NOTE: Please be aware that information you furnish as a result of this questionnaire will be on a voluntary basis and will be for informational purposes only. Information that you feel is proprietary shall not be furnished, since this is not a solicitation.

It should also be understood that the Government may use some of the information, ideas and recommendations you provide as an aid in developing the solicitation/contract. The Government will not be liable for any information obtained as a result of this questionnaire.

INDUSTRY QUESTIONNAIRE

COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT STRATCOM ARCHITECTURE (CESAR) CONTRACT

Contract Architecture

1. USSTRATCOM/J66 envisions the CESAR contract to span the SWPS, C2, and OA LAN missions. Potentially, it will also span the Intel mission. If the contract envelopes its largest proposed scope, the contractor will be responsible for integrating existing C4 programs , buying commodities (both hardware and COTS software ), providing engineering services, developing custom applications, and maintaining existing systems. The most important aspect of the CESAR contract is the contractor's assumption of responsibility for integrating the above list of products. For example, if a development version of software is not fully compatible with hardware the contractor purchases, the contractor finds a fix (not the government). The government is considering a number of acquisition alternatives ranging from 1) one contract encompassing all responsibilities to 2) multiple contracts, one for each of the specific activities (integration, buying equipment, services, etc.) Between those extremes are options for various groupings of activities into a smaller number of contracts (e.g., one contract covering both integration and buying equipment). What are the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative? Which alternative would work best from the perspective of the government? Which would work best for the prime? How do issues of responsiveness, efficiency, and cost effectiveness affect the government choice of this alternative?

  1. One government view on awarding multiple contracts is that we need a contractor to take responsibility for the total system of systems. What contracting provisions could the government employ to ensure responsiveness from the prime integrator if commodity purchasing and/or hardware maintenance were provided by a different contractor?

  1. If the government chose to award the full scope of CESAR activities in one contract, how could we create incentives which lead the contractor to provide the most efficient, responsive, and cost effective solution? (We want to avoid a scenario, for instance, in which the contractor can earn so much profit from sale of hardware that we cannot offer enough award fee for excellence in integration to make the incentive for integration outweigh the incentive for selling hardware.)

Percent of the Business

4. In order to ensure that a competitive industrial base remains viable for follow-ons to the initial CESAR effort, the government is considering a mandate that the prime must subcontract some percentage of the contract value. From industry's perspective, what would be the pros and cons of such a policy? Please identify any short- or long-term consequences of such a policy. Presuming that some subcontract quota is adopted, what would be the appropriate percentage for the quota? 30 percent? 50 percent? 70 percent? Please substantiate your response.

Breadth of Expertise

5. Presuming the full scope of the CESAR effort is awarded to one integrating contractor, how can the government ensure that the most qualified domain expertise is available in every mission area and every business area? What would be the best government approach to protect against a situation where the CESAR contractor has exceptional expertise in four or five business or mission areas, and is bankrupt in another?

Award Fee

6. Please provide your recommendations on how the government should structure the award fee to optimize the benefits for BOTH the prime and the government.

Recruitment and Retention

  1. There is concern that the Omaha area does not contain the required expertise in the numbers needed to support the CESAR contract. Do you foresee finding and retaining qualified personnel in this area as a potential problem? How would you address this issue?

  1. How can the government ensure that CESAR contractor personnel are paid at competitive market rates in the area to ensure a stable, capable work force, and still obtain the most cost-effective services?