. Are there any current performance issues relating to existing SAP BW queries that DOI needs to solve? A11. The current reporting performance has been deemed acceptable. Still, like any system, the Government is always looking for potential methods to improve performance. Q12. How many system administrators does DOI anticipate training for this new reporting infrastructure? Is this what is meant by "Core Team Users"? A12. The Government's requirement will be for training. However, the specific numbers as well as types of individuals will not be known or identified until the request for quote/solicitation is issued. The requirement is to demonstrate the capability to provide training for the solution. Q13. If we are able to provide similar references (ability to handle up to 100,000 users for SAP Financials) would DOI consider a performance base offer and/or proof of concept of Oracle Reporting/Analysis Tools vs. SAP Offering? A13. The Government is open to vendor suggestions and ideas that will satisfy the requirements. Please keep in mind this RFI is not a request for quotes, offers, or proposals. The purpose of this RFI is intended only to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Q14. Does DOI require licensing and maintenance costs for all 5 Option Years listed or would you prefer a total cost if pulled together for all the Option Years? A14. Funding has been estimated on a per year basis so DOI knows the estimated budget across all 5 years. Also, as stated above, the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort. Therefore, no pricing information is to be submitted with the capability statement submissions. Q15. Does our response need to include responses to each requirement of the 80 software requirements? And can this be a separate attachment that is not included as part of the 10 pages? A15. No, the Government is not expecting the capability statement to be a line-by-line response nor can any information be included as an attachment outside the page limitation. The intent of the capability statement is to provide sufficient information in order for the Government to make a determination regarding the potential vendor's ability to successfully perform. The capability statement should provide a description of the experience and capability of the organization's ability to do the work and meet the requirements. In addition, it should demonstrate an understanding of the overall requirements and any prior experience of similar scope. Q16. Requirements #1 and #2 appear to be duplicates? Is this the case or is one of the requirements missing? A16. Requirements #1 and #2 are duplicates. There are no requirements missing. Q17. The document requests that the solution be able to produce standard federal financial and budget related reports (e.g.SF-133). Is this to replace SAP functionality, and if so, is it being delivered through SAP ERP or SAP BW currently? A17. The vendor's solution should be able to produce standard reports (for example from SAP ERP and SAP BW. Q18. Other than the Consolidated Financials and Budget Formulation modules, is everything in Figure 1 on Page 1 in existence and in production today? A18. Yes. Q19. Will there be any requirement to go directly against SAP ECC or does all reporting functionality go to BW and the other data sources mentioned in Requirement # 1? A19. FBMS does have reports that go directly against SAP ECC. However, the Government will entertain other solutions that offer cross functionality. Q20. Requirement # 11 states that the solution must handle 100,000 users. Can you give us a percentage breakdown by general category as to how these users will use the system? (E.g. heavy report authoring, report consumption, analysis, dashboard consumption, ad hoc queries etc.). What is the expected usage as a percentage of a user's time on average? Also, page 3 of the SOW shows # of users scaling to 2000+, how do 100,000 users come into play? A20. Based on review and this comment, the Government will delete Requirement 11 from the requirements. Therefore, vendors are not required to address this in the capability submissions. Q21. For the two additional requirements of Consolidated Financial Statements and Budget Formulation & Planning, will there be any more forthcoming detailed requirements similar to the reporting requirements you provided in the RFI? What exactly are you expecting from the vendors with respect to detail in answering these requirements as they are worded presently? A21. The FBMS PMO plans to install COTS products. Please describe Consolidated Financial Statements and Budget Formulation & Planning products that are tightly integrated with your reporting solutions. Q22. The SOW states: the new reporting tools must be capable of integrating with: ECC 6.0 EHP6+SPrism and Prism Grants PRISM v7.xBW (Netweaver platform TBD)SAP Enterprise Portal (Netweaver platform TBD)SAP Process Integration (Netweaver platform TBD)SAP Solution Manager (Netweaver 7.1)Open Text (Full Opentext Records Management v TBDSolution Manager v TBD Specifically, what kind of integration are you looking for, what would you like to accomplish? A22. The requirements document will be reworded to read, "the new reporting tools must be compatible with the following:" Q23. The SOW states that you want to: Retain the use of FBMS Authorization objects to control data-level security (e.g. Business Area, Cost Center, etc). Are you referring to authorization variables or infocube level security? A23. The FBMS is referring to Info Object Variables. Q24. A comment on page 1 of the Requirements Document references the focus of the Reporting Improvements effort as follows: The focus of this effort is to improve the current FBMS reporting (BEx Web Analyzer, reporting against the BW infrastructure). Later on page two, the Requirements Document references a "new reporting tool". Can the government please provide clarification with regard to these two different messages - is the government requesting a new reporting product or does DOI intend to utilize the current reporting infrastructure? A24. DOI intends to utilize the current reporting data storage of SAP BW. It also intends to have a transition period where both the current tool, BEx Web Analyzer and the new reporting tool, will both be available to the end users. Q25. Can more detail be provided related to the use of BusinessObjects' in the current FBMS landscape? Figure 1 on page 1 of the Requirements Documents shows BusinessObjects as a part of the current FBMS landscape. Yet, it is not mentioned later on this page when the SAP integrated suite and its components are detailed as followed: (SAP ECC, SAP Enterprise Portal, SAP BW, SAP PI, and SAP GRC) combined with several additional applications (Compusearch PRISM, and Oracle RDBMS) A25. DOI did a pilot with Business Objects as a proof of concept to gain support for this effort to inquire about a new reporting tool. Business Objects is not in production. Q26. Can the government clarify which BusinessObjects product Figure 1 is intended to refer to - i.e. does it refer solely to the BusinessObject Enterprise XI product or are there other BusinessObjects products included? For each of those products, what modules are available and/or have been licensed? A26. DOI did a pilot with Business Objects as a proof of concept to gain support for this effort to inquire about a new reporting tool. Business Objects is not in production. Q27. Page 1 of the RFI Document and pages 1 and 4 of the Requirements Document references "Dashboards." Does the government intend for this dashboard term to reference a specific technical capability such as BusinessObjects Xcelsius product or is the reference related to a general, more dynamic and visually engaging reporting capability? A27. The term is being used to relate to a general, more dynamic and visually engaging reporting capability and no specific tool. Q28. Page 7 of the Requirements Document details a series of Treasury and Other Submission Upload Files. Can the government clarify the upload format for these files? Is it correct to assume that Netweaver and/or PI shall be utilized to facilitate the delivery of the extract files? A28. The format for these files is controlled by the receiving organization. The method of delivering these files varies by the receiving organization. PI is the preferred method for FBMS, but this is not always within the control of DOI. Q29. Page 6 of the Requirements Document details that the new reporting system to provide audit trail capabilities. Can the government further define the specific functions entailed within those audit capabilities? A29. The requirements document will be revised prior to request for quotes/solicitation that will identify the Government's requirements regarding audit trail functionality. However, for this phase of the process the capability statements should address if the solution has the capability for audit trails. Also, the Government is interested in best practice capabilities within industry for this area. Q30. Page 6 of the Requirements Document contains a requirement that the new reporting capability allows mobile employees to view business information even when offline. What specific offline capabilities are required and what types of mobile devices need to be supported? A30. As an example, the simplest requirement is for individuals to download the report to their laptop and manipulate the report while not connected to FBMS. Q31. Page 7 of the Requirements document references Budget Formulation & Planning requirements as follows: The tool or add on module shall provide the capability to automate the formulation and planning of the agency and bureau budgets. This includes the integration and automation of all process, sub-processes and document preparation related to Federal budget formulation, funds distribution, and planning. Can the government provide clarification as to whether the reporting improvement effort is intended to actually facilitate the build of a system that can be used for the generation of future budgets or solely to provide reporting against such a budget formulation capability? A31. The current requirement is for reporting against budget execution and formulation functionality. However, the Government is also interested in functionality within the product that would allow for the generation of future budgets. This will provide flexibility for the Government in budget formulation. Q32. What is DOI's definition and requirements of budget formulation? Does it include:Calculation of future administrative budgets including staff projections and overhead/benefit allocation? Incorporation of program budgets? Trend analysis of past spending and cost data to better forecast future cost rates? Workflow to allow hierarchy when formulating budgets (e.g. the field budgets at a division level, then that budget is compiled across regions or an agency)? A32. FBMS has a potential future requirement to support federal budget formulation. At this time, those detailed requirements have not been finalized. The types of capabilities listed are what is expected to be detailed if FBMS is expanded to support federal budget formulation. Q33. Who is the incumbent provider of DOI's FBMS reporting capabilities? Will the incumbent contractor be allowed to bid on the procurement of the services described in the RFI? A33. There is not a current incumbent. However, DOI did a pilot with SAP's BusinessObjects as a proof of concept to gain support for this effort to inquire about a new reporting tool. However, BusinessObjects is not in production. This, however, will not preclude any potential offeror from participating in this acquisition. Q34. The RFI Structure detailed in the RFI Document requests no more than 10 pages of a firm's ability to perform all aspects of the effort described in the RFI and Requirements Documents. Can the government provide clarification with regard to the desired RFI response structure so that we may do our best to provide the information required and help DOI to make as informed a decision as possible as to how to proceed? A34. The intent of the capability statement is to provide sufficient information in order for the Government to make a determination regarding the potential vendor's ability to successfully perform. The capability statement should provide a description of the experience and capability of the organization's ability to do the work and meet the requirements. In addition, it should demonstrate an understanding of the overall requirements and any prior experience of similar scope. Q35. With regard to the desired structure of the response to the RFI, is it the government's intention to receive recommendations as to proposed solutions based upon the Requirements Document within these 10 pages? A35. It is the Governments intention to receive a COTS solution for the specified requirements. Please keep in mind this RFI is not a request for quotes, offers, or proposals. The intent of the capability statement is to provide sufficient information in order for the Government to make a determination regarding the potential vendor's ability to successfully perform. The capability statement should provide a description of the experience and capability of the organization's ability to do the work and meet the requirements. In addition, it should demonstrate an understanding of the overall requirements and any prior experience of similar scope. If a vendor feels they have a product that will meet the needs they should ensure their capability submission clearly demonstrates this ability. Q36. Page 1 of the RFI explains that the purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described herein. Does DOI intend to utilize responses to this RFI to in any way down-select bidders should this RFI later result in a related solicitation? A36. The purpose of this RFI is to identify potential sources that are interested in and capable of performing the work described therein in order to make a determination regarding the acquisition strategy for this effort (i.e. Open Market or GSA Federal Supply Schedule). It is in no way intended to be utilized as a down-select based on responses received. Q37. In the interests of providing DOI with as informed responses as possible, and due to the proximity of the RFI due date and the submission date for questions, can an extension be provided for the RFI deadline to provide at a minimum 1 business week to respond from the date that questions are answered? A37. An extension is being granted. Capability statements are now due no later than Friday, March 4, 2011, 3 pm Eastern Time.