Sol_12314426Q0118_Amd 1_Att 1_Q-A Responses.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 42 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 12314426Q0118
About this file
This file contains Questions and Answers (Q&A) responses clarifying requirements for USDA RFQ 12314426Q0118, a Total Small Business Set-Aside for Technical Advisory Support Services supporting the transition of Food for Peace to USDA. The Q&A addresses 100 vendor questions spanning the Performance Work Statement (PWS), pricing sheet, evaluation criteria, security requirements, and contract terms. Key clarifications include: (1) Place of Performance is USDA facilities in Washington, DC during regular business hours with limited telework permitted only during facility closures or contingent events; (2) Interim T2 (Public Trust/Moderate Risk) background clearances issued by USDA typically take 1-2 weeks, though no system access or work can commence until clearance is granted; (3) Vendors may propose flexible staffing models without strict adherence to the ten labor-category rows on the pricing sheet, and personnel need not be named at submission; (4) The contractor's role is exclusively advisory, producing process guides, recommendations, and assessments with no system design, development, or maintenance in scope; (5) Vendor substitutions are permitted post-award subject to T2 investigation requirements; (6) The Point of Contact may be performed remotely as a back-office function and need not be 100% dedicated; and (7) Payment will be firm-fixed-price aligned with deliverables, with a $650,000 ceiling.
The Q&A further clarifies that vendors may propose alternative sequencing for Deliverables 3-10 with rationale; no prior named personnel or USDA/Food for Peace Title II experience is mandatory at submission, though vendors with such experience will be rated higher; the Government will provide Government-furnished information upon discovery; four workstations represent available workspace, not minimum staffing requirements; ODCs are not expected; and the evaluation will use comparative best-value methodology without formal tradeoffs. Additionally, the Q&A confirms no incumbent exists, this is a one-time 12-month project (July 1, 2026–June 30, 2027), editing and Section 508 compliance work may be performed remotely, contractor-background intellectual property retains contractor ownership unless negotiated otherwise, and travel outside Washington, DC is not anticipated but would require bilateral modification if necessary. The correct NAICS code is 541611 with a $24.5 million small business size standard, and the SF1449 Box 10 designation of "UNRESTRICTED" was an error that would be corrected by amendment.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Sol_12314426Q0118_Amd_0001.pdf | ||
| C04 RFQ 12314426Q0118.pdf | ||
| C04 Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS).pdf | ||
| C04 Attachment 2 - Q and A Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A
| Questions & Answers for USDA RFQ 12314426Q0118-Technical Advisory Support Services | ||||||
| Number | Document | Section | Paragraph | Page | Question | Answer |
| 1 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 1.0 Background and Purpose / 3.0 Technical Requirements | Throughout | 3-5 | To support efficient transition, are there existing USDA or interagency planning artifacts (e.g., transition working group memoranda, identified policy/operational gaps, draft procedures, prior consultant work products from FAS or BHA) that will be made available to the awardee at kickoff? If so, will these be furnished as Government Furnished Information at award? | Any such things which are identified will be provided to the selectee either upon award or upon those things being discovered. USDA cannot conclusively state which such things may exist already. |
| 2 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 3.0 Technical Requirements | 3.0 Technical Requirements | 3 | In the Performance Work Statement on page 3, section 3.0 Technical Requirements it states “In general, the contractor shall undertake analysis, design, development, testing, integration, logistics, program management, cost, financial, or management analysis, or maintenance of systems, processes, programs, offices or products, as applicable to the Food for Peace program. The contractor shall perform analytical tasks related to design and program implementation, including personnel, hardware, software, and support facilities and/or equipment, as related to the transition of the Food for Peace program to USDA implementation.” This is followed by 7 key areas of support and associated deliverables. Is it correct to assume from this that the contracted personnel will be providing technical support tasks around the areas described above as it relates to Food For Peace programs launching or joining USDA’s portfolio over the course of the year alongside guide development, revision, and/or updates to the guides? | Yes. |
| 3 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 4.1 Deliverables | Table Headers | 5 | In the Performance Work Statement on page 5, section 4.1 Deliverables there is an asterix in the table next to “Due*” but no associated asterix referenced elsewhere with more detail. Is there anything else intended to be communicated by this asterix offerors should know? | This is an artifact of drafting and can be ignored. |
| 4 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | 4.3. Place of Performance | 6 | On pg 6, section 4.3 Place of Performance it states “All work is expected to be performed at a USDA facility in the Washington, DC area during regular business hours, due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff”. Will USDA be open to negotiating some telework arrangements for contract staff, with the understanding the majority of work will be onsite in Washington DC. | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. |
| 5 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | 4.3. Place of Performance | 6 | Can the Offeror perform editing and Section 508 compliance work remotely/offsite using approved personnel, or does USDA require all work to be performed onsite at USDA facilities in Washington, DC? | This is a "back office" function and may be performed at any location. |
| 6 | Attachment 1 - PWS | 8.0 Security Requirements | Paras. 2-3 | 6-7 | The period of performance begins 7/1/2026, but T2 (Public Trust/Moderate Risk) background investigations conducted by USDA typically take 60-120 days. (a) Will USDA accept interim T2 clearances or favorably adjudicated equivalent investigations (e.g., active DoD Tier 2 / NACI) to enable on-site work beginning 7/1/2026? (b) Is there a preference or requirement that proposed personnel hold a current Public Trust clearance at proposal submission? (c) If clearances are not in place by 7/1/2026, may interim performance be conducted remotely until clearances are issued? | Interim T2 clearances issued by USDA will be accepted. In recent experience, it takes approximately 1-2 weeks. Because USDA cannot provide any system or logical access prior to an interim clearance being granted, there is nothing to perform durng that period. The USDA Security Office will consider other investigations if recent but reserves its own judgement. |
| 7 | Attachment 3 - Pricing Sheet | Services tab | Rows 5-14 | N/A | The Pricing Sheet provides two rows for each of the five labor categories (Communications, Prepo Commodities, NOEs, Geography, General). Please clarify the intent of the two rows: (a) Senior/Mid or Lead/Support tier breakouts for the same domain; (b) two distinct named individuals per domain; or (c) vendor discretion. May vendors leave rows at zero hours where the proposed staffing model does not require a second tier? | If the vendor proposes zero hours in a particular labor category, then it should reflect that. |
| 8 | Attachment 3: Pricing Sheet | n/a | n/a | n/a | The pricing sheet has room for 10 personnel, two for each technical area of the PWS and two general. Is this the required staffing model for the effort? Or would the Government be open to an alternative staffing model with different labor categories, as long as the proposed personnel have the expertise required for all technical areas? | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals. |
| 9 | Attachment 3: Pricing Sheet | n/a | n/a | n/a | Does the Government envision the proposed team to be full-time or part-time over the 12-month POP? | This is not specified. Vendors should note the cost ceiling specified in the instructions to offerors to determine feasible LOE. |
| 10 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 11.0 Performance Requirement Measures | 1 (last box in the table) | 7 | In the Incentives/Disincentives box of the Performance Requirement Measures table, it states that a "2.5% reduction in contract value for failure to meet AQLs for 3 consecutive months." Can USDA kindly clarify the meaning of AQLs? Additionally, can USDA please confirm how it will determine whether the contractor has met or failed to meet the AQLs? | The PWS specifies the AQLs and how they will be observed. |
| 11 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 11.0 Performance Requirement Measures | 1 (last box in the table) | 7 | In the Incentives/Disincentives box of the Performance Requirement Measures table, it states that a "Subsequent incorporation of nonmaterial revisions shall not be considered a late submission." Can USDA kindly clarify the meaning of this statement? | This is intended to ensure reports can be submitted timely even if the vendor is waiting to confirm some minor detail. The minor detail can be corrected in a re-submission. |
| 12 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 4.0 Deliverable / Schedule | Table | 5 | For deliverables 3 through 10, may vendors propose alternative sequencing if the proposed order better supports transition planning? | Yes. |
| 13 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 5.0 Government Furnished | 1 | 6 | Does USDA expect the contractor to provide full-time on-site personnel for the full 12-month period, or may the contractor propose a blended staffing model with scheduled on-site presence and reach-back technical experts? | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals. |
| 14 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 5.0 Government Furnished | 1 | 6 | Should the four government-furnished workstations be interpreted as a minimum staffing expectation, or simply available workspace? | Available workspace. |
| 15 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 7.0 Contractor's Personnel | All | 6 | Can USDA clarify whether key personnel must be named at quote submission, and whether substitutions are permitted after award? | Personnel need not be named at quote submission, but this may be a good means of demonstrating staffing capacity. USDA will consider all substitutions, noting the requirement for a T2 investigation. |
| 16 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | 8.0 Security Requirements | 2 | 6 | Can USDA clarify the anticipated timing for interim T2 background clearances and whether any work may begin while clearances are pending? | Interim T2 clearances issued by USDA will be accepted. In recent experience, it takes approximately 1-2 weeks. Because USDA cannot provide any system or logical access prior to an interim clearance being granted, there is nothing to perform durng that period. The USDA Security Office will consider other investigations if recent but reserves its own judgement. |
| 17 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | All | All | All | Does USDA have incumbent, prior advisory support, or existing transition planning materials that will be made available after award? | Any such things which are identified will be provided to the selectee either upon award or upon those things being discovered. USDA cannot conclusively state which such things may exist already. |
| 18 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | All | All | All | Will USDA provide access to existing Food for Peace/USAID/BHA transition documents, operating procedures, or stakeholder lists? | Any such things which are identified will be provided to the selectee either upon award or upon those things being discovered. USDA cannot conclusively state which such things may exist already. |
| 19 | C04 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement (PWS) | All | All | All | Does USDA expect the contractor to advise on IT systems architecture, requirements definition, system integration, or only high-level programmatic infrastructure needs? | USDA expects the contractor to advise on the issues identified in the PWS. |
| 20 | C04 Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet | Labor Category | All | NA | Can the government kindly confirm whether respondents can add additional labor categories not already listed in Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet? | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals. |
| 21 | C04 Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet | Labor Category | All | NA | Can the government kindly confirm whether respondents can provide additional detail, such as senior, mid and junior levels, in Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet? | Personnel need not be named at quote submission, but this may be a good means of demonstrating staffing capacity. USDA will consider all substitutions, noting the requirement for a T2 investigation. |
| 22 | C04 Attachment 3- Pricing Sheet | ODCs | All | NA | Are ODCs expected, given that no travel outside Washington, DC is anticipated? | They are not expected. |
| 23 | C04 RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Solicitation Information / Volume 1: Technical | All | 12 | Can USDA kindly confirm if there is a page limit for the technical volume? | There is no specified page limit, but readability is of paramount importance. |
| 24 | C04 RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Solicitation Information / Volume 1: Technical Factor 1: Staffing Plan | 2 | 12 | Can USDA confirm that respondents may include proposed personnel CVs in an annex? | Personnel need not be named at quote submission, but this may be a good means of demonstrating staffing capacity. USDA will consider all substitutions, noting the requirement for a T2 investigation. |
| 25 | C04 RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Volume I: Technical / Factor 1: Staffing Plan | 1 | 12 | Is USDA seeking direct Food for Peace implementation experience, USDA/FAS experience, or both as the strongest indicator under the staffing factor? | USDA predicts the most competitive vendors to have both. They are not weighted. |
| 26 | C04 RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Volume II: Price | 1 | 13 | Given that USDA anticipates awarding a firm-fixed price contract, can USDA please explain what the anticipated payment schedule will look like? Or, should respondents propose a payment schedule in their submissions? | Payment schedule should be aligned with the deliverables. |
| 27 | C04_RFQ_12314426Q0118 | 52.252-2 Clauses Incoporated by Reference | 52.219-6 | 6 | Can the Government confirm that this is a Total Small Business Set Aside? Box 10 on the SF1449 is checked "Unrestricted". | This is a Total Small Business Set- |
Aside. The indication on the SF1449 is in error and will be corrected solicitation amendment.
| 28 | Pricing Template | Labor Categories | There are two rows for each Labor Category. Please clarify if it is expected that there will be two advisors who will be working on the various components. | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals. | ||
| 29 | Primary document | First page | Box 10 | 1 | Can you confirm this RFQ is unrestricted rather than a small business set-aside? The document later mentions small business clauses incorporated by reference. | This is a Total Small Business Set- |
Aside. The indication on the SF1449 is in error and will be corrected solicitation amendment.
| 30 | PWS | 4.3 | 1 | 6 | Would USDA consider allowing remote work for this activity? | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. |
| 31 | PWS | 3.7 USDA Staff Training and Handover | 1 | 5 | The PWS does not identify the number of staff to be trained or their functional roles. To enable accurate scoping and pricing, could USDA provide: (1) the anticipated number of staff who will require training; (2) the functional categories of those staff, such as program managers, grants officers, logistics and transportation specialists, monitoring and evaluation staff, and financial management personnel; and (3) whether the staff designated for training will be seasoned professionals with prior international food assistance experience, new hires specifically recruited for Food for Peace implementation, or a combination of both? | This information is not known at this time. |
| 32 | PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | 2 | 6 | Does USDA expect contractor personnel to maintain a full-time, five-days-per-week on-site presence for the duration of the 12-month period of performance, or is the on-site requirement limited to specific activities? |
If full-time on-site presence is expected, does this apply equally to all contractor personnel or only to the designated point of contact? The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals.
Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary.
33 PWS 4.3 Place of Performance 1 6 Much of the subject matter expertise relevant to Food for Peace Title II programming resides outside of the DC beltway. Given this geographic reality, would USDA consider a hybrid performance model in which contractor personnel perform research, analysis, writing, and deliverable development remotely, while maintaining a defined in-person presence in Washington, DC for activities requiring direct stakeholder access, coordination with USDA staff, and training?
| If so, are there specific task areas or deliverables for which in-person presence would be considered mandatory? | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. | ||||||
| 34 | PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | 1 | 6 | If a subject matter expert identified in the staffing plan performs work outside of the Washington DC office at USDA headquarters, can that work be invoiced? | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. | |
| 35 | PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | |||||
| 5.0 Government Furnished | 2 | ||||||
| 1 | 6 | Will contractor personnel be required to be physically available in the workstations at the USDA headquarters facility with coverage from 6am to 6pm ET? | It is not expected that personnel will be available at all hours of all days. Rather, personnel should adopt work schedules within those bounds. | ||||
| 36 | PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | |||||
| 5.0 Government Furnished | 2 | ||||||
| 1 | 6 | What is the minimum required number of personnel to meet the place of performance and work hour requirement? | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. The pricing sheet has ten spaces but these need not have a 1:1 correspondence with specific individuals. | ||||
| 37 | PWS | 4.3 Place of Performance | |||||
| 5.0 Government Furnished | 2 | ||||||
| 1 | 6 | USDA is currently undergoing a significant organizational restructuring. Will the Foreign Agricultural Service remain at the Washington, DC USDA Headquarters office for the duration of the period of performance? | This information is not known at this time. | ||||
| 38 | PWS | 7.0. Contractor's Personnel | 2 | 6 | "The Contractor shall provide a point of contact to facilitate Government-Contractor communications and technical directions." Does the Government expect the Point of Contact to be one of the on-site personnel (e.g., a Project Manager), or can they be a limited FTE project executive who attends monthly in-person meetings? | This is a "back office" function and may be performed at any location. | |
| 39 | PWS | General Information | 3.0 Technical Requirements | 3 | Can USDA please confirm whether participation in and/or award under this RFQ would preclude the contractor, its affiliates, or team members from competing for or participating in future Food for Peace implementation activities, technical assistance support contracts, or other related USDA Food for Peace procurements due to potential organizational conflict of interest considerations? | Generally, any vendor that participates in development of requirements for a follow on activity is excluded from being able to participate in a solicitation for that requirement. | |
| 40 | PWS | Section 11.0 Performance Requirement Measures | 2.5% reduction in contract value for failure to meet AQLs for 3 consecutive months | 7 | PWS Section 11.0 imposes a 2.5% contract-value disincentive for failure to meet AQLs for three consecutive months. Will the Government clarify (a) how the AQL is measured for episodic deliverables (Process Guides, Training and Handover) that do not occur monthly, (b) whether the 2.5% reduction applies to the total contract value, the monthly invoice value, or the deliverable-line value, and (c) whether positive incentives exist for AQL exceedance? | The PWS specifies the AQLs and how they will be observed. | |
| 41 | PWS | Section 3.0 Technical Requirements | analysis, design, development, testing, integration, logistics, program management, cost, financial, or management analysis, or maintenance of systems, processes, programs, offices or products | 3 | PWS Section 3.0 enumerates 'analysis, design, development, testing, integration, logistics... or maintenance of systems, processes, programs, offices, or products,' while Sections 3.1 through 3.5 describe advisory deliverables only. Will the Government confirm that the contractor's role is exclusively advisory (producing guides, recommendations, and assessments) and that no system design, development, integration, or operations-and-maintenance work is in scope, since such work would imply a materially different labor mix and a different NAICS classification? | Correct. | |
| 42 | PWS | Section 3.5 Cross-Cutting and Emerging Issues | Six bullets: FACG, IFRP, Food Aid Quality Review, Non-Emergency Programming, Title V Farmer-to-Farmer, IT Infrastructure | 4 | PWS Section 3.5 lists six cross-cutting topic areas (FACG, IFRP, Food Aid Quality Review, Non-Emergency Programming, Title V Farmer-to-Farmer, IT Infrastructure) but produces four deliverable guides (Items 7, 8, 9, 10). Will the Government provide a topic-to-deliverable crosswalk identifying which of the six topic areas are addressed in each guide, so vendor staffing and depth-of-coverage can be aligned to the evaluation expectation? | The vendor is expected to use expertise and judgement in determining the best organizational structure for material. | |
| 43 | PWS | Section 3.7 plus Section 11.0 | Competency score of 90%; 80% of Government employees; Random Sampling | 4, 7 | PWS Section 3.7 requires the contractor to administer a competency assessment based on Deliverables 3 through 10 with an 80%-of-employees / 90%-score threshold (Section 11.0 Performance Requirement Measures). Will the Government clarify (a) who designates the Government participant population and ensures their availability, (b) who proctors and scores the assessment, (c) the dispute and re-test process, and (d) whether the contractor is held harmless under the AQL or incentive structure if Government participation rates fall below 80% for reasons outside the contractor's control? | The vendor may propose the examination methodology. USDA does not anticipate proctoring, disputes, retests, etc. | |
| 44 | PWS | Section 3.7 USDA Staff Training and Handover, plus Section 1.0 | Final 90 days dedicated to implementation advice vs. last three months for staff training | 3, 4-5 | PWS Section 1.0 states the final 90 days will be 'dedicated to expert advice and guidance in implementing the items and protocols developed,' while Section 3.7 states the 'last three months' are dedicated to training USDA staff and administering competency assessments. Will the Government confirm whether these are concurrent activities within the same final 90-day window, and clarify the relative weight of implementation-advisory effort versus formal training delivery during that period? | These are the same task, worded in two different ways. | |
| 45 | PWS | Section 4.1 Deliverables (table) | Item 6 at 2 months precedes Item 3 at 3 months; other items non-sequential | 5 | The Deliverable Schedule in PWS Section 4.1 sequences Item 6 (Country Selection Guide) at 2 months ahead of Item 3 (Communications Strategy Guide) at 3 months, and intersperses other guides through month 11. Will the Government confirm whether these sequence dates reflect the Government's intended dependency order, and reiterate (per Factor 2) the latitude vendors have to propose a re-sequenced schedule with sequencing rationale in the technical volume? | Vendors are free to propose different sequencing or deadlines, when accompanied by a rationale for doing so. | |
| 46 | PWS | Section 5.0 Government Furnished | Shared office space with not less than four (4) workstations | 6 | PWS Section 5.0 commits to 'not less than four (4) workstations' at USDA headquarters. Will the Government confirm (a) whether the four workstations represent the maximum or minimum contractor on-site footprint, (b) whether additional contractor personnel may perform work remotely subject to T2 clearance, and (c) whether Government-furnished equipment includes USDA-issued laptops, network accounts, and USDA email, or whether contractor-furnished equipment is permitted on USDA networks? | The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. USDA commits to making four workstations available. It is possible, but not guaranteed, that additional workstations will be available. These will include USDA-issued computers, network accounts, etc. Contractor-furnished equipment is not permitted on USDA networks. |
Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary.
47 PWS Section 6.0 Travel plus Section 4.3 Place of Performance No travel outside the Washington, DC area is anticipated 6 PWS Section 6.0 states 'No travel outside the Washington, DC area is anticipated.' Will the Government confirm whether any directed travel (domestic or overseas) that arises during performance will be (a) priced into the FFP as risk-borne by the contractor, (b) reimbursed as a separate ODC line at FTR rates, or (c) handled via bilateral modification, and clarify how local DC-area transit and parking at USDA HQ are treated? Travel outside the Washington, DC area is not, at present, included in the scope. Should circumstances transpire that it becomes necessary, this would be executed through a bilateral modification to the contract.
USDA does not provide parking at USDA Headquarters. Transit benefits are subject to the normal policies and procedures of the vendor.
| 48 | PWS | Section 7.0 | The contractor shall provide a point of contact; that point of contact shall have adequate delegated authority | 6 | PWS Section 7.0 requires a contractor point of contact with delegated authority for day-to-day purposes and a designated alternate. Will the Government confirm (a) whether the point of contact is treated as a Key Person, (b) whether the point of contact must be dedicated 100% to this contract or may be matrixed across the contractor's portfolio, (c) whether U.S. citizenship is required, and (d) whether the point of contact must be physically located at the USDA headquarters workspace during regular business hours? | (a) No (b) 100% not required (c) No, but highly recommended to obtain a T2 clearance (d) This is a "back-office" function and may be conducted from any location. |
| 49 | PWS | Section 7.0 Contractor's Personnel | Individually and in combination, have the breadth and depth of knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience | 6 | The PWS Table of Contents lists Section 7.0 as 'Contractor's Key Personnel,' but the section body refers only to 'Contractor's Personnel' with no Key-Personnel designation, no minimum education or experience floors, and no resume submission instruction. Will the Government confirm (a) whether any positions are designated Key Personnel subject to substitution restrictions, (b) the minimum qualification floors (degree, years of relevant experience, certifications) for each proposed role, and (c) whether resumes are required as part of the Staffing Plan Factor 1 submission? | The discrepancy in titles is a drafting error. The PWS indicates - by virtue of excusion - that there are no minimum qualifications. Resumes are not required but may be an effective means of meeting the requirement. |
| 50 | PWS | Section 8.0 Security Requirements | Public Trust (Moderate Risk) background investigations / T2 conducted by USDA prior to beginning work | 6 | PWS Section 8.0 requires T2 Public Trust (Moderate Risk) investigations to be conducted by USDA prior to beginning work, while PWS 5.0 references 'interim T2 background investigation clearances.' With a 1 July 2026 PoP start and typical T2 adjudication timelines of 60 to 120 or more days, will the Government confirm (a) whether USDA will issue interim T2 favorable determinations to enable contractor start at PoP day 1, (b) whether the contractor can submit incumbent-cleared personnel for crediting, and (c) how the contractor is to recover labor cost for cleared personnel held in standby pending USDA-conducted adjudication? | Interim T2 clearances issued by USDA will be accepted. In recent experience, it takes approximately 1-2 weeks. Because USDA cannot provide any system or logical access prior to an interim clearance being granted, there is nothing to perform durng that period. The USDA Security Office will consider other investigations if recent but reserves its own judgement. |
| 51 | PWS | Section 9.0 Data Rights | Data collected and products delivered to USDA will be considered property of the U.S. Government | 7 | PWS Section 9.0 states delivered products are 'property of the U.S. Government' but does not invoke a specific FAR 27 data-rights regime. Will the Government confirm (a) whether the Government is asserting unlimited rights under FAR 52.227-14 in deliverables, (b) whether contractor-background intellectual property (pre-existing templates, methodologies, training frameworks) incorporated into deliverables retains contractor ownership with a Government license, and (c) whether contractor-asserted limited or restricted rights markings will be honored if identified at delivery? | The default Government position is that contractor retains ownership of contractor-background intellectual property (pre-existing templates, methodologies, training frameworks). This position may be negotiated and clarified prior to award. |
| 52 | PWS (attachment 1) | 4.3 | First | 6 | Understanding the project team's place of work performance is at the USDA DC office, can the contract include additional technical experts on a part-time, remote, or hybrid format? | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. |
| 53 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 3.0 / Section 3.5 | Technical Requirements / Cross-Cutting and Emerging Issues | 3–4 | Are there existing USDA systems, platforms, or reporting tools already identified for Food for Peace transition activities, or is the contractor expected to recommend future-state operational approaches as part of its advisory services? | Both |
| 54 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 3.6 / Section 7.0 | Coordination and Reporting / Contractor's Personnel | 5–6 | Which USDA offices, stakeholders, or program offices are expected to coordinate directly with the contractor during performance? | This information is not known at this time. |
| 55 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 3.7 | USDA Staff Training and Handover | 5 | Can USDA clarify the anticipated number of USDA staff expected to participate in the training and handover activities described in Section 3.7? | This information is not known at this time. |
| 56 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 4.3 | Place of Performance | 6 | The PWS states all work is expected to be performed at a USDA facility in the Washington, DC area. Is any portion of the work or deliverables permitted to be performed remotely, or must all contractor activities be conducted onsite? | Due to the need for access to stakeholders, systems, in-person coordination, and training of USDA staff, the expectation is that work will be performed at a USDA Facility. During facility closures or contingent events, telework may be necessary. |
| 57 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 5.0 | Government Furnished | 6 | Will USDA provide access to existing Food for Peace materials, program documentation, and relevant policy guidance to support contractor performance? | Any such things which are identified will be provided to the selectee either upon award or upon those things being discovered. USDA cannot conclusively state which such things may exist already. |
| 58 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 6.0 | Travel | 6 | The PWS states no travel outside the Washington, DC area is anticipated. If travel outside the DC area becomes necessary during performance (e.g., site visits to field offices), would such travel be pre-authorized by USDA or require a contract modification for approval and reimbursement? | Travel outside the Washington, DC area is not, at present, included in the scope. Should circumstances transpire that it becomes necessary, this would be executed through a bilateral modification to the contract. |
| 59 | PWS (Attachment 1) | Section 8.0 | Security Requirements | 6 | Will USDA sponsor T2 (Public Trust) background investigation processing for contractor staff, and what is the expected lead time for clearance? May contractor staff begin work on an interim clearance basis pending completion of the full background investigation? | Interim T2 clearances issued by USDA will be accepted. In recent experience, it takes approximately 1-2 weeks. Because USDA cannot provide any system or logical access prior to an interim clearance being granted, there is nothing to perform durng that period. The USDA Security Office will consider other investigations if recent but reserves its own judgement. |
| 60 | PWS / RFQ | Section 8.0 plus RFQ Clause 452.204-71 | PIV / LincPass language | 6, 10 | PWS Section 8.0 references Government-issued credentials and RFQ Clause 452.204-71 references the USDA LincPass PIV credential. Will the Government confirm (a) whether all on-site contractor personnel will be issued a USDA LincPass, (b) whether reciprocity exists for personnel holding active PIV or CAC credentials from another federal agency, and (c) the typical lead time from favorable T2 determination to LincPass issuance? | (a) Yes (b) No (c) In recent experience, it takes approximately 1-2 weeks to obtain an interim T2 clearance. The principal significant variable is responsiveness of the individual. |
| 61 | RFQ | Award Type | Firm-fixed price requirements contract; one (1) one-year base period | 12 | The RFQ describes the award as a 'firm-fixed price requirements contract' with no extension. Will the Government clarify whether this is (a) a firm-fixed-price completion contract for the eleven PWS deliverables, (b) an FFP-LOE level-of-effort contract priced against a named labor mix, or (c) an FFP requirements vehicle under FAR 16.503 where the Government will issue task-level calls, and confirm which FAR Part 16 contract type clause governs? | The award will result in a firm-fixed-price contract for all deliverables. |
| 62 | RFQ | Clause 52.237-3 Continuity of Services | Listed in RFQ clause list | 4 | The RFQ incorporates FAR 52.237-3 Continuity of Services. Will the Government confirm (a) whether there is an existing incumbent contractor providing equivalent advisory services to USDA in support of the Food for Peace transition, (b) the current contract number and end date if so, and (c) whether the awardee is expected to phase in concurrently with the incumbent prior to 1 July 2026 or to begin clean at PoP start? | There is no incumbent. This is a one-time project. |
| 63 | RFQ | Clauses 52.240-91, 52.240-92, 52.240-93 | RFQ clause list | 4 | The RFQ incorporates FAR 52.240-91, 52.240-92, and 52.240-93. Given that all work is performed at USDA HQ on USDA-furnished equipment per PWS 4.3 and 5.0, will the Government confirm (a) whether the 52.240-93 Basic Safeguarding obligations attach only to contractor systems that store or process covered contractor information, (b) the expected scope of any 52.240-92 Security Requirements deliverables (for example, a System Security Plan), and (c) the flow-down requirements to any subcontractors? | This clause is applicable to any system that transmits, maintains or otherwise uses government information related to this requirement. |
| 64 | RFQ | Period of acceptance | Hold the prices in its offer firm for 90 calendar days | 13 | The RFQ requires vendors to hold prices firm for 90 calendar days from 27 May 2026, while the PoP runs 1 July 2026 to 30 June 2027. Will the Government confirm whether (a) the PoP start date will slip day-for-day if award is made after 1 July 2026, (b) the 12-month duration is preserved regardless of award date, and (c) deliverable due dates anchored to 'months after award' will shift accordingly? | If POP shifts, the period of performance will remain at a 12-month duration, regardless of the start date. Vendors may, as noted in the instructions, propose alternative due dates, when accompanied by a rationale. |
| 65 | RFQ | Section L - Qualification Requirements | Qualification Requirements paragraph | 13 | The RFQ states qualification requirements 'may be obtained in Attachment 1 - PWS,' but the PWS does not contain a discrete Qualification Requirements section. Will the Government identify, by PWS section and paragraph, the specific qualification requirements (for example, Section 7.0 Contractor's Personnel, Section 8.0 T2 Public Trust eligibility) that constitute the threshold for award eligibility, and confirm whether prior USDA, FAS, or USAID Food for Peace Title II programmatic experience is a mandatory qualification or an evaluation preference? | It is the responsibility of the offeror to read and interpret the requirements specified in the PWS. Offeror's quote will assist the Government in their determination of offeror understanding of the requirement. |
| 66 | RFQ | Section L - Submission instructions | Quotes submitted electronically via email; subject line: RFQ #, Vendor Name | 13 | Quotes are submitted via email to diana.rath@usda.gov and william.walton@usda.gov with a specified subject-line format. Will the Government confirm (a) the maximum aggregate email-attachment size accepted by the USDA gateway, (b) whether multiple emails are acceptable when attachments exceed the limit (with sequencing in the subject line), (c) whether the Government will issue a confirmation of receipt, and (d) whether password-protected or encrypted attachments are accepted or rejected? | Attachment sizes for incoming emails through Outlook are not listed, however, the default is 35MB including email and attachments. The limit may be higher or lower. If necessary, multiple emails will be accepted and will be confirmed. Passwork protected/encripted attachments should be accpeted, but offeror will be notified if there are any issues with access to files. |
| 67 | RFQ | Section L - Volume I Factor 1 plus PWS 7.0 | Plan to source and retain technical personnel generally | 12 | Factor 1 requires a plan to 'source and retain technical personnel generally' for a 12-month, no-extension period of performance. Will the Government clarify (a) whether vendors must commit to specific named candidates at submission or may propose labor categories with sourcing pipelines, (b) the substitution standards that will apply between submission and award and during performance, and (c) whether incumbent capture (where applicable) is permitted and encouraged? | (a) and (b): The vendor may propose any staffing model that will accomplish the objectives stated, consistent with the directions in the instructions to offerors. (c) There is no incumbent to capture |
| 68 | RFQ | Section L - Volume I Technical | Factor 1 Staffing Plan, Factor 2 Technical Capability | 12 | Will the Government specify any page limits, font, margin, and spacing requirements, file format (PDF, Word, or both), and file-naming or file-separation conventions for the Technical Volume I (Staffing Plan plus Technical Capability) and Price Volume II? Absent such guidance, vendors will assume no page limit and PDF format and request that any post-receipt page-count reductions be applied uniformly to all received quotes. | There is no specified page limit, but readability is of paramount importance. |
| 69 | RFQ | Section L - Volume I Technical, Factor 2 | Vendor may suggest alternate due dates in Section 4.1 Deliverables, Item Nos. 3-10 | 12 | Factor 2 allows vendors to propose alternate due dates for Deliverable Items 3 through 10. Will the Government clarify whether the proposal of alternate due dates is evaluated favorably (as demonstrating sequencing rigor and transition-planning discipline), neutrally, or unfavorably; and whether retention of the as-stated dates is the Government's preference where no compelling sequencing rationale exists? | Any adjustments, if accepted, will be incorporated into the contract. |
| 70 | RFQ | Section M - Evaluation Method | Comparative evaluation methodology; formal tradeoff procedures will not be conducted | 12 | The RFQ specifies a comparative evaluation methodology with no formal tradeoff. Will the Government confirm (a) whether the technical factors (Staffing Plan, Technical Capability) are of equal importance to each other and how each ranks relative to Price, (b) whether ratings will be adjectival, narrative, or confidence-based, and (c) whether the Government reserves the right to award without discussions or intends to conduct exchanges before award? | The government will evaluation using a comparative evaluation methodology, comparing quotations against one another to determine the best value to the Government. Ratings will not be adjectival, narrative or confidence based. |
| 71 | RFQ | Section M - Volume I, Factor 1 Staffing Plan | Vendors with USDA international programs and/or Food for Peace Title II program experience will be rated higher | 12 | Section M Factor 1 states vendors with 'USDA international programs and/or the Food for Peace Title II program experience will be rated higher.' Will the Government clarify (a) whether this experience may be demonstrated by the prime, any subcontractor or teaming partner, or any named individual key person, and (b) whether prior experience supporting USAID's implementation of Food for Peace Title II (the historical implementing agency) is treated as equivalent to USDA international programs experience for evaluation purposes? | USDA predicts the most competitive vendors to have both. They are not weighted. |
| 72 | RFQ | Section M - Volume II Price | Ceiling price not to exceed $650,000.00 | 12 | The Government anticipates a ceiling price not to exceed $650,000 for the 12-month firm-fixed-price requirement. Will the Government confirm (a) whether this ceiling is fully loaded (labor, indirects, ODCs, and any local travel under PWS 6.0), (b) whether quotes exceeding the ceiling will be rejected as non-responsive or evaluated as a deficiency, and (c) whether the Government has a target or independent government cost estimate (IGCE) range it can share to inform the price-realism evaluation under FAR 12.204? | This reflects the total value of all CLINs. A higher price will not be considered. USDA recognizes this will require thoughtful planning by the contractor. |
| 73 | RFQ | SF 1449 | Box 10 | 1 | Box 10 on SF 1449 states that the NAICS code for this activity is 928120. However the SAM.gov posting indicates that is under NAICS 641611. Can USAID please clarify the applicable NAICS code for this procurement? | The correct NAICS for this procurement is 641611 as stated in the solicitation. The SF1449 will be corrected via amendment. |
| 74 | RFQ | SF1449 Block 10 NAICS field vs. clause structure / SAM | Block 10 NAICS field | 1 | The SF1449 lists NAICS 928120 (International Affairs) while the scope (professional management and advisory services for an internal USDA transition) aligns to NAICS 541611 (Administrative Management and General Management Consulting, $24.5M size standard) and the SAM.gov posting reportedly cites 541611. Will the Government confirm the controlling NAICS code and corresponding small business size standard that vendors must use for representations and for 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting compliance? | The correct NAICS for this procurement is 641611 as stated in the solicitation. The SF1449 will be corrected via amendment. |
| 75 | RFQ | SF1449 Block 10 vs. clause list / SAM record | Block 10 / clauses 52.219-6, 52.219-14 | 1, 3-4 | The SF1449 indicates UNRESTRICTED in Block 10 while the incorporated clauses (52.219-6 Total Small Business Set-Aside, 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting) and the SAM.gov posting designate this as a Total Small Business Set-Aside. Will the Government confirm by amendment that this acquisition is, in fact, a Total Small Business Set-Aside, and clarify whether any further small-business socioeconomic preference (e.g., SDVOSB rule-of-two consideration under FAR 19.1405) will be evaluated for tiebreak or best-value purposes? | This is a Total Small Business Set- |
Aside. The indication on the SF1449 is in error and will be corrected solicitation amendment. No further small-business socioeconomic preference will be evaluated for tiebreake or best-value purposes.
| 76 | RFQ | Solicitation Information | Volume 1: Technical | 12 | Can the Government clarify whether vendors are required to identify named individuals for each proposed role, or whether vendors may instead propose labor categories/roles with descriptions of the required qualifications, skills, experience, and representative personnel profiles for each role? | Personnel need not be named at quote submission, but this may be a good means of demonstrating staffing capacity. USDA will consider all substitutions, noting the requirement for a T2 investigation. |
| 77 | RFQ | Standard Form 1449 | Box 10 | 1 | On page 1 of RFQ 12314426Q0118, Box 10, the solicitation appears to identify the procurement as “UNRESTRICTED.” However, page 4 of the RFQ and the SAM.gov posting reference FAR 52.219-6 Notice of Total Small Business Set Aside. Can USDA please confirm that this RFQ is intended to be issued as an unrestricted procurement? | This is a Total Small Business Set- |
Aside. The indication on the SF1449 is in error and will be corrected solicitation amendment. No further small-business socioeconomic preference will be evaluated for tiebreake or best-value purposes.
| 78 | RFQ | Volume 1: Technical | 1. Factor 1: Staffing Plan | 12 | "The Government will consider the extent to which the vendor demonstrates experience performing work similar in scope, size, and complexity to the requirements of the solicitation." | ||
| Does this statement refer to vendor (company) experience or to the experience of the proposed staff? Should vendors include corporate past experience in Factor 1? Will corporate experience be considered in the evaluation? | For any experience cited, it should be readily apparent how it will support this activity. For example, if the vendor previously worked on a specific project, but all associated staff have departed and no records were retained, that would not be relevant. | ||||||
| 79 | RFQ | Volume 1: Technical | n/a | n/a | Would the Government allow vendors to include an Executive Summary in the Technical Volume? | Sure | |
| 80 | RFQ | Volume I: Technical Factor 1: Staffing Plan | 1 | 12 | Contractors with USDA international programs and/or Food for Peace Title II program experience will be rated higher. If a hybrid approach is allowable will this experience be rated higher than a contractor who has more in-office presence but little to no experience with these programs? | USDA predicts the most competitive vendors to have experience with both portfolios. | |
| 81 | RFQ | Volume II: Price | 2 | 13 | The contract ceiling is $650,000 for a 12-month firm-fixed price engagement. If organizational changes at USDA require the contractor to substantially alter its staffing model, place of performance, or delivery approach would USDA have additional funds available to accomodate those changes through an equitable price adjustment? Or would the contractor be expected to absorb such changes within the existing ceiling price? | This is a hypothetical future scenario that will be addressed at such time as it occurs. | |
| 82 | RFQ | Can USDA please clarify if this procurement is being released under the GSA MAS schedule? | This is not being released under the GSA MAS schedule. | ||||
| 83 | RFQ 12314426Q0118 | 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors | Questions / Offer Due Date | 14 | What is the anticipated timeline for release of Government responses to vendor questions? Would the agency consider extending the proposal submission deadline if significant new guidance or clarifications are issued in response to questions? | The government does not plan to extend the quote submission deadline. | |
| 84 | RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Solicitation Information / Evaluation Criteria | Factor 1: Staffing Plan | 12 | Should vendors include resumes or CVs for proposed team members in the Technical Volume? If yes, are there page limits or required resume formats, and do they count against any page limit if applicable? Additionally, does USDA expect vendors to identify specific Key Personnel beyond the required Point of Contact, or is a proposed staffing plan with anticipated roles sufficient? | Personnel need not be named at quote submission, but this may be a good means of demonstrating staffing capacity. USDA will consider all substitutions, noting the requirement for a T2 investigation. | |
| 85 | RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Solicitation Information / Evaluation Criteria | Factor 2: Technical Capability | 12 | The solicitation does not identify a separate Past Performance evaluation factor or volume requirement. Should vendors include relevant past performance or project references in the Technical Volume, and if so, is there a preferred format, number of references, or recency requirement? | USDA will not review materials not requested in the solicitation. | |
| 86 | RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Solicitation Information / Evaluation Criteria | Evaluation Method | 13 | Will the Government provide relative weighting or prioritization of the Technical Factors (Staffing Plan and Technical Capability) versus Price in the best-value determination? | Weighting of factors is as indicated in the instructions. If no weighting is indicated, then factors are not weighted. | |
| 87 | RFQ 12314426Q0118 | Statement of Requirement | Background | 3 | Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing similar Food for Peace transition advisory support, or is this a new requirement with no prior contract? | There is no incumbent. This is a one-time project. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .