MODIFICATION
D -- Army Mobile Device Application Develop. Svcs.
- Notice Date
- 10/5/2010
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541511
— Custom Computer Programming Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, Army Contracting Command, ITEC4, NCR PARC (NCR-CC), 2461 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, Virginia, 22331-0700, United States
- ZIP Code
- 22331-0700
- Solicitation Number
- W91QUZ-11-RFI01-0000
- Archive Date
- 10/30/2010
- Point of Contact
- WARREN R. PETRIS, Phone: 7033253172
- E-Mail Address
-
warren.petris@us.army.mil
(warren.petris@us.army.mil)
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Request for Information (RFI) Army Mobile Device Application Development Services The U.S. Army Contracting Command National Capital Region Contracting Center (NCRCC) is seeking information for the purpose of obtaining market research only. This Request for Information (RFI) is being issued to help the Army better understand current and future market solutions, availability of services, industry best practices, technical characteristics and functionality of information technology (IT) services, tools, and products capable of enhancing and/or extending the Army's efforts to develop a software development contract for mobile device applications. Subsequent to the receipt of responses to this RFI, the Program Executive Office Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS) may invite select RFI respondents to a technical interchange session to discuss their response with Government representatives. This is not a Request for Proposal (RFP), Request for Quotation (RFQ), or an invitation for bid, nor does its issuance obligate or restrict the Government to an eventual acquisition. All information received from this RFI will be used for Market Research purposes only. The Government does not intend to award a contract on the basis of responses to this RFI nor otherwise reimburse vendors for the preparation of any information submitted or Government use of such information. Acknowledgement of receipt of responses will not be made, nor will respondents be notified regarding the outcome of the information received. 1.1. Army PEO EIS Background The Army PEO EIS provides infrastructure and information management systems to the Army, enabling it to achieve victory through total information dominance. PEO EIS develops, acquires and deploys tactical and management information technology systems and products. PEO EIS is a systems acquisition, development and integration center of excellence under the management of four deputy program executive officers, five directorates and numerous project/product managers. PEO EIS develops and fields a wide range of products and services that support the Army and, through its diverse programs, touches every soldier, every day. 1.2. Army PEO EIS Mobile Applications Vision The Army recognizes the great benefits that mobile applications can provide to meeting mission objectives, and supporting the war-fighter and the greater Army community. PEO EIS envisions itself as the "one-stop shop" within the Army for providing these secure and scalable mobile application products to the Army community. PEO EIS understands that effectively providing mobile application products to its customers goes beyond simply developing these applications for them. It entails providing a full lifecycle of mobile application capabilities starting from concept development through product design, requirements identification, application development, integration with back-end systems, security and information assurance, deployment, hosting, support, maintenance, and ongoing product management. PEO EIS is currently exploring how to most effectively and efficiently provide this full range of capabilities to its customers in the near and long-term. This includes gaining a strong understanding of the market including potential providers, market segmentation, technology trends and dynamics, pertinent business trends, recent innovations, industry characteristics, best practices employed by both private and public sector organizations, and pricing structures. PEO EIS understands that it needs support from its industry partners to help it meet its vision of being the "one-stop shop" for mobile applications within the Army. In the near-term, PEO EIS envisions acquiring the services identified in Table 1 below from a number of large and small business partners capable of developing applications across all mobile platforms including, but not limited to, iPhone, Android, Windows Mobile, and Blackberry. This will help PEO EIS quickly meet the growing mobile applications demand and needs of its internal and external customers. This RFI and the resulting responses are intended to enable the Army to design the optimal contract and acquisition strategy to achieve the stated goals. Table 1: Preliminary Contract Scope SERVICE CATEGORY SERVICE COMPONENT 1.0 Application Product Design 1.1 Market Strategy/Analysis 1.2 Requirements Development/Validation 1.3 Application Product Design 1.4 Architecture and Standards Development 1.5 Service Catalog Design and Alignment 2.0 Application Product Development 2.1 Development/Coding 2.2 Testing 3.0 Application Product Integration 3.1 Integration with Federal Civilian Systems 3.2 Integration with DoD Systems 3.3 Integration with Commercial Capabilities 3.4 Integration with Carrier Enablement Services 4.0 Security and Information Assurance (IA) Management 4.1 Certification and Accreditation (CON) Documentation 4.2 User Authentication 4.3 Device Authentication 4.4 Data Security 5.0 Middleware (Infrastructure) Management 5.1 Middleware Services 5.2 Process Management 6.0 Ongoing Application Product Management 6.1 Performance (SLA) Management 6.2 Schedule Management 6.3 Cost Management and Reporting 6.4 Earned Value Management 6.5 Risk Management /Contingency Planning 6.6 Business Continuity Planning 6.7 Procurement Management 6.8 Quality Management 6.9 Administrative Support 6.10 Regulatory Compliance Management 6.11 Third Party Relationship Management 7.0 Application Product Support 7.1 End User Tier 2/3 Support 8.0 Application Product Maintenance 8.1 Security (IAVA/STIG) Compliance 8.2 Patch Management 8.3 Update Management 9.0 Mobile And Wireless Services 9.1 Peripherals Management 2. RFI OBJECTIVES AND INSTRUCTIONS 2.1. Objectives This RFI is intended to improve PEO EIS' understanding of the technologies, solutions, innovations, and products available in the market for: (1) enhancing the war-fighters' experience leveraging emerging mobile technologies; (2) extending enterprise services to the mobile end user; (3) furthering the knowledge management mission by optimizing use of the mobile services; (4) providing an integration platform for third party applications providing value added services to the war-fighter; and (5) supporting new business models and streamlined processes to incentivize a broad community of industry partners. 2.2. Instructions Responses to this RFI are requested in three segments. First, the Army seeks a basic understanding of the companies that provide products and services in the mobile device application space. Second, the Army seeks to understand the experience and capabilities of those firms. Finally, the Army seeks industry's responses to a series of targeted questions addressing many of the challenges associated with this effort. Response submissions should be submitted in Microsoft Word format and should not exceed twenty (20) pages with Arial font greater than or equal to 10 pt. Respondents are strongly urged to adhere to this page limitation as well as to limit marketing material in order to provide more substantive information in their response. Responses are to be submitted via e-mail to the Contracting Officer, Warren Petris at [warren.petris@us.army.mil] no later than 1500 EDT 15 October 2010. 3. COMPANY PROFILE AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION The Army is interested in understanding the profile of the companies responding to this RFI. Accordingly, responses to the following questions are requested. Table 2: Company Profile and Demographic Information ITEM INFORMATION REQUESTED RESPONSE 3-1 Organization Name (if organization has experienced name changes, please list all previous names used) 3-2 Industry (NAICS) Codes (North American Industry Classification System) and business size for each NAICS code NAICS SIZE 3-3 Vehicles and contracts your company holds 3-4 Year established/founded 3-5 Company ownership (public, private, joint venture) 3-6 Business Classification / Socio-Economic Status (e.g., large, small, 8(a), women owned, hub-zone, SDB, Service-Disabled Veteran Owned) 3-7 Location of Headquarters 3-8 Location where Incorporated 4. EXPERIENCE AND CAPABILITIES The Army is interested in understanding the experience and capabilities of the respondents to this RFI. Accordingly, we request each respondent provide the Army an understanding of its capabilities and experience (especially DoD and Army) through a narrative description for each of the scope areas defined in Table 1 above and listed below: 1. Application Product Design 2. Application Product Development 3. Application Product Integration 4. Security and Information Assurance (IA) Management 5. Middleware (Infrastructure) Management 6. Ongoing Application Product Management 7. Application Product Support 8. Application Product Maintenance 9. Mobile and Wireless Services 5. MARKET AND TECHNICAL QUESTIONNAIRE 1. In the near-term, PEO EIS intends on acquiring the services listed in Table 1 above through a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract or Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA). a. Are there any other critical services not mentioned in Table 1 that PEO EIS should consider? b. Do vendors typically provide all of the services listed in Table 1 or is specialization in a specific set of services the more frequent model? PEO EIS anticipates multiple vendors (prime/subcontractor teaming arrangements ) providing services in combination to deliver mobile applications to the customer base. What are the potential issues PEO EIS may face when bringing these vendors together? What are the best practices that PEO EIS should consider to successfully integrate these multiple vendors across the mobile application lifecycle? 2. How is industry organized (segmented) to provide mobile application development and support services to its customers? By platform (Windows Mobile, Android, iPhone, etc.)? By service (development, design, support, etc.)? Other? 3. Do organizations seeking mobile device application development services typically award separate contracts (or perhaps, functional areas within a single contract) for each platform (Windows Mobile, Android, iPhone, etc.) or do they award a single contract that encompass all platforms? What are the advantages and disadvantages for each option? 4. PEO EIS would like to better understand industry practices with respect to how vendors demonstrate innovation and use of commercial best practices when designing, developing, integrating, and supporting mobile applications. Within the realm of mobile application services, how do vendors typically demonstrate innovation and use of commercial best practices? From a process perspective? From a service perspective? From a product perspective? 5. What are the emerging technology trends anticipated in the mobile application space that should be considered? 6. What commercial best practices and trends are typically considered when developing requirements for an acquisition focused on the services in Table 1? 7. What are the unique challenges that organizations such as PEO EIS face when developing mobile applications? What are the mitigating strategies? 8. PEO EIS would like to better understand how vendors can ensure success when designing, developing, integrating, and deploying mobile device applications. In what ways do vendors measure performance and success for each of the services listed in Table 1? 9. PEO EIS anticipates that its customers will require integration of their mobile applications with "back-end" Army, DoD, civilian, and commercial systems and databases. What are the key considerations and challenges in integrating mobile applications with back-end systems? How would you propose that these challenges be overcome? How can integration be streamlined? 10. What are the anticipated challenges vendors may face when trying to meet Army and DoD security requirements? PEO EIS intends to put all vendor-developed mobile applications through a stringent Certification and Accreditation (C&A) process. What has industry's experience been in executing the documentation responsibility for C&A efforts/packages with actual review and approval residing with the Government? What are the potential challenges that vendors may face when working with PEO EIS and the Army to coordinate and execute the C&A process? How would you propose that these challenges be overcome? 11. What are the primary risks to data security at, and to/from, the device? What mitigation actions, either in the contract or in parallel, and considerations should be undertaken that will maximize PEO EIS' ability to ensure data security? 12. PEO EIS intends to manage its own application store in the near-term; however, it is also interested in understanding the best practices employed by commercial industry in developing and managing application stores. What are the commercial best practices in developing and managing application stores? 13. PEO EIS intends to host all provider-developed mobile applications in-house. What are the considerations and challenges associated with moving applications from the provider's development and testing environment to a secure PEO EIS hosting environment? How would you propose that these challenges be overcome? 14. PEO EIS intends to provide Tier 0/1 support for all provider-developed mobile applications through the Army Enterprise Service Desk (AESD) and expects providers to supply Tier 2/3 support. What role should providers play in helping maximize the performance of the AESD Tier 0/1 support? How can the interaction between the AESD and the provider be optimized? How should the provider-supplied Tier 2/3 support be integrated with the AESD Tier 0/1 support to ensure the most effective and efficient provisioning of application support? 15. What are the challenges and complexities associated with porting applications from one platform to another (e.g., Windows Mobile to iPhone; Android to Blackberry, etc)? How would you propose that these challenges be overcome? In what situations will porting applications be more difficult? Less difficult? 16. PEO EIS would like to better understand industry practices for deploying chargeback mechanisms to users of mobile device applications. How do organizations typically deploy chargeback mechanisms to users of mobile device applications? 17. PEO EIS has described its high-level vision for delivering mobile applications. Please provide your feedback on the stated vision and approach. In addition, please provide any other thoughts related to mobile application delivery that will aid PEO EIS in shaping its requirement.
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/notices/6d3e69f45ea361f97c2d2610656bc27b)
- Record
- SN02306200-W 20101007/101005234416-6d3e69f45ea361f97c2d2610656bc27b (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |