1231ME18R0017_-_Questions_9-13-18.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 18 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 1231ME18R0017
About this file
Q&A submitted on 9/7/18 in response to amendment 2 changes.
View the file
Other files
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
Sheet1
| Page # | Section # | Question | ANSWER | |
| 1 | Attachment C pg 9 | 9.1.5 Performance Work Statement | Should the PWS submitted by the offeror include relevant FAR clauses? | FAR Clauses included in the solicitation but if there are others that you believe should be included, please include in your assumptions (if you have any) or you can provide it separately |
| 2 | Attachment C pg 3 | 8. Proposal Content | "Volume 1 of the offeror’s proposal is the Technical Proposal. It includes the following sections: ... |
b. Performance Work Statement (PWS) in response to the SOO
c. CLIN 001 Task Order PWS"
| The Functional Area tasks and deliverables for the First Task Order are repeated in the Functional Area tasks and deliverables for the SOO. How does the government expect these two PWS sections to differ? | The same work can be required in the task orders because the overall scope is included in the basic. They will differ depending upon the requirements of each task order. | ||||
| 3 | N/A | N/A | What entities will be eligible to receive funding under the program? | State and local governments, territories of the US, Indian Tribes, Non-profits, for profits, corporations, LLCs | |
| 4 | Attachment C pg 13 | 10. Evaluation Factors | "Sub-factor 1 - Relevant Experience: Knowledge and understanding of government lending practices and programs designed to facilitate the deployment of broadband services to benefit rural communities." |
The SOO indicates on page 6 "In addition, the contractor will hold up to three (3)8 iterations of competitive application reviews for loan/grant combinations or grants only."
Does the government anticipate any entities applying for just loans?
| What is the anticipated value of individual grants, loans, and grant/loan combinatons per application? Are there maximum or minimum values for the applicants to be eligible? | 100% grants are capped at $25M, There is no cap on 100% loans or loan/grant combos. We are anticipating an average award of $20 million but more than likely the range will come in between $5M and $40 M. | |||
| 5 | Attachment C pg 9 | 9.1.2 Relevant Experience | "Attachment H Corporate Experience Example Matrix may be used (copy and paste) in the offeror’s proposal" | |
| Can the government please provide Attachment H? | DELETE, THIS WAS INADVERTENTLY MISSED, NO ATTACHMENT H | |||
| 6 | Attachment C pg 14-15 | Evaluation Factor 2 | Regarding Evaluation Factor 2: Technical Approach, Subfactor 1: Relevant Experience - In this Evaluation Factor the Government states - |
Corporate Experience will be evaluated based on the extent to which it demonstrates a likelihood of successful performance of the requirements identified in the SOO using the proposed Technical and Management Approaches as a prime contractor or a subcontractor on current and/or previous Government contracts of similar size, scope and complexity as the requirements identified in the SOO.
Relevant Corporate Experience of a subcontractor will be evaluated and are as important as the contributions of the Prime/Lead Contractor as it relates to the Corporate Experience factor.
Discussion of Corporate Experience in the Technical Approach section of the proposal will be evaluated in Corporate Experience.
This is in contrast to the NOTE on pg. 15 which states -
Note: Technical Approach should address HOW the offeror will perform the requirements, NOT what offeror’s experience is. Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience should be included in the Corporate Experience section. Similarly, Management Approach should address HOW the offeror is going to manage the work of this contract, NOT what the offeror’s experience has been in managing programs. Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience in managing programs of similar size, scope and complexity should be included in the Corporate Experience section.
| Please Deconflict | Revised language for clarification: Note: Technical Approach should address HOW the offeror will perform the requirements, NOT what offeror’s experience is. Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience should be included in the information in 9.2 Relevant Experience section under Corporate Experience. Similarly, Management Approach should address HOW the offeror is going to manage the work of this contract, NOT what the offeror’s experience has been in managing programs. Discussions of the offeror’s previous experience in managing programs of similar size, scope and complexity should be included in the Corporate Experience section. | |||
| 7 | Attachment C pg 9 | 9.1.3 Management Approach | "9.1.3 Management Approach Demonstrate the offeror’s organizational and management approaches, including the prime offeror’s management tools and systems, resource and schedule management approach, staffing plan/approach, and, if applicable, approach to assigning work between the prime and any subcontractors, proposed for the requirements identified in the SOO."" |
In the SOO, Functional Area 4. Management and Administration The contractor shall designate a Program Manager (PM) to coordinate the day-to-day activities and to act as the interface with the COR.
1. Ensure the availability of staff with the requisite experience, skills, and knowledge needed in accordance with submitted Staffing Plan and Labor Mix submitted in the technical proposal. Reference Table 1 below.
2. Maintain a management/Staffing plan that includes a master schedule of the required tasks and personnel to support the requirements set forth. Reference Table 1 below.
3. Ensure that the functional requirements of this SOO, at a minimum, are satisfied throughout the life of the contract.
4. Assist the agency to track metrics and conduct ongoing internal evaluation of performance in meeting program goals as it relates to proposal submissions.
5. Develop and follow the QASP as submitted and approved by the Government. Reference Table 1 below.
6. Schedule, execute, document minutes, and follow up as required for the Award kick-off meeting. Reference Table 1 below.
7. Provide status reports. The reports shall reflect the accomplishments achieved during the current reporting period and projections for the upcoming reporting period(s). Reference Table 1 below.
| How does the government expect section 9.1.3 Management Approach to differ from the response for Functional Area 4 in the Technical Approach since most of the requirements are the same? | SOO requirements are to be met in the PWS. The requirements for functional area 4 may overlap the overall requirements for management approach but continue for the life of the contract. The task orders will only apply those requirements under each functional area that are also set forth in the overall scope of work for the contract. | ||
| 8 | The Government released RFP Amendment Two on September 5, 2018 and provided a document titled “Amendment Two Attachment C BPP Proposal Processing Support Services.” Does this document replace the document titled Attachment C that was released with the original RFP? They are two different documents. Please clarify and reissue all Solicitation documents with correct naming in order that offerors may correctly understand the Government’s solicitation. | The AMENDMENT TWO - Attachment C DOES replace the Attachment C of the original solicitation notice released on 8/23/18 | |
| 9 | The document released on September 5, 2018, on page 19 of 19, states there are two attachments: Attachment A – SOO and Attachment B – Price/Cost Worksheet. These were not released with the document issued on September 5, 2018 titled Attachment C. What are the correct file and document names of the Government’s solicitation? | Neither Attachment A or B of the original Solicitation Notice changed. ONLY Attachment C was replaced with the Attachment C issued with Amendment TWO | |
| 10 | The document released on September 5, 2018, on pages 13 and 14 of 19, in Section 10 provides Evaluation Factors. Please clarify what the evaluation factors are for this solicitation since in the following pages under sections 10.1 and 10.2 the Government provides similarly named paragraphs but does not explain their relationship or what the Government’s intent is with regard to what those paragraphs are. The Government has one level of detail in one section and another level of detail in another. How are they related? What was the Government trying to state by providing a second naming convention for paragraphs with slightly different names, factor and sub-factor numbering. | ||
| 11 | Because the Government’s evaluation factors and solicitation document naming must be changed significantly in order to clearly state the Government’s requirements and how it will evaluate proposals, we request the Government extend the proposal due date by a minimum of three weeks in order for all SDVOSB offerors to have a fair opportunity to compete. | The solicitation WILL BE EXTENDED by Two days and PROPOSALS WILL BE DUE 9/25/18 at NOON EST. | |
| 12 | Under the RFP 0017 Broadband Pilot Program Proposal Processing Support Services Requirement, what is RUS’s requirement or expectation as it relates to the Contractor developing a new “Dashboard”? | Contractor will work with Agency to develop dashboards. | |
| 13 | Under the RFP 0017 Broadband Pilot Program Proposal Processing Support Services Requirement, is the Contractor expected to approve the broadband design and construction proposed by the applicant? | Contractor will make the recommendations to agency | |
| 14 | How do you envision the Contractors for each RFP working together to successfully implement the Pilot Program? | Processing contract will control review of applications with assistance from TA contractor on broadband availability findings. In addition, Contractor will assist in training of TA contractor in preparation of outreach on how to use the system. | |
| 15 | What loan and grant policies & procedures (P&P) are currently in place? What is RUS’s expectation as it relates to the Contractor enhancing or developing new underwriting and credit P&P? | Policy for this program is curently under developmnet. We anticipate contractor assistence with implementation but not with development of requirements. | |
| 16 | Please describe the type of web-based intake/review system maintained by RD and the functionality of the system. | The system for this program is currently under development. It is being built on a Salesforce platform. | |
| 17 | How does RUS anticipate RUS staff interacting with the Contractor staff? What is the expected frequency? | RUS staff will be overseeing contractor and contractor will be required to make recommendations to RUS. There wil also be interaction on providing reports and discussions about how the project is performing. | |
| 18 | Upon a recommendation of an award by the Contractor, what are the next steps? Is RUS ultimately responsible for granting the award? | Contractor recommendations goes to RUS for consideration. If RUS has concerns with recommendation, it goes back to contract for further review. If acceptable, it is pushed forward for final approval and notifying applicant of an offer. | |
| 19 | Has RUS identified the underserved broadband areas and determined those areas in most need? | RUS has determined that certain areas are ineligible. There is no way at this point to clearly identify which area is eligible. RUS has developed a process for on-site validation of an applicant's clain that a area is eligible. | |
| 20 | Will the Contractor have the discretion for the order in which areas are to be targeted for application submissions? | Contractor will have no discreation on this issue. | |
| 21 | What would define the Broadband Pilot Program as being a success? | Susscees would be defined as getting broadband service to areas that do not have service today. | |
| 22 | In addition to the mission objectives, what financial goals does RUS have for the funds to be deployed? | We expect a project to be technically and finacially sustainable for the long term. | |
| 23 | Amendment Two: it states that there are no requirements for Functional Area 1 Application Processing Development and Execution but in Attachment A – Statement of Objectives (SOO) USDA/RD/RUS Broadband Pilot Program (BPP) Proposal Processing Support Services Dated 8-17-18 it lists 6 requirements to address in the proposal. |
Question: Do the requirements for Functional Area 1 still stand or are they cancelled with no deliverables expected in this area? See citations below.
Page 6 AMENDMENT TWO – BROADBAND PILOT PROGRAM PROPOSAL PROCESSING SUPPORT SERVICES REQUIREMENT
“Functional Area 1 - Application Processing Development and Execution– Development and execution of agreed upon process and procedures necessary for processing of all loan and grant applications during the agreed upon time frames.
Deliverables under this task order:
• No specific deliverables are required under this task order under this functional area. This functional area is listed for information purposes only.”
Pages 6-7 Attachment A – Statement of Objectives (SOO) USDA/RD/RUS Broadband Pilot Program (BPP) Proposal Processing Support Services Dated 8-17-18
“Functional Area 1. Application Processing Development and Execution For the purposes of planning, the contractor shall plan on receiving loan applications on a rolling basis throughout the base period and option years.
In addition, the contractor will hold up to three (3) iterations of competitive application reviews for loan/grant combinations or grants only. The contractor should assume that application windows will run simultaneously but will close on different days. The contractor should also assume that these application windows will be in the base period.
The number of potential applications in each round is unknown, therefore, the contractor shall provide:
Three (3) rounds are currently anticipated, but may increase or decrease depending on the needs of the program.
Attachment A – Statement of Objectives (SOO) USDA/RD/RUS Broadband Pilot Program (BPP) Proposal Processing Support Services Dated 8-17-18
1. Creation of a Management Plan that addresses all aspects of this SOO, including, but not limited to: processing of loan and grant applications, subject matter experts for constructing and operating broadband systems, and providing subject matter experts for any technical review questions that arise during the process. Reference Table 1 below.
2. Scalable approach to the application review process based on knowledge of processing alternatives.
3. Support in the development of a consistent application acceptance, review, award and post award monitoring process for the multiple rounds of funding, including a standardized evaluation methodology and criteria.
4. Support all aspects of the application review process for the application submissions. Government will provide on-line review system. Reference Table 1 below.
5. Utilize existing RD systems for coordinating, tracking, and monitoring progress of the applicant submissions with the “Dashboard”.
6. Support the Environmental Compliance Specialists in the review of applications for environmental and historical compliance.”
Requirements for Functional Area 1 still stand and deleverables will come under additional task orders.
File details come from the government source that posted it.