Attachment_4_-_Q_A_Amendment_2_0002.pdf

RFP No. 140D0422R0046 Attachment 1 – Questions Form

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS FORM

# RFP Section Question Response Change to

RFP?

Description of Change

Technical/ Contractual

1 Section 6 Technical, Section 6(a)- Management Approach

Does the government require resumes and Letters of Intent for all proposed staff, or just Key Personnel?

The government requires resumes and Letters of Intent for all proposed.

Yes Additional language added to Section 6 Technical, Section 6(b)-Management Approach

Technical

2 N/A Is there an incumbent contractor for this requirement, and if so, who is it? What was the value of the contract?

Yes. The incumbent is The Young Center for Immigrant Children’s Rights. The current contract value is $7,378,983.11.

No No change Contractual

3 N/A If this is a new requirement, is it a consolidation of other existing contracts?

This is not a new requirement. No No change Contractual

4 Attachment 2 – Price Proposal Sheet, Bidding Assumptions Tab and Payment Schedule Tab

According to the solicitation, page 2, the period of performance is 1 base year plus 4 option years.

The Bidding Assumptions tab and Payment Schedule tab shows a base period of 6 months, option 1 period of 3 months, and 3 additional options periods of 1-month each. Can the offeror edit the sheet or could the government review and reissue if this is an error?

This requirement is for one 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods. The Pricing Spreadsheet is updated to reflect the corrections.

Yes Changes were made to the Bidding Assumptions and Payment Schedule tabs in Attachment 2 – Pricing Spreadsheet.

Contractual

5 Attachment 1 PWS section 1 Purpose.

In the following statement please clarify what quantifies OCI in:

“Organizations providing Child Advocate services may not have a conflict of interest with ORR and/or its UAC service providers or contractors”

Participation as a named party/plaintiff in adversarial legal proceedings against ORR or UC service providers/contractors or appearing on behalf of or at the request of or otherwise providing material support to plaintiffs in adversarial proceedings against ORR or UC service providers/contractors (to include the provision of

No No Change Technical

Does an OCI disqualify an organization from submitting?

Should an organization have a contingency plan? Can any potential disqualifiers be circumnavigated?

affidavits/declarations/statements, among other types of support) would constitute a conflict of interest. Organizational conflicts of interest do not necessarily disqualify an organization from submitting a proposal/bid; however, the organization must disclose any and all conflicts of interest it is aware of during contract negotiations and present its proposed mitigation plan. ORR will take careful consideration of any information presented during contract negotiations to determine whether the mitigation techniques proposed can effectively avoid, address, and/or neutralize the OCI risk. If the contract is awarded or if no OCI is presented during contract negotiations but a new conflict or conflicts of interest arise post-award, the organization must immediately notify ORR and ensure appropriate firewalls are in place. ORR and the service provider will jointly determine the next step(s) to ensure that service delivery is unimpaired, timely, and implemented objectively and fully.

6 Solicitation letter (paragraph 1, page 5)

Would the Government waive the letters of commitment requirement?

No, the government will not waive this requirement.

No No Change Technical

7 Solicitation letter (section Subfactor 1.A, paragraph 1, page 9)

Since the PWS does not specify a requirement for accreditation transcripts, does the Offeror need to provide these documents? If so, would the Government clarify what documents an Offeror should submit to meet the “accreditation transcripts” requirement?

Offeror needs to provide accreditation transcripts from institution of last earned degree.

Yes Language added to Solicitation Letter (Factor 2, Subfactor 1.A, page 10).

Technical

8 Solicitation letter (section Factor 3, paragraphs 1 and 4, page 11)

Would the Government accept a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) in lieu of evaluations submitted in CPARS and/or

PPIRS?

Yes. A Past Performance Questionnaire will be provided as an attachment.

Yes Updates are made to the Solicitation, Volume II: Past Performance, page 7 and Factor 3, page 11.

Attachment 5 – PPQ has been added.

Technical

9 PWS Task 1.0 (paragraph 1, page 4)

Paragraph 1 states “It is estimated that child advocacy services will be requested for a minimum of 1,000 UAC during the base year and at least an increase of 2 percent will be served in each subsequent year of the contract.”

We believe that it is manageable to increase the caseload to 1,050 during the base year and an annual increase at a 3% rate. Would the Government consider increasing the case count to be served during the base year and in each subsequent year?

We expect we will be able to cover this degree of expansion in our appropriations.

No No Change Technical

10 PWS Task 1.2 (paragraph 1, page 5)

To reflect the final PWS for the current award, would the ORR/DUCO directorate change the 10-day end period for children who transition into the Unaccompanied Refugee Minors (URM) program to 30 days?

Yes, ORR/DUCO will change the 10-day end period for children who transition into the URM program to 30 days, in alignment with current requirements. Therefore, the new language in PWS Task 1.2, paragraph 1, page 5, second sentence will read: “Child Advocate services for UAC must end within 30 days of the child transitioning to the Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) program.”

Yes See PWS Task 1.2, paragraph 1, page 5, second sentence will read: “Child Advocate services for UAC must end within 30 days of the child transitioning to the

Unaccompanied Refugee Minor (URM) program.”

11 PWS Task 2.8 (paragraphs 6 and 7, page 7)

To reflect the final PWS in the current award, would the Government modify the job requirement for Regional Coordinators and Supervisory Child Advocates to permit either a J.D. or M.S.W. degree?

Yes, the government is willing to modify the job requirement for Regional Coordinators and Supervisory Child Advocates to permit either a J.D.

or M.S.W. degree.

Yes See PWS Task 2.8, paragraphs 6 and 7, Technical

12 PWS Task 2.10(4) (paragraph 1, page 9)

To reflect the final PWS in the current award, would the ORR/DUCO directorate modify the last sentence in subpart 4 to read as proposed here?

“Therefore, staff must not release files, shred files, release data, or any other information about an individual child or child’s case that arises from ORR care providers, ORR staff, and other ORR-funded service providers to anyone without the prior authorization of ORR or the child.”

Government is willing to accept language below:

“Therefore, staff must not release files, shred files, release data, or any other information about individual UAC or UAC cases that arises from ORR care providers, ORR staff, and other ORR-funded service providers to anyone without the prior authorization of ORR.”

Yes See PWS Task

2.10 (4) paragraph 1, page 9

Technical

13 PWS Task 3.2(1-4) (paragraph 1, page 9)

Our legal staff believes this information to be confidential and protected under the TVPRA. To reflect the final PWS in the current award, would the ORR/DUCO directorate remove

No, the government will not remove these requirements.

No No change Technical these requirements in its entirety (subparts 1-4) from the PWS?

14 PWS Task 3.5 (paragraph 1, page 9)

Would the Government revise the timeline to submit the monthly report on the 15th day of each month rather than the 10th?

Yes, the government will revise the timeline to submit the monthly report on the 15th day of each month.

Yes See PWS Task 3.5, paragraph 1, page 9

Technical

15 PWS Task 3.10 (paragraph 1, page 11)

To reflect the final PWS in the current award, would the ORR/DUCO directorate revise this task to read as proposed here?

“The Contractor shall respond to case inquiries and requests for case updates from ORR staff.”

No, the government wants to keep the language as is in the current PWS.

16 PWS Task 3.12 (paragraph 1, page 11)

This section currently states that “The Contractor shall submit a bi-weekly Burn Rate Report.”

Because the contract is firm fixed price, the concept of burn rates does not exist due to the straight line prorated monthly nature of invoicing. Additionally, invoicing to the Government occurs only monthly. Would the Government remove this paragraph?

This has been removed. Yes See PWS Task 3.12, paragraph 1, Contractual

17 Price Proposal Sheet (Payment Schedule Tab)

In Volume 3, Section 2 - Price Proposal Spreadsheet, Subsection f, Page 7 of the RFP, it states “f.

The Offeror shall include a payment schedule for the labor portion of the price proposal, in monthly increments.” However, the Price Proposal Sheet appears

This requirement is for a 12-month base period and four 12-month option periods. The Pricing Spreadsheet is updated to reflect the corrections.

Yes Changes were made to the Bidding Assumptions and Payment Schedule tabs in Attachment

Contractual to indicate 6 payments in the Base Year, 3 payments in Option Period 1, and single payments in the remaining Option Periods.

Would the Government clarify which statement is correct and if needed, amend the pricing template to reflect the requirements of the submission?

2 – Pricing Spreadsheet.

18 Price Proposal Sheet (Bidding Assumptions Tab)

The Bidding Assumptions tab appears to indicate that the Government expects a full-time equivalency of 2,080 hours. This does not appear to take into consideration federal holidays and PTO taken by employees. Please consider updating the FTE numbers to reflect a more practicable LOE estimate as it is not feasible to expect employees to work 2,080 hours in a year.

Would the Government amend the template as necessary?

Yes, this has been updated to 1,920 hours/year. Yes Changes were made to the Bidding Assumptions in Attachment 2 – Pricing Spreadsheet.

Contractual

19 Price Proposal Sheet (Price Proposal Tab)

The Price Proposal tab is broken out by task and appears to allow for the totaling of Labor costs.

However, it does not include any rows for ODCs in the price build.

How does the Government want us to include ODCs?

Payment schedule should only be labor costs, ODCs will be reimbursed as actuals up to the NTE ceiling.

No No Change Contractual

20 Price Proposal Sheet (Payment Schedule Tab)

The Payment Schedule tab seems to indicate that both labor and ODCs will be reimbursed under a single amount. Does this mean that the Government anticipates all ODCs to be paid as a firm fixed price without any requirement to support actuals as they are incurred?

Payment schedule should only be labor costs, ODCs will be reimbursed as actuals up to the NTE ceiling.

No No Change Contractual

21 Pricing Proposal Given that this is a nationwide contract and the disparities between rates in different localities are significant, it would provide more transparency into the buildup of total price when using labor rates that are localized based on the area where the cases occur and services are provided.

Would the Government include Labor Categories on the pricing proposal template for each region shown on page 4, Task 1.0 Services Provided by the Child Advocate Program?

No, since this requirement is FFP the Government will not include Labor Categories on the pricing template for each region.

No No change Contractual

22 Pricing Proposal Sheet and PWS

The pricing proposal does not include a transition period. Due to the complex nature of the work involved, would the Government include a 3-month transition period for transition of existing cases and knowledge transfer?

Any transition period will occur in the beginning of the base period performance.

23 Solicitation (Evaluation Factors, page 8)

In the previous open solicitation, the Technical Approach was prioritized as the number 1 evaluation factor. Given the complexity of providing this service, we believe that knowledge of ORR processes and the ability to provide the best solutions/outcomes for children is fundamental to providing Child Advocate services and successful contract performance. Would the Government consider changing the solution offered in Technical Approach as the most important factor?

Yes, the government will consider changing the solution offered in Technical Approach as the most important factor.

Yes Changes were made to the Solicitation, pages 3, 5, 8, 9 and 10

Technical

24 PWS Task 2.9 (paragraph 1, page 9)

Given that this is a nationwide contract and processing times between states vary for Child Abuse and Neglect (CAN) checks, would the Government consider allowing for the successful submission rather than completion of checks prior to the start of employment?

The government will align with our policy for direct care staff – that they can work prior to the completion of the checks but they must be supervised by someone who has all complete checks whenever they are around children.

Yes Language has been added to PWS Task 2.9, paragraph 1,