Q A_-_PSC_IDIQ.pdf

Questions and Answers

14-233-SOL-00009

June 20, 2014

Section B

1. Question: Section B.2.1, Page 3 - Do subcontractors have to fall within the prime’s ceiling labor rates, or can the prime negotiate different rates with subcontractors?

Answer: No, please be aware that offerors are not proposing subcontractor rates.

2. Question: Section B.2.1, Page 3 - Can we negotiate fully loaded labor rates with subcontractors that have no NICRA?

Answer: Offerors are not proposing Subcontractor rates as part of establishing the IDIQ.

3. Question: Regarding the Salary Rate Limitation (p50): the RFP states that “the Contractor shall not use contract funds to pay the direct salary of an individual in excess of the Federal Executive Schedule Level in effect on the date the funding was obligated.” Given that this limitation will change over time, how should it be represented in the ceiling rates?

Answer: The Salary Rate Limitation is an annual cap not an hourly cap. The ceiling rates will not change as a result of any salary rate adjustments.

http://www.hhs.gov/asfr/ogapa/acquisition/salary-rate-limitation-qa.html

4. Question: Pg. 2 B.2 Should the Unloaded Hourly Direct Labor Rates include Fringe Benefit Cost

(which typically include, health, tax, insurance, and other compensation such as retirement and/or bonus) that are costs incurred by employers?

Answer: The unloaded rates should not be loaded with any indirect costs, including fringe.

5. Question (from Conference): Section B, B.2 (1) under the indirect costs can we use our DCAA approved provisional rates in lieu of Negotiated Indirect Rates with HHS?

Answer: Yes [Confirmed answer is correct]

6. Question: There is currently a salary cap ($181,500/yr) for HHS projects, which essentially limits payment levels for those in Labor Category I because many senior researchers have higher actual salaries. In computing the labor rate tables, we plan to use the salary cap in computing our labor tables with the understanding that if the salary cap changes in future years, then the ceiling rates are automatically adjusted accordingly. For example, if the HHS salary cap is raised by 3% in 2015, then the cap could automatically be raised in 2015 by 3% to $186,945. If the salary cap is completely eliminated, then we could use the highest actual salary as the ceiling. Is this correct? If not, please tell us how to interpret the relationship between the HHS salary cap and the maximum labor rates for this project. Since the labor rate table spans ten years, it is important to understand how these may change in the future.

Answer: The salary limitation is on annual rates, not hourly rates. See Q&A link

7. Question: Similarly, it is possible that government approved indirect cost rates may change in the future. If our indirect cost rates change, we assume we should use the more recent rate to determine maximum loaded rates in accordance with the new government approved rate. Is this correct?

Answer: We have no intention of renegotiating the loaded rates based on changes to the contractor’s indirect costs.

8. Question: To prepare the labor rate tables, we need to know the starting and ending dates for years. Can we assume October 1, 2014-September 30, 2015 for Year 1, and so on?

Answer: We cannot guarantee an award date. The best estimate we can provide for the award date is February 20, 2015.

9. Question: Section B.2 pg 2 Given the broad scope of services that may be acquired under this contract, there will be instances where high level specialists may be required that exceed the Class definitions included in the SOW. Would the government allow such special skill levels to be added as Task Order specific labor categories that are not subject to the contract ceiling rates?

Alternately, would the government consider allowing another Labor Class for specialized subject matter specialists whose skills are needed for specific TOs and whose qualifications exceed those currently available?

Answer: No, prime contractors will be held to the ceiling rates and labor classes specified in the contract.

10. Question: Page 4 (Section B.2.2 Fee) states “The Contractor shall not exceed the following ceiling rates: Fixed Fee Ceiling for Prime Contractor/Subcontractors Would the PSC remove the requirement for a ceiling fee on subcontractors at the IDIQ phase? Some subcontractors (especially small business subcontractors) do not have the ability to establish a ceiling fixed fee. For example, small businesses that use GSA rates would not be able to propose CPFF. The requirement for a ceiling fixed fee for subcontractors at the IDIQ level does not seem reasonable. Prime contractors are responsible for negotiating contract terms with subcontractors – and for determining reasonableness of cost/price. PSC does not have privity of contract with the prime contractor’s subcontractors. Therefore we request that PSC remove this requirement.

Answer: This has been removed.

11. Question: Please confirm that direct ceiling labor rates and fully loaded ceiling labor rates apply only to the prime contractor labor and not to subcontractor labor rates.

Answer: Correct.

Section C

1. Question: Does the vendor have to provide all services listed in section C4, or can they respond to the RFP based on their ability to deliver best in class capabilities within specific areas?

Answer: The offeror needs to respond to all areas of the RFP

2. Question: Pg. 6 C.3 Statement of Work states that the contractor shall furnish all of the necessary personnel, materials, services, and facilities incident to the performance of the work as stated in each individual task order that may be issued under this contract. "Please confirm whether the contractors should include facility, materials, and equipment cost in their rate scenarios or if these costs will be requested and addressed during the task order process? If our rate scenarios should include these costs, should they be applied as part of the hourly rate, or as individual cost lines in the Rate Scenario templates? Please advise.

Answer: No specific facility, material, or equipment direct costs need to be proposed as part of the pricing scenarios. However, these items may be included as indirect costs if they are normally applied under your standard accounting procedures. If they are included in your indirect costs we expect to see them as an indirect cost line in the rate scenarios.

3. Question: Section C.3 pg 6 “The Contractor shall furnish all of the necessary personnel, materials, services, and facilities…..” Can the government provide details on what type of facilities the Contractor will need to furnish and any information regarding information such as size requirement of facilities etc.?

Answer: This will be determined at the task order level.

4. Question: Section C.6 pg 10 “The Contractor shall provide all equipment necessary for performance of this contract.” Can the government provide details on what type of equipment the contractor will be required to provide in performance of the contract? Will the costs will be included in ODCs on Task Orders?

Answer: No. This will not be known until the task order level requirements are defined. Costs may potentially be included in ODCs but not necessarily in all cases.

Section L

1. Question: For the Management and Staffing Plan, the instructions say to present staff structure by class, as well as specific individuals. Should we take that to mean that we should provide a brief summary of the qualifications of each projected personnel within the body of the proposal? Should we include descriptions of personnel in all six classes, or just in Classes I and II, as has been the case in past solicitations? Of course we will provide resumes for all proposed personnel in the Appendix.

Answer: This requirement has been removed. See revised section.

2. Question: Section L.1, page 100 – General instructions. The instructions state that “Resumes are excluded from the page limitation and shall be provided as a separate attachment in the appendix.” There is no requirement for resumes specified in the solicitation.

Please clarify the requirement for resumes.

Answer: This language has changed. There are no specific requirements for resumes however resumes available may help with the evaluation of the Organizational Experience.

3. Question: Section L.2 (B) (3), page 105 – Past Performance. In the second paragraph there is a reference to “…major or significant subcontractors …” Further, the phrase “major subcontractors” is included in Section M.1 (b) – Past Performance Evaluation on page 114 and page 116.

Please provide the definition or requirements for a “major” and a “significant” subcontractor.

Answer: This reference has been removed.

4. Question: Section L.2. (A) (2) i, page 103 – Other Information, Subcontracting Plan. The section states that offerors shall include a commitment letter from the subcontractor if subcontractors are proposed. Section L.2 (B) (2), page 105 – Organizational Experience. This section states “A letter of intent should be included for all subcontractors proposed.”

Is the “letter of intent” the same as the “commitment letter”?

Answer: Yes, an Amendment will remove the term “commitment letter” and use only “letter of intent”.

5. Question: Section L.2 (B) (2), page 105 – Organizational Experience. This section states “A letter of intent should be included for all subcontractors proposed.”

Should the “letter of intent” be included in the Technical Proposal or the Business Proposal?

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2 (B) (2)

6. Question: Section L.2 (B)(1), Page 103-4 - In the draft RFP, PSC requested narrative descriptions and resumes for only Class I and Class II staff. It appears this limitation has been removed. Does the offeror need to provide resumes for all labor categories or will providing them for Class I and II suffice?

Answer: This has been removed.

7. Question: Section L.2 (B)(1), Page 104 - The draft RFP included a section Personnel Qualifications, which is no longer in the final RFP. Therefore, should we include a description of our senior personnel in the staffing section of Section 1: Management and Staffing Plan?

Answer: See revised language

8. Question: Section L.2 (A)(2) and (B)(2), Page 103 & 105 - The Organizational Experience section requires a letter of commitment for each subcontractor proposed. Would PSC prefer that these letters be included in the Technical volume or the Business volume? It is noted as a requirement in both places

9. Question: Section L.2 (B)(3), Page 105 - The RFP states that 3 performance references are required from “any major or significant subcontractors”. Please define and clarify what PSC considers a “major or significant subcontractor”. Because this is an IDIQ without any task orders, it is difficult to know in advance which subcontractors might have a major role on a task order issued in the future.

10. Question: Section L.2, Page 101 - What information do subcontractors need to provide for the

Business Proposal?

Answer: Information required in the SDB participation plan.

11. Question: Section L.2 (2)(h), Page 102 - Section L.2.2.h states that the Offeror’s proposed Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Plan must stipulate definitive commitments for the inclusion of SDB concerns expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value. As an IDIQ with an unknown total contract value, absent any task orders, it is difficult to propose targets expressed as dollars. For the purposes of the IDIQ, may we express our proposed goals, in both the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Small Disadvantaged Business Participation Plan, solely in terms of percentage?”

12. Question: Section L.2 (A)(2), Page 101 - Section L.2.A.2.i of the solicitation states that all proposed Subcontractors should provide a letter of commitment containing information on their cognizant field audit offices. Many of our small business and small disadvantaged business partners do not have a government approved accounting system nor Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA), and therefore do not have a cognizant field audit office. May these partners still participate? If so, how should this be reflected in their commitment letter?

Answer: Yes, see revised language. A NICRA is not required for subcontractors for IDIQ proposal purposes.

13. Question: The draft RFP asked offerors to name a project director. The final version doesn’t mention a PD but asks instead for an “IDIQ point of contact,” described as follows (page 105, top of page): The Offeror's proposed primary IDIQ Point of Contact shall be clearly identified. The IDIQ Point of Contact is expected to be the overall administrator of this Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract. Duties include being the primary liaison with the Government for any IDIQ questions, modifications or other issues. Should this Point of Contact be an administrative person, such as from our contracts office, rather than a senior member of the research staff?

Answer: This is at your discretion however the contracts office might be better suited to perform those duties.

14. Question: The Management & Staffing Plan section of the RFP (page 104) states, “The plan shall present staff structure by class, as well as specific individuals.” Since the personnel section has been omitted, it appears the only specific individual to be named in the proposal is the point of contact. Thus, how should offerors interpret this language?

15. Question: Because small business firms are not required to submit a subcontracting plan, are small businesses also excluded from providing a copy of our subcontractors’ current negotiated rate agreement, as requested on page 104, section L.2, B, 1? If we need to provide a copy of our subcontractors’ current negotiated rate agreement, does DHHS want this information in the Management & Staffing Plan, or should it be provided in the Business Proposal?

Answer: A NICRA is not required for subcontractors for IDIQ proposal purposes.

16. Question: On page 105 of the RFP, it is stated that three performance references for any major or significant subcontractors within the past three years shall be provided.

a. Please clarify if you are looking for up to three references per subcontractor, or three references combined for all major subcontractors.

b. On what basis should we determine which subcontractors are major or significant?

Answer: See revised language.

17. Question: On page 100 of the RFP, it is stated that resumes shall be provided as a separate attachment in the appendix. Will these resumes be evaluated, and if so, as part of which section?

Also, where do the resumes stand in level of importance for the basis for award?

Answer: This language has changed. There are no specific requirements for resumes however resumes available may help with the evaluation of the Organizational Experience. This language has changed. There are no specific requirements for resumes however resumes available may help with the evaluation of the Organizational Experience.

18. Question: We are a small minority-owned business, but not a disadvantaged business. Do we need to include the small disadvantaged business participation plan (Business Proposal, (2) Other Information, part h.)?

19. Question: On page 105, under Past Performance, it states “the offeror shall provide a maximum of 5 performance references for Prime contracts and 3 performance references for any major or significant subcontractors within the past 3 years.” Do the 3 references in the latter part of the sentence refer to those for organizations the Offeror may be proposing as a subcontractor (under the Subcontracting Plan)?

20. Question: In RFP Section L.2(A)(2)(g), the Proposal Preparation instructions read, “The Offeror shall complete Attachment J.1, SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.” Elsewhere, in Section K, article K.4(e) reads, "By submission of its offer, the offeror certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief that no Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress or an employee of a Member of Congress on his or her behalf in connection with the award of any resultant contract. If any registrants under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 have made a lobbying contact on behalf of the offeror with respect to this contract, the offeror shall complete and submit, with its offer, OMB Standard Form LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, to provide the name of the registrants. The offeror need not report regularly employed officers or employees of the offeror to whom payments of reasonable compensation were made.”

If no registrants under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 have made any lobbying contact on behalf of an offeror (or subcontractor) with respect to this contract, does the offeror (or subcontractor) still need to complete and submit the OMB Standard Form LLL with its proposal, even if there is no lobbying to disclose, or is the article K.4(e) certification itself sufficient? If the latter, the offeror recommends that the Section L.2(A)(2)(g) instructions be revised accordingly.

Answer: The certification is sufficient. The language has been changed.

21. Question: Page 104 asks that proposed staff be identified by the six labor classes. Is the contractor expected to provide named staff in all classes?

22. Question: Page 105 indicates that an individual’s work history is not relevant to an Offeror’s organizational experience prior to the time that person was employed by the Offeror. Our organization is less than 5 years old, but our team worked together at a previous organization before splitting off to form our current organization. Can our team’s prior experience be included as organizational experience?

23. Question: Page 105 says: “If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors, they should have been under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract.” Does this mean that a prime should only include experience of a subcontractor that resulted from joint work between the two firms, or can a prime list the experience of a subcontractor on non-joint work, as long as there was a prior relationship between the two firms?

24. Question: Personnel from subcontractors need to be mapped under the six Labor categories in the

Technical proposal, but what is required for subs in the Business proposal (beyond their rate agreement), since both the Loaded and Unloaded Pricing Scenarios have plugs in the subcontractor line? (I think someone may have asked this question.)

Answer: You are not required to provide cost information for subcontractors.

25. Question: In reference to Section L.2(A)h(3) and L.2.(A)i : As section L.2.(A)i requires the

Subcontracting plan to be IAW FAR 52.219-9 we assume that in the case of a conflict of L.2(A)h(3) the requirements of section L.2.(A)i shall control.

Answer: No, there would be no conflict. They are separate. Note the SDB participation plan target, as revised, of 0.5% is based on total contracting dollars while the subcontracting plan goal for SDBs of 5% is based on total subcontracting dollars.

26. Question: We second the question voiced Friday about if there are any further specific requirements for the business proposal.

Answer: All requirements are identified in the solicitation.

27. Question: Page 107 of the solicitation says “the first page of the proposal must show” and identifies some basic contact information requirements. Is this content for the cover letter, to be included as an attachment, or is this to be integrated into the proposal? And is it part of the technical proposal or the business proposal?

Answer: First page of technical proposal.

28. Question (from Conference): On the personnel issue; in the draft you had very extensive personnel requirements and in the final RFP you removed the whole personnel section. You refer to key personnel in about five places in there, there’s no requirement for key personnel. There’s an IDIQ point of contact now defined with no requirements just saying “he’s the guy” yet you have a reference at the bottom of the management staffing section that says give me a table with all six classes. It’s really unclear what you’re looking for. Are you looking for a staffing table?

Do you want 40 names? Do you just want TBDs? Wish you would clarify what you really mean because all the real specific requirements you pulled out and the whole key personnel thing, what are you looking for? You’re saying I can use key personnel here or I can do that, but you took requirement form out of the RFP.

Answer: We took out the key personnel section because we figured it is an IDIQ and we don’t have definitive work and you don’t know if this person would be great on this. Probably at the task order level but how do you decide it at an IDIQ level?

Clint: We’ll take a look at that before we issue the amendment. As Jen was mentioning, there’s no performance at the IDIQ level so it is awkward to specify someone key on the IDIQ beyond perhaps maybe a program manager or some sort of IDIQ administrator. I normally anticipate key personnel designations would be made at the task order level by the task order contracting officer.

Does that answer the question?

Follow-up: [Speaker not at microphone] Clint: Good point and I know in preparation for this there were a lot of questions regarding resumes, staffing table and as you mentioned what labor categories level. We’ll make that a high priority topic of discussion and hopefully we can do a better job at making that clear or what our expectations are and removing anything that we don’t think we truly need for evaluation purposes.

[Action taken] – See revised language

29. Question (from Conference): I have a question about Section L.2 (B)(3), it says three performance references any major or significant subcontractors. Does that mean three each? Or three total for all your subs? If you have four subs you can only give three? Or three for each sub?

Answer: Three for each sub but we are going to discuss the relationships and issue something more clear.

[Action taken/Clarification] We have changed the requirement to a maximum of eight (8) references. These can be 8 Subcontractor references, all eight for the Prime, or a combination. We don’t care as long as there is a maximum of eight references.

30. Question: Page 103. Section L.2.A.2.i of the solicitation states that all proposed Subcontractors should provide a letter of commitment containing information on their cognizant field audit offices. Many of our small business and small disadvantaged business partners do not have a government approved accounting system nor Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA), and therefore do not have a cognizant field audit office, and cannot provide cost-plus based rate information. Absent established procedures, these organizations are accustomed to billing for their services using Time and Materials rates. May these partners still participate? If so, how should this be reflected in their commitment letter?

31. Question: Page 103-4. At the bidder’s conference there did not seem to be clarity as to what PSC expects in the staffing plan and resume sections regarding our Class I through Class VI personnel.

Given that it is our Class I and Class II personnel who lead task orders or perform major roles on task orders we recommend limiting these requirements to those personnel who are key to the success of each task order.

32. Question: Page 105. Many of our proposed “significant” subcontractors are small businesses and may not have CPARs completed on their work because they served in a small business capacity on the contract. Should they still submit Past Performance Questionnaires from their prime contractor?

Answer: You can submit a questionnaire specific to the work the subcontractor performed under the contract.

33. Question: Section L.1 pg 100 Please confirm we are to submit an electronic copy of both the Technical Proposal and the Business Proposal to jennifer.eskandari@psc.hhs.gov in pdf format of each.

Answer: This language has been removed. See revised L.1

34. Question: Section L.1 pg 100 Submission instructions provide the hard copy delivery instructions please confirm this proposal can be hand delivered.

Answer: See revised L.1

35. Question: Section L.1 pg 100 This section lists the cover letter, Table of Contents, list of exhibits, and past performance to be excluded from the page count.

Q1: Would the government allow a list of acronyms be included with each volume and exclude it from the page count.

Answer: A list of acronyms can be included however it will not be excluded from the page count.

Q2: In addition to the items listed would the Government confirm that the title page and cover (for the binder) are excluded from page count.

Answer: The title page and binder cover do not count towards the page count.

36. Question: Section L.2(A)(1)a pg 101 This requirement provides instructions for the SF33, should the SF30s be placed behind the SF33s?

Answer: Yes. See amended Section L.2(A)(1) mailto:jennifer.eskandari@psc.hhs.gov

37. Question: Section L.3(c)(2) pg 107 Please confirm that the “first page” referenced in L.3(c)(2) is the cover letter and that the cover letter and it is to be placed as the first page of only the Business Proposal.

Answer: The “first page” referenced in L.3(c)(2) is the cover letter and should be part of the technical proposal.

38. Question: Section L.1(2) pg 105 Organizational experience is an Offeror's relevant organizational work history. For this procurement, the Government will credit the Offeror with organizational experience stemming from the work histories of its individual officers, employees and subcontractors given they were employed by the Offeror during the period in question. An individual's personal work history is not relevant to an Offeror's organizational experience prior to the time that person was employed by the Offeror. If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors they should have been under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract Agreement and the work referenced was performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor. A letter of intent should be included for all subcontractors proposed.

We are not an incumbent. We have generated a team of subcontractors and consultants specifically to meet all the focus areas in the SOW for this RFP. This requirement makes it impossible to show the relevant experience of each of our team members, because they were not working for us while gaining this experience. This would seem to put non-incumbents at a severe disadvantage with respect to incumbents.

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2(B)(2).

39. Question: Section L.2 (C)(2) ... If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors they should have been under a Teaming Agreement/ Subcontract Agreement and the work referenced was performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor. A letter of intent should be included for all subcontractors proposed.

Please clarify that proposed subcontractor experience in the Corporate Qualifications Section is not limited to work performed under a teaming agreement with the prime contractor.

Answer: See revised language in L.2(B)(2). Organizational experience for subcontractors is not limited to work performed under a teaming agreement with the proposed prime.

40. Question: Section L.2 (C)(3) “The offeror shall provide a maximum of five (5) performance references for Prime contracts and three (3) performance references for any major or significant subcontractors within the past 3 years. Each reference is limited to five (5) pages in length.“

Please clarify that the Government requests a maximum of three references across all major or significant subcontractors

Answer: See revised language for L.2(B)(3).

41. Question: Section L.2 (B)(1) Quick (24-hour) turnaround projects are anticipated during the performance of future task orders requirements. The management and staffing plan should address the Offeror's ability to handle these types of requests. The plan shall present staff structure by class, as well as specific individuals. Proposed staff shall be identified by the classes defined below

Since the Key Personnel requirements have been eliminated from the RFP, can we assume the Government only requires staff structure by class?

Answer: See revised language for L.2(B)(1).

42. Question: Section L.2 (A) (p 103) requires Offerors to include a commitment letter from subcontractors (Business Proposal); section L.2 (B) (p 105) requires Offerors to include a letter of intent for all subcontractors proposed (Technical Proposal). Are these two separate letters, or can they be one in the same? If different letters, what information is required in the letter of intent (Technical Proposal)?

Answer: See revised language. This is changed to use “Letter of Intent”.

43. Question: Page 111, L.6 (b) states: In order to receive credit under the source selection factor or subfactors, the offeror must provide, with its offer, targets, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value, for SDB participation in any of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Industry Subsections as determined by the Department of Commerce. If we are not submitting an actual budget at the IDIQ stage how can we determine the dollars and percentages as requested?

Answer: See revised language in Section L and M.

44. Question: Section L, L.1 General Instructions (p. 100) – Delivery instructions in the solicitation ask that “The Contractor shall submit…one (1) electronic copy on a CD/DVD” suggesting that the technical and business volumes both be contained on one CD. In the same paragraph, the solicitation asks that “The CD /DVD and the hard copies shall be labeled with the following information:…2. Technical Proposal or Business Proposal (as applicable),” suggesting two CDs (one for each volume). Please confirm if PSC would like both volumes on one CD or the individual volumes on two separate CDs.

Answer: Both the technical and business volumes should be on each of the five CD/DVDs.

45. Question: Please confirm that the Technical Proposal page limits do not apply to the past performance section of the proposal. This would mean that Section B.1. Management and Staffing Plan and B.2. Organizational Experience must confirm to the 70 page requirement, but B.3. Past Performance is separate.

Answer: As stated in Section L.1 “The cover letter, Table of Contents, list of exhibits, and past performance are not included in the page count.”

Organizational Experience

1. Question: On page 105 of the RFP, it is stated that “If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors they should have been under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract Agreement and the work referenced was performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor.” Can DHHS please confirm that subcontractors who are currently under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract Agreement with the Offeror are permitted to provide experience in the Organizational Experience section? Can the statement be re-worded to read: If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors that are currently under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract Agreement, the work referenced should have been performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor.

Answer: We have changed the Organization Experience Section.

2. Question: On page 105, section L.2, B, 2 Organizational Experience, please confirm that we are permitted to show an individual’s experience completed prior to him/her joining the Offeror or subcontractor firm, provided that they are current employees and are available to support this contract.

Answer: Yes, see new language in Section L.2(B)(2).

3. Question: Are we permitted to include subcontractors with whom we do not have a previous teaming agreement or contract, but we believe will increase our organizational strength and capacity to provide a wide range of expertise across the scope of work?

Answer: Yes, see new language in Section L.2(B)(2).

4. Question: If we are permitted to include these kinds of subcontractors, where should we include their expertise, since the personnel qualifications section has been deleted in the final solicitation, and without a previous teaming agreement, we cannot include the experience and capacity in our organizational capacity section?

Answer: This information goes in the organizational experience of your technical proposal. See new language in Section L.2(B)(2).

5. Question: Similar to #4, where should we include individual key personal Healthy Teen Network staff expertise, if not in a personnel qualifications section? Is this still under the management and staffing plan, or is it included under the organizational capacity section?

Answer: This information goes in the organizational experience of your technical proposal. See new language in Section L.2(B)(2).

6. Question (from Conference): I had a clarification. On page 105 in the Organization Experience section it says “If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors they should have been under a Teaming Agreement/Subcontract Agreement and the work referenced was performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor.” I’m not sure I understand what that means to you because we’re obviously trying to put together a team for this and how do you reference work.

Answer: We want you to have worked with the sub. If you cite experience of a subcontractor we want you to have been working with that subcontractor at that time like have a teaming agreement or somehow have that relationship as opposed to “well Sub A did this work in 2012 but we got a teaming agreement in 2013 but they did that great work back in 2012, we didn’t know them but..

Follow-up: Ok so if they were doing work on another project under a teaming agreement in one area but were doing other work in another area at the same time you could still use that other area of work? Or no?

Answer: Can you say that again?

Follow-up: It’s a little confusing. So say you have been under some sort of agreement with them for the past 5 years for a certain area and they were doing work in another area. Can you use that work they were doing in another area?

Clint: After talking with the procurement analysts that are working on this with us, I think we’re going to defer a response to that. We need to talk a bit more. We have received a lot of questions that are very specific regarding the past performance evaluations and what we will or won’t count or consider to be greater or lesser relevance exedra and I think we need to have a conversation and hopefully we can clarify all that and make it more explicit.

Jennifer: A reminder everything will be put out on FBO with clarifications.

[Clarification- This information goes in the organizational experience of your technical proposal. See new language in Section L.2(B)(2).]

7. Question (from Conference): I have a question based on a previous one about organizational experience and use of subcontractors for organizational experience. I guess the way it reads now if you’re using a subcontractors experience as part of the organizational experience section which you have to demonstrate organizational experience that covers a lot of ground and so if you are working with a subcontractor on that the work has to have been done by that subcontractor or someone who has worked for them. That part makes a lot of sense. The part which I am struggling with and I’m not sure I understand is the part that says that, that subcontract that suggests that subcontractor if they are… if they have relevant experience that you’re citing has to have, at the time of having that experience, have been under a teaming agreement or a subcontract agreement with you. I guess that means you don’t want any offerors going out and finding subcontractors that they haven’t worked with because of their organizational experience so I’m hoping that there’s some clarification around that because I’m not sure that, or around what the intent was there.

Answer: We’re going to revisit that and issue a clarification.

[Clarification - This information goes in the organizational experience of your technical proposal. See new language in Section L.2(B)(2).]

8. Question: Section M.1 (a)(2) Third sentence of this paragraph requirement: “Organizational experience should also include a list of Government agencies....that have done business with the Offeror.”

Q1: If submitting a proposal as a team, is the list to include all Government agencies where the Prime has done work or should the list of all Government agencies also include those from the subcontractors?

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2(B)(2). Subcontractors should be included.

Q2: Also should the list of government agencies include only agencies where the work performed was relevant to the PSC SOW?

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2(B)(2). Yes, the experience should be relevant.

Q3: Is this list excluded from the page count?

Answer: No.

9. Question: Please Confirm that the organizational experience for subcontractors should be included in the organizational experience section and that the evaluation factors are for the team as a whole. The previous RFP had the organizational experience for subcontractors included as an Appendix.

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2(B)(2). Organizational experience should not be included in the appendix.

10. Question: Can the government please clarify the use of subcontractor experience within the

Organizational Experience? Is subcontractor organizational experience only allowable if it was performed as a subcontractor to the Offeror/prime?

Answer: See revised language in L.2(B)(2). Organizational experience for subcontractors is not limited to work performed under a teaming agreement with the proposed prime.

11. Question: On page 105 of the SOW, under the section on Organizational Experience, it is stated that "If the Offeror uses the experience of subcontractors they should have been under a Teaming Agreement / Subcontract Agreement and the work referenced was performed by the subcontractor and/or individuals employed by the subcontractor." Does this mean that the only subcontractor work that can be included in a PSC IDIQ proposal is subcontractor work that was done while a subcontractor was under a previous or current Teaming Agreement / Subcontract Agreement with the prime for this new PSC IDIQ proposal? Or, alternatively, can we include work that a subcontractor did before it entered into a Teaming Agreement / Subcontract Agreement with the prime for the PSC IDIQ proposal? If the former, can we include work that a subcontractor did while under a Teaming Agreement / Subcontract Agreement with the prime, even though it was work that was done independently of that arrangement?

Answer: See revised language in Section L.2(B)(2).

General

1. Question: What is the anticipated start date of the contract?

Answer: Right now May 2015 however we hope to move quicker than that

2. Question: Does PSC intend to award cost reimbursable task orders to for-profit organizations under this master contract?

Answer: Possibly

3. Question: A Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan is mentioned in Section H.4 on page 24 of the RFP. Will DHHS provide a copy of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan?

Answer: No, this is in reference to individual task orders and would depend on the type of work being performed on a task order by task order basis.

4. Question: Can DHHS please provide the number of small businesses who were awarded contracts under the 2009 IDIQ contract program?

Answer: 22 SBs received IDIQ awards in 2009

5. Question: How many awardees does the Government intend to award?

Answer: We do not have a set number that we intend to award.

6. Question: Can an organization respond to the Solicitation as a prime as well as another Offeror’s subcontractor?

7. Question: While it doesn't appear to be as such, wanted to confirm if the Government intends to award on LPTA, Best Value, any other means, or simply as is outlined within Section M?

Answer: This will be awarded using the criteria provided in Section M.4. The best value approach is trade-off analysis

8. Question: To confirm, is the information with SAM sufficient evidence of an organization’s authorized signer? (p107)

Answer: Yes.

9. Question: Solicitation No. 14-233-SOL-00009 indicates that FAR 52.227-14 Rights in Data – General (Dec 2007) will be incorporated into a contract awarded pursuant to the proposal process.

However, the solicitation also notes that FAR 52.227-17 Rights in Data – Special Works (Dec 2007) may be included in individual task orders. The special data rights clause seems more applicable in situations where data is produced for the internal use of the government;

Could HHS provide guidance as to when the special works clause would be applied in task orders? How would HHS interpret a contractor’s obligations when both of these clauses are applied simultaneously? We are also interested in how the special rights clause relates to FAR 352.227-70 Publications and Publicity, which encourages a contractor to disseminate its findings.

Answer: The special works clause will only be included in the Task Order if it is necessary.

Regarding 352.227-70, the contractor is still encouraged to disseminate its findings unless the work falls under the special works clause or other restrictions specified in the tasks orders and therefore cannot be disseminated.

10. Question: Can a small business be a sub to both a Large and Small business, in effect, being part of two teams?

11. Question: Is there a difference between subcontractors and consultants? Much of the solicitation says “subcontractor,” but “consultant” is used occasionally. If there is a difference, does this change the materials we need to submit for each?

Answer: For the purposes of submitting the proposal there is no difference between subcontractors and consultants or the materials needed to be submitted.

12. Question: Do we need to provide a new teaming agreement, for this PSC IDIQ, for subcontractors, as part of this application, or will that be completed when task order bids are submitted? We understand only prime and sub relationships are appropriate here, but even so, we would develop a teaming agreement, or an MOU.

Answer: There’s no requirement to provide a copy of teaming arrangements as part of this proposal. There are requirements for letters of intent. Any contractor team arrangement as defined in FAR 9.6 is acceptable.

13. Question: Pg. 14 F.2 Place of Performance states that the place of performance of most orders will take place at the Contractor's facility or within the Washington DC metro area unless specified otherwise. Specific locations will be state in the task order." Please confirm whether the contractors should include facility cost in their rate scenarios or if facility costs will be requested and addressed during the task order process? If our rate scenarios should include facility cost, should the facility cost be applied as part of the hourly rate, or as an individual cost line in the Rate Scenario templates? Please advise.

Answer: Yes it should be included in the rate scenarios in accordance with your standard accounting procedures.

14. Question: Pg. 21 G.6 Equipment states that no equipment shall be purchased under this contract without prior written authorization from the Task Order Contracting Officer." Please confirm that this means that contractors should not include any equipment cost, including laptops, printers, and the like, as part of their rate scenarios and submitted loaded rates. If this is the contrary, we ask further guidance in how we should account for such costs.

Answer: Equipment costs should be accounted for in accordance with your standard accounting procedures. No specific equipment should be proposed for the pricing scenarios.

15. Question: Pg. 63 J.3 For the unloaded and loaded rate scenarios, do the pre-populated costs of

'Other Direct Costs', 'Subcontractor', and 'Travel' already include indirect handling cost (such as G&A) and Fee, or should we add those lines individually as incremental cost? Please advise.

Answer: No. See the pricing scenario instructions which explains that offerors need to add all indirect costs applicable.

16. Question: Pg. 63 J.3 For the unloaded and loaded rate scenarios, Please confirm that the pre-populated costs of 'Other Direct Costs', 'Subcontractor', and 'Travel' and the hours are only for example purposes and are neither ceilings or binding, but will be determined during the task order process.

Answer: The pre-populated costs are strictly for the pricing scenarios and not for task orders.

17. Question: Pg. 63 J.3 Since subcontractor costs are listed separately in the Rate Scenarios, it appears that these costs should not be considered or included when developing our rate tables in section B.2 and B.3, but will instead be billed separately and determined on a per task order basis.

Please confirm and advise if the contrary

Answer: The rate scenarios are for evaluation purposes only and do not impact your rates in Section B.

18. Question: Please provide information such as contractor names, contract numbers, contract award amounts, period of performances.

Answer: The information already distributed in Attachment J.4 is sufficient for proposal purposes

19. Question: Please advise regarding the FOIA officer contact information.

Answer:

Program Support Center (PSC) Freedom of Information Officer 7700 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 920 Bethesda, MD 20857 Phone: 301-492-4800 FOIArequest@psc.hhs.gov FOIA Officer: Carol Maloney

20. Question: Can you make sure that it says somewhere in the evaluation criteria that Offerors need to address all areas of the SOW?

Answer: Note the evaluation criteria in Section M and instructions in Section L and propose accordingly.

21. Question: On page 102 paragraph e. it states that we could submit “audited” financial statements to substantiate financial capacity. Since we are a for profit and no audit is required, is a “Compilation Report” prepared by an independent accounting firm acceptable?

22. Question (from conference): As the 70 page limit is quite long does PSC think it might be valuable to include a sample task order in the solicitation?

Answer: We discussed at great lengths how we wanted to go about doing the evaluation and I think that this is final and we’re not going to go down the sample task order route and we’re going to keep consistent with how we have it I realize it’s fairly long and in some extent that impacts us in the terms of the amount of work we have to evaluate but we might be able to provide a better answer I’m trying to recall the discussions and some of the basis for why we didn’t want to do a sample task order. Part of the concern was the broad scope of the IDIQ contract and having something that would be fully representative and that presented a challenge as well with the pricing scenarios. In creating those we took a large volume of actual task orders and the labor mix and level of effort from those and tried to average those. But I don’t think at this point we will be switching to a sample task order for evaluation purposes.

[Confirmed answer is correct] – We think the evaluation approach as it currently exists in the solicitation is the best approach to take.

23. Question (from conference): Just curious, are contractor team agreements being accepted for this proposal?

https://www.psc.gov/psc_foia/psc-freedom-of-information-act-foia-home mailto:FOIArequest@psc.hhs.gov

Answer: That is a GSA term, so no. JV we would accept and traditional prime/sub agreements.

[Clarification] – Yes, we will accept Contractor Team Arrangements consistent with FAR Part 9.6. The offeror has to be very clear on what kind of the arrangement that is being proposed.

24. Question (from conference): We currently have 23 task orders under the current IDIQs. One of the challenges we found is that the scope can change and throughout the period of performance we have to bring additional subs and your limitations for us as a prime to bring additional subs from outside the teaming partners presents a problem for us. Number two is we are one of the top 10 small businesses on CI0SP3 vehicle and what happened is we had 26 teaming partners and after the contract was awarded we received task orders and we sent the task order RFQ to the teaming partners both large and small business teaming partners don’t respond. We have all these opportunities and they don’t respond or express their interest. They don’t respond or if they do they say “oh we can’t do the work”. If that is the case will the government allow us as a Prime to go with other teaming partners

Answer: We don’t see a problem with changing team members. There’s no limit.

Anthony: The socio-economic package has to be coordinated with the contracting office and my office. We would look more to see if you changed it like if what was approved was a small business and you wanted to use a large now. You would definitely need to coordinate with contracting.

Clint: We recognize that these are very broadly scoped and as I mentioned there was a lot of subcontracting under the current contracts and we expect that to be the case moving forward.

There’s nothing that is going to prohibit you from on a particular task order proposing subs you think are necessary for performing that discreet statement of work. The IDIQ contract isn’t going to have a whole list of subs, if we do it might be for consent to contract purposes to say they have already been vetted. Other than that you’re free to propose however you need to subject of course to impacting subcontracting goals. As a matter of contract it isn’t a prohibition.

[Confirmed] – On task orders you can propose who you need to when bidding on it.