A29 15DDHQ19R00000007 Amend 0004.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

See block 16c

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

CODE6. ISSUED BY CODE7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

15DDHQ19R00000007

CODE FACILITY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, country, state and ZIP Code) (X)

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

05/01/2019

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER

NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X XThe above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning ____copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

ORDER NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return _______ copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of this amendment is to provide answers to questions received June 8, 2020, by 4pm EDT. Changes made to the RFP are indicated by a line in the left hand margin.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print) 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

Dupuis, Kevin

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED

By (Signature of Contracting Officer)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

Previous edition unusable STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016) Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

15DDHQ19R00000007/0004 Page 1 of 1

X

06/11/2020

Question No. Section Page No. Question Answer

1 F.2 36 Will the Government please specify a notional starting date (for evaluation purposes) so as to normalize direct labor estimated costs?

The Government will add a starting date when the contract has been awarded. It is anticipated an award will be made in Fiscal Year 2020 (prior to October 1, 2020).

2 Section L 116 FAR 52.215-20: Please confirm that unsanitized pricing is due at time of submission by the Prime only and a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data will be provided upon request, post Award.

The Government confirms that unsanitized pricing is due at time of submission by the Prime only and a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data will be provided upon request, post Award.

3 L.9.1, 120 Section L.9.1 (Page 120) of the RFP states “The Offeror shall submit one (1) electronic proposal Volumes I, and II, marked as such.” Can the Government confirm that the Offeror must provide one file that includes both Volumes I and

The Offeror shall submit two (2) electronice files: one (1) electronic proposal for Volume I, and one (1) electronic proposal for Volume II, marked as such. Changes have been made to the RFP.

4 L.9.1 120 Amendment 3 changes the evaluation methodology for this proposal. Please clarify if the Government intends to re-evaluate the entire proposal from bidders or focus on changes from the previous submission. The Government intends to re-evaluate the entire proposal from offerors.

5 L.9.1 120 Does the Government want bidders to provide change-marked files to indicate changes between this submission and our previous submission? If so, please provide instructions for how the Government would want sections marked/highlighted.

No, the the Government does not want offerors to provide change-marked files to indicate changes between this submission and our previous submission.

6 L.9.1, and L.10.1, 120/122 Section L.9.1 (Page 120) of the RFP states the Technical Volume page count is 40, but Section L.10.1 (Page 122) states the page count is 35. Can the Government confirm the page count for the Technical Volume is 35 pages?

Tthe Government confirm the page count for the Technical Volume is 40 pages. Changes have been made to the

RFP.

7 L.9.3 121 Can the Government confirm that the Offeror’s response to Amendment 3 will be considered a new response and not an FPR?

The Government confirms that the Offeror’s response to Amendment 3 will be considered a new response and not an

FPR.

8 L.10.1.c, 122 Are all the requirements within Section L.10.1.c (Section K, Reps & Certs, and Other Statements of Offerors) excluded from page count?

No, all the requirements within Section L.10.1.c (Section K, Reps & Certs, and Other Statements of Offerors) are included in the page count.

9 L.10.1(e) 123

Will the Government please confirm that the RFP permits the agency to credit past performance the Offeror’s related companies (e.g., parent company, other subsidiaries of that parent company) so long as the Offeror describes in its proposal the meaningful contribution that the related company will make to performance of the Delta Code Contract?

No, the Government does not confirm that the RFP permits the agency to credit past performance the Offeror’s related companies (e.g., parent company, other subsidiaries of that parent company). The GAO holds that an agency may consider past performance when the proposal demonstrates that the resources of a parent/affiliate will affect contract performance, however an agency is not required to do so.

10 L.10.1(e) 123/124

The past performance sections notes, "The Government will evaluate how the Offeror's relevant past performance and any relevant past performance for proposed subcontractor(s) relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of these contract requirements." on page 123. Further down on page 124, the RFP notes, "Offerors shall submit a list of three (3) contracts completed or ongoing during the past the past three (3) years, each supplied reference shall not exceed 5 pages in length." Will the Government please add the following bold language to, "Offerors (which may include its subcontractor(s)) shall submit a list of three (3) contracts completed or ongoing during the past the past three (3) years, each supplied reference shall not exceed 5 pages in length." to ensure consistency within section L.10(e).

The Government will not add the bold language. As stated in the RFP, the Government will supplement the information provided by the Contractor with information the Government obtains through reference checks, its own knowledge/experience, and/or from other sources. In accordance with the RFP, each submitted contract shall be representative of the Offeror’s capability (as either prime or subcontractor’) to perform the services described herein

11 L.10.2 124/125

The Government’s requirement states that bidders “must submit 5 sample resumes, with letters of commitment…”.

Given that the 5 resumes are “Sample” for non-key personnel to demonstrate our capability to deliver required personnel to meet your mission needs, please confirm that the “Letters of Commitment” are required for the “Sample” Resumes.

The Government confirms that the “Letters of Commitment” are required for the “Sample” Resumes.

12 M.3 128 Please further define the importance levels of each evaluation factor as they are aggregated to the overall confidence rating and provide a methodology for how the aggregated confidence ratings will be calculated.

Confidence ratings will not be calculated. In accordance with the RFP, offerors shall provide sufficient information for the Government to determine its level of confidence in the ability of the Offeror to perform the requirements of the RFP based on an assessment of relevant experience from the contractor. All evaluation factors have the same level of

13 M.3.3 Factor

3.0 129

Within Section M.3.3 of the RFP it states, “Offerors are notified that failure to submit a Program Management Plan which fully addresses all of the items documented under RFP Section L.9.4(b) will result in their proposal rated as deficient and elimination from further consideration.” Should the correct reference be RFP Section L.10.2(b)?

Yes, the correct reference is RFP Section L.10.2(b). Changes have been made to the RFP.

14 Section M.4 129

In reference to Section M.4 Cost Proposal Evaluation Ratings Overview, the last paragraph stated, “Cost proposals will be compared to the following items: (1) Prices previously paid by DEA for the same, or similar items; and (2) the IGCE. Cost proposals in compliance with RFP Section L.9.5 will next be evaluated for price realism. Since this procurement is being conducted as ‘full and open,’ DEA has a reasonable expectation that adequate price competition would have occurred (even if only one offer was received).” This statement refers to RFP Section L.9.5, which does not exist, did the government intend to refer to L.10.3?

Yes, the correct reference is RFP Section L.10.3. Changes have been made to the RFP.

15 Please confirm that the QA Responses dated 05/01/2019 still remain valid for this submission.

The Government confirms most of the Q&A Responses dated 05/01/2019 remain valid for this submission. The Government has attached an updated Q&A list with relevant questions pertaining to the changes made in the 6/3/2020 amendment.

1. Is there an incumbent on this contract? If so, please provide the incumbent name, current contract number, duration, historical level of effort and value of the contract?

Yes. ASRC is current incumbent. The contract was a 2 year effort and extended for 6-months.

2. Page 31, C11 – Security Requirements. For Secret security clearance. We understand

“Secret” clearance is required before contractors can start work. Will the DEA provide help with the process to get clearance for the contractors before they can start? We understand that individual security clearance is time sensitive, and wanted to know if help will be provided to make it smooth and efficient.

RFP Section H provides detailed instructions for the establishment of facility and individual clearances. The Contractor’s security officer will work closely with the DEA COR to meet all security requirements documented in RFP Section H. Contractors will need to successfully complete DoD DSS Security checks before DEA Clearance process can begin. Clearance will need to be in place before contractor could start work.

3. Page 47, Section H I General - Facility Clearance, is that required to submit a proposal? Or can that be gained after the award is granted?

No, it cannot be gained after the award is granted per DEA 2852.204-85 – “For consideration to work under the contract, the Contractor must hold a current Facility Clearance at the SECRET or INTERIM Secret level…”

4. Is the current incumbent allowed to bid for this RFP?

Yes.

5. Is this effort open to any 8(a) firm capable of doing the work?

This effort is open to any Small Business Administration (SBA) certified 8(a) firm capable of doing the work.

6. Do you have a prequalified number of vendors/service providers in your queue to whom you are making this available?

No.

7. Can you kindly state who would be the publisher of this respective software?

This is customized software to be developed and deployed within DEA.

8. Section: H.1 DEA-2852.204-85 SECURITY (October 2015):

I. GENERAL: For consideration to work under the contract, the Contractor must hold a current Facility Clearance at the SECRET or INTERIM Secret level through the U.S.

Department of Defense/Defense Security Service (“DOD”/”DSS”).

a) As per this section, the contractor should have interim or active SECRET clearance. If we have a teaming partner who holds TS facility clearance, does this satisfy or prime and subs should have this when we submit the proposal?

No, prime must have the Facility Clearance.

b) Can we submit response with our sub and if we are down selected for an award, can our sub sponsor SECRET facility clearance for us and get Interim clearance before we kick off the project?

No. Our contract is with the prime, not the sub.

c) Can our sub sponsor an interim SECRET clearance for us before we submit the proposal response?

No. Clearance must be held with the Contractor.

9. Section: “L.9.4 Program Management Proposal (Volume II)” talks about submitting below resumes.

a) Do we need to submit that many number of resumes along with the proposal or one resume for each category identified below?

The number of resumes requested is required per labor category.

When we submit these key personnel, is it required for them to have ACTIVE SECRET clearance or can the agency sponsor once an award is made and before they onboard?

Clearances can be obtain after contract award, however, personnel holding active clearances will still need to complete DEA suitability process if coming to DEA from another agency.

10. L.9.5 Cost/Price Proposal (Volume III)

a) Could you please provide a cost/price proposal excel template so that we can update it and submit?

No, a template will not be provided. Offerors are responsible for creation of all portions of their proposals.

11. Will the agency allow the prime 8(a) company to use reference of their subcontractors?

No. The contract will be with the prime 8(a) company and subcontractor references cannot be used.

12. Should we require any further clarification on the answers the agency provides to our submitted questions, will the agency allow another round of questions?

No, there will not be another round of questions.

13. Section C.5.17 indicates that the contract should be fully staffed for at least the identified key personnel within 30 days of contract award. Section C.5.18.1 states, “Onboarding of key personnel to the new contract shall be completed within the first 45 calendar days.” Please clarify the timeframe for staffing and onboarding key personnel.

C.5.17 requires the Contractor to provide contractor security packages to DEA for at least the identified key personnel within 30 days of contract award date.

C.5.18.1 is modified to refer to onboarding of any DEA incumbent contractors within 45 calendar days, with remaining personnel onboarded once their DEA Suitability status is favorably adjudicated.

14. Section L.9.1 & L.9.4: For Key Personnel resumes to be submitted by the Offeror, there are 2 positions identified for Microsoft Application Consultants. It is our understanding that Microsoft will provide generic resumes for these positions to all Offerors. Therefore, the resumes will be same or similar for all Offerors, there will be insignificant competitive advantage for any Offeror on these 2 positions. Will the Government remove these 2 positions from the required resumes for Key Personnel as it is a critical evaluation factor?

Microsoft Application Consultants will be removed from Key Personnel and Key Personnel Resumes. The RFP has been amended.

15. May Offerors use 8-point Arial Narrow font for graphics, tables, charts, and diagrams?

The Government will allow 8 point for graphics, tables, charts, and diagrams.

16. Will the Government increase the page limit for Volume 1 - Technical to 40 pages to permit additional page count for Section K, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors?

The Government will increase the page limit to 40 pages. RFP has been amended.

17. May Offerors include the acronym list as an appendix in Volume I - Technical Proposal?

Yes, the acronym list may be an appendix in Volume I – Technical Proposal.

18. May Offerors include resumes as an appendix in Volume II - Program Management Proposal?

Per L.10.2, paragraph 1 “The Program Management proposal will not exceed 35 pages exclusive of key personnel resumes.”

19. B.4 Table B-1: Are Offerors required to use these exact labor categories and hours to prepare their Cost/Price Proposals?

Yes, Offerors are required to use these exact labor categories and hours.

20. B.4 Table B-1: Two positions, Senior Oracle Web Developer and MS Access Developer, are shown as 1,440 hours (.75 FTE) in the base and option years. Is it the Government’s intention that these two positions be filled by part-time resources?

Yes, these positions would be filled by part-time resources.

21. C.2 pg 15: This is the only mention of “cloud” in the RFP. Does the current project make any use of the cloud, such as for development and non-production environments?

DEA has its own private cloud and part of the Concorde development environment resides in a tenant of that cloud.

22. C.4.1.3 & Exhibit J-E-3: Can the DEA provide statistics for the number of service desk tickets opened on a monthly or yearly basis and the number of service desk tickets now open, their classification, and severity?

Statistics for service desk tickets are approximately the following per year:

All Service Requests: 3645 All Incident Requests: 365 Open Service Requests: 173 Open Incident Requests: 9

23. C.6.1 & F.5: Both tables, which are identical, omit the Due Date for “Update completed

Sprint plan”. Can the Government provide the information that goes in this block?

It is due by the 15th of the month after the actual deployment of a user story. The Government will include the information in the RFP.

24. H.8: The RFP says, “This CLIN has been designated for individuals from Microsoft’s MACH program or have similar experience.” We assume that the Government expects the Offeror and not Microsoft to fill these positions. Is this assumption correct?

Yes, that assumption is correct. We would expect the Offerror to make arrangements with Microsoft to provide the qualified personnel or someone with the same level of experience as a graduate of the MACH program.

25. H.8: Because the Offeror’s proposed key personnel may be widely scattered geographically, will the Government accept scanned signatures rather than original ink signatures? We can attest to these signatures or provide a second, executive signature if desired.

Yes, the Government will accept scanned signatures.

26. K (b)(2)(d): Can the Government confirm that if the Offeror is registered in the System for

Award Management (SAM), may we only provide the information required by paragraph (b)(2) and paragraph (d)?

The Government confirms instruction in K.1 52.204-8 b(2).

27. L.9.1 & L.9.3: Does Letters of Commitment refer to the “Letters of Commitment documenting any subcontractor relationships” cited in paragraph (c) on page 122?

Yes, Letters of Commitment refer to the Letters of Commitment documenting any subcontractor relationships.

28. L.9.1: This section specifies that Illustrations are excluded from the page limit. Do illustrations include both graphics and tables?

Yes, illustrations include both graphics and tables.

29. L.9.1 This section specifies that Illustrations are excluded from the page limit. This presents problems with the formatting and flow of the proposal. Does the Government have a preference for where illustrations should be placed (e.g., on unnumbered pages within the body of the proposal, in a separate appendix)?

The Government does not have a preference for where illustrations should be placed. Offerors are responsible for the composition of their proposals.

30. L.9.1 This section specifies that Illustrations are excluded from the page limit. This presents problems with the formatting and flow of the proposal. Would the Government consider extending the page limits to 45 pages for Volumes I and II, inclusive of all illustrations?

Volume I page limit has been raised to 40 pages. RFP Section L already excludes illustrations from countable pages. RFP has been amended.

31. L.9.1 We assume no Confidentiality Agreements are required as part of the proposal submission. Is this assumption correct?

Correct, Confidentiality Agreements are not required.

32. L.9.1 For illustrations, may Offerors use fonts smaller than 10 point and other than Times New Roman, provided that graphics are readable?

33. L.10 For Cost/Price, the table indicates that each subcontractor should submit 2 hard copies and 2 CDROMs. Neither Section L or Section M provide any instructions regarding subcontractor pricing submissions. Are subcontractors required to submit Volume III, and if so, what information should each subcontractor provide?

The subcontractor shall follow the instructions in Section L and Section M.

34. L.9.3 (a) – (e); L.9.4 (a) – (b): The instructions for the Technical Proposal (Volume I) and Program Management Proposal (Volume II) do not ask Offerors to address the PWS, specifically Section C.5 TASKS. Where should Offerors provide their approach to execute the PWS tasks?

Offerors should refer to instructions in Section L and Section M for all proposal submissions.

35. L.9.3 The Executive Summary requests a great deal of detailed information. Will the Government extend the Executive Summary page limit to 15?

The Government will extend the Executive Summary page limit to 10. RFP has been amended.

36. Do the other RFP sections requiring “fill-in” completion by the Offeror include the Standard Form 33 on page 7?

37. L.9.3 (c) Offerors have no control over how many amendments may be released that must be included in this section. Will the Government exclude all items in paragraph (c) from the page count?

No, the Government will not exclude all items in paragraph (c) from the page count. Offerors have not yet submitted proposals and will not submit their proposals until the amended proposal is released. The Government does not anticipate further amendments at this time.

38. L.9.3 (e); M.3.1: The first sentence of paragraph (e) states, “The Government will evaluate how the Offeror’s relevant past performance and any relevant past performance for proposed subcontractor(s) relates to the probability of successful accomplishment of these contract requirements.” However, the remainder of paragraph (e) only refers to the Offeror’s performance as does Section M.3.1. Can the three past performances include past performance performed by partner companies? If yes, will this past performance be weighted the same as the prime contractor’s own past performance?

Only the past performance of the prime contractor will be evaluated.

39. M.2.1 Table M-1: A strength is awarded for “A proposal area that…contributes toward exceeding the contract requirements in a manner that provides additional value to the government…” However, the instructions in Sections L.9.3 and L.9.4 do not ask offerors to respond to the PWS requirements. How will the Government evaluators determine how to award strengths for exceeding contract requirements to Offerors?

Offerors should refer to instructions in Section L and Section M for all proposal submissions.

40. Part IV, Section K, K.1 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (OCT 2018)(a)(1): FBO states the NAICS code is 541519 but page 100 of the RFP states a NAICS code of 541511. Can the Government please clarify?

The applicable NAICS code is 541511. RFP has been amended.

41. L.9.1 (1) and L.9.3 (c): Will the Government please confirm that Section K Representations/Certifications and Amendments are excluded from the page limits, per the list in paragraph (1) Page Limitation p. 119, “exclude the following”?

42. Section I Contract Clauses FAR 52.230-2 Cost Accounting Standards: Recommend that the

Government remove this Clause as it is not applicable to Contracts with Small Businesses.

The Government will remove. RFP has been amended.

43. K.7: FAR 52.230-1 Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification (Oct 2015):

Recommend the Government remove this provision as it is not applicable to Small Businesses.

Government has stated in the RFP that this does not apply to small businesses or foreign governments.

44. Section I Contract Clauses: FAR 52.219-9: Small Business Subcontracting Plan (AUG 2018):

Request the Government remove this clause as it is not applicable to Small Business Concerns.

The Government will remove. RFP has been amended.

45. L.9.4.a: The RFP L.9.4.a requires 2 resumes for Microsoft Application Consultants. However, Microsoft's corporate policy restricts the use of actual resumes. Microsoft will only supply representative resumes, and this applies to all offerors for the RFP. Will the Government consider making Microsoft a Directed Subcontractor, as per FAR subpart 225.871-5 for all offerors? If so, would the Government consider removing the two Microsoft Consultant resumes from RFP L.9.4? Alternatively, will the Government accept Microsoft-provided anonymous resumes without signatures to fulfill of this requirement? The Government’s evaluation will not benefit from anonymous resumes. Either option would have equal impact on all offerors who submit resumes.

Microsoft Application Consultants will be removed from Key Personnel and Key Personnel Resumes. The RFP has been amended.

46. Section L.9.3 (d) Technical Proposal (Volume I): (d) Compliance with Small Business Teaming/Subcontracting Information as Appropriate: As this procurement was issued as an 8(a) set aside, is this requirement not applicable?

The requirement is applicable.

47. L.9.1 (1) Page Limitation: Will the Government allow Arial 9pt font for tables and graphics/illustrations? Font allowances for tables and graphics is not specifically defined in the RFP.

48. H.8 (a) (2) Key Personnel: Starting with the second paragraph, "The following individuals are hereby designated as Key Personnel”, will the Government please confirm that the Quantity of Hours in the H.8 (a) table are the total number of hours/FTE’s for the IDIQ? (e.g., Software Consultant shows 19,200 hours or 10 FTE’s whereby only five (5) FTE would be named Key Personnel per L.9.1 (1) (Page Limitation).

Correct.

49. C.11 Once the contract is awarded, will Key Personnel and Non-Key Personnel be required to achieve a secret clearance?

Yes, except for the MS Access developer.

50. H.1 Page 47 states “Only United States citizens, by birth or naturalized, shall be permitted to perform services for DEA under this contract.” does this mean that U.S. citizens without a secret clearance are acceptable for the purposes of submission.

51. H.8: Section H.8 on page 64 lists the following as a requirement for the Software consultant and Senior Software Developer, "Experience in at least one software development environment with a minimum of 1,000 automated unit tests." Would the government accept this as an alternative wording to qualify on the resumes - "Experience in at least one software development project with a continuous integration environment?”

No, an environment with a minimum of 1000 automated tests provides a more detailed description of level of integration with a large number of automated tests.

52. H.8: The RFP states, ‘This CLIN has been designated for individuals from Microsoft’s MACH program or have similar experience.’ What are examples of similar experience to the Microsoft MACH program?

This is incumbent upon the vendor to discuss with Microsoft.

53. L.2 52.204-6 UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFITY (OCT 2016): The RFP states, “(b) The Offeror shall enter, in the block with its name and address on the cover page of its offer, the annotation “Unique Entity Identifier” followed by the unique entity identifier that identifies the Offeror’s name and address exactly as stated in the offer.” Referencing “in the block”; will the Government please confirm if it requires a SF30 to be submitted with an offer?

Yes, the Government confirms it requires an SF30 to be submitted.

54. L.2 52.204-6 UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFITY (OCT 2016): The RFP states, “The Offeror also shall enter its EFT indicator, if applicable.” Can the Government please that confirm offerors who are registered in SAM and have a Unique Entity Identifier do not need to provide its EFT information?

Yes, the Government confirms that offerors who are registers in SAM and have a Unique Entity Identifier do not need to provide its EFT information.

55. L.9.1.(1): Is the Master Table of Contents included as outside of page count?

56. L.9.3(d) Please confirm that a Subcontracting Plan is not required as this RFP is an 8(a) set aside.

The Government confirms that a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not required, however, a Subcontracting Plan is required.

57. L.9.3(3): The RFP states, “The Government considers an Offeror’s past performance as prime contractor as more relevant to the probability of successful accomplishment of these contract requirements than an Offeror’s past performance as a subcontractor.” Will the government please confirm that the Offeror is defined as a Prime AND any significant Subcontractors?

Offeror is defined as the prime contractor and their past performance as a prime contractor is more relevant when evaluating past performance.

58. L.9.3(e): Will the Government please confirm that only one government point of contact is required for each past performance reference?

Only one government point of contact is required provided that individual is readily available. If the Government is unable to contact the provided government point of contact, it could affect evaluation scoring.

DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION

DELTA CODE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT

RFP No. 15DDHQ19R00000007

RFP 15DDHQ19R00000007

Table of Contents

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

B.1 GENERAL

B.2 MAXIMUM CONTRACT CEILING AND MINIMUM CONTRACT GUARANTEE

B.3 TRAVEL PRICING

B.4 CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/STATEMENT OF WORK

C.1 INTRODUCTION

C.2 BACKGROUND

C.3 OBJECTIVE

C.4 SCOPE OF WORK

C.4.1 New Applications and O&M Development Support

C.4.1.2 New Applications

C.4.1.3 Transition/O&M Development Support

C.4.1.1 Areas of Application Support

C.4.2 Mobile Application Development (future)

C.5 TASKS

C.5.1 Requirements Gathering

C.5.2 Application Mock-up

C.5.3 Participate in Daily Agile Stand-Up Meeting and Scrum of Scrums Meeting

C.5.4 Attend Monthly Planning Sessions

C.5.5 Attend Monthly mid-Sprint Reviews

C.5.6 Attend Monthly Retrospective Sessions

C.5.7 Champion Meetings

C.5.8 Use of Team Foundation Server (TFS)

C.5.9 Testing

C.5.10 Delivery of Incremental Software Beta Release

C.5.11 Delivery of Incremental Software Production Release

C.5.12 Provision of Training/Demonstrations

C.5.13 Data migration

C.5.14 Script Development

C.5.15 Documentation Support

C.5.16 Configuration Management

C.5.17 Program Management

C.5.18 Contract Transition

C.5.18.1 Transition Phase-In

C.5.18.2 Transition Phase-Out

C.5.19 Government Furnished Equipment (GFE and Government Furnished Information (GFI)

C.6 DELIVERABLES - Format/Content

C.6.1. Deliverables Table

C.7 SECTION 508 COMPLIANCE

C.8 TRAINING

C.9 DEA-2852.211-70 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE (BASE AND OPTIONS) (March 2019)

C.10 PLACES AND TIMES OF PERFORMANCE

C.10.1 Places of Performance

C.10.2 Times of Performance

C.10.3 TELEWORK AND EMERGENCY SUPPORT FOR CONTRACTORS

C.11 Security Requirements

SECTION D – PACKAGING AND MARKING

D.1 PREPARATION FOR DELIVERY

D.1.1 Acceptance by Common Carrier

D.1.2 Excluded Packing Products

D.2 PACKING LIST

D.2.1 Marking of Shipments (Commercially Packaged)

D.3 PRESERVATION, PACKING AND PACKAGING

D.4 MARKINGS OF WARRANTED ITEMS

D.5 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

SECTION E – INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

E.1 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

E.1 1 Clauses Incorporated by Reference Table

E.2 CONTRACTING OFFICER REPRESENTATIVE

E.3 INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

Criteria E.3.1 General Acceptance

SECTION F – DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F.1 FAR 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

F.2 IDIQ MASTER CONTRACT ORDERING PERIOD

F.3 TASK ORDER PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

F.4 PLACE OF PERFORMANCE

F.5 DELIVERABLES

SECTION G – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA

G.1 GENERAL

G.2 AUTHORIZED USERS

G.3 TASK ORDER ORDERING CONTRACTING OFFICER

G.4 DEA-2852.242-71 INVOICE REQUIREMENTS (MAY 2012)

G.5 DEA-2852.242-70 CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT (JUL 2014)

G.6 DEA-2852.242-73 CONTRACTING OFFICER’S REPRESENTATIVE (MAY 2012)

G.7 DEA-2852.242-74 CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION POINTS OF CONTACT (MAY 2012)

G.8 DEA-2852.211-71 SCHEDULED AND UNSCHEDULED CLOSURES OF GOVERNMENT OFFICES

(NOV 2012)

G.9 DEA-2852.242-72 FINAL INVOICE AND RELEASE OF RESIDUAL FUNDS (MAY 2012)

SECTION H – SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

H.1 DEA-2852.204-85 SECURITY (October 2015)

I. GENERAL

II. CONTRACTOR’S POINT OF CONTACT

III. CONTRACTOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES

B. CONTRACTOR’S SECURITY OFFICER:

IV. DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS1

A. MANDATORY DOCUMENTS:

V. DISQUALIFYING FACTORS

A. CRIMINAL RECORD:

B. ILLEGAL DRUG USE:

C. FALSE STATEMENTS:

D. DEBT-RELATED ISSUES:

E. ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES:

F. PERSONAL CONDUCT:

H.2 TRAVEL COSTS

H.3. DEA-2852.209-70 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (MAY 2012)

H.4 LIMITATIONS ON FUTURE CONTRACTING

H.5 FORMER EMPLOYMENT OR ASSIGNMENT WITH THE DEA

H.6. DEA-2852.204-78 CONTRACTOR PERSONNEL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (JAN 2016)

H.7 DEA-2852.242-78 APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR ADVERTISING AND MEDIA RELEASES (MAY

2012)

H.8 DEA-2852.242-76 KEY PERSONNEL (JAN 2014)

H.9 DEA-2852.245-70 GOVERNMENT-FURNISHED RESOURCES (MAY 2012)

H.10 INCORPORATION OF CONTRACTOR’S PROPOSAL

H.11 DEA-2852.239-70 SECURITY OF SYSTEMS AND DATA, INCLUDING PERSONALLY

IDENTIFIABLE DATA (AUGUST 2012)

H.12 DEA-2852.237-70 Preventing Personal Services Contracts and Performance of Inherently Government Functions (JUN 2018)

H.13 Organizational Conflicts of Interest

SECTION I – CONTRACT CLAUSES

I.1 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

I.2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

SECTION J – LIST of EXHIBITS and OTHER ATTACHEMENTS

EXHIBIT J-E-1

EXHIBIT J-E-2

EXHIBIT J-E-3

SECTION K – REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, and OTHER STATEMENTS of

OFFERORS

K.1 52.204-8 ANNUAL REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS (OCT 2018)

K.2 FAR 52.204-19 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE OF REPRESENTATIONS AND

CERTIFICATIONS (DEC 2014)

(End of Provision)

K.3 FAR 52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (JUL 2013)

K.4 52.209-5 CERTIFICATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (OCT 2015)

K.5 FAR 52.209-11 Representation by Corporations Regarding Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction under any Federal Law

K.6 FAR 52.209-12 Certification Regarding Tax Matters

K.7 FAR 52.230-1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION (Oct 2015)

K.8 FAR 52.230-7 PROPOSAL DISCLOSURE—COST A CCOUNTING PRACTICE CHANGES (APR

2005)

SECTION L: INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICE TO OFFERORS

L.1 52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

L.2 52.204-6 UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFITY (OCT 2016)

L.3 52.233-2 SERVICE of PROTEST (SEPT 2006)

L.4 JAR 2852.233-70 PROTESTS FILED DIRECTLY WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (JAN

1998)

L.5 COMMITMENT OF GOVERNMENT TO AWARD A CONTRACT AND EXPENDITURE OF

FUNDS

L.6 ALTERNATE PROPOSAL INFORMATION

L.7 OFFEROR ACCEPTANCE PERIOD

L.8 COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE

L.9 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

L.9.1 General Instructions

L.9.2 Proposal Due Date

L.9.3 Final Proposal Revisions

L.9.4 DISPOSITION OF PROPOSALS

L.10 PROPOSAL VOLUMES

L.10.2 Program Management Proposal (Volume II)

L.10.3 Cost/Price Proposal (Volume III)

SECTION M: EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998)

M.2 EVALUATION GENERAL

M.2.1 Overall Evaluation Approach

M.2.2 Evaluation Factors Order of Importance

M.3 Evaluation Factors (Non-Cost)

M.3.1 Factor 1.0 – Past Performance

M.3.2 Factor 2.0 – Key Personnel Resumes

M.3.3 Factor 3.0 – Program Management Plan

M.4 Cost Proposal Evaluation Ratings Overview

M.4.1 Cost Proposal Evaluation Process

M.5 BASIS FOR AWARD

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS

B.1 GENERAL

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Delta Code Software Development (DCSD) Contract is an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to provide the software engineering support required to: continue to develop and deliver quality software applications in the Concorde framework, and provide operations and maintenance support to existing Concorde and non-Concorde applications. Services/supplies will be provided on the basis of direct labor hours at specified fixed hourly rates that include wages, overhead, profit, and materials (at cost).

Various Program Areas within DEA will be able to order from this contract.

A Task Order under this IDIQ contract is defined as “an order for services placed against an established contract or with Government sources,” FAR 2.101. Task Orders are issued by the aforementioned DEA Program Areas against this contract.

The Contractor shall provide all management, supervision, and labor, necessary to perform on a Task Order basis.

Hereafter, the DCSD Contract is also referred to as the “IDIQ Master Contract” while Task Orders issued under the IDIQ Master Contract will be referred to as either “Task Order(s),” “TO(s),” or “Order(s).”

B.2 MAXIMUM CONTRACT CEILING AND MINIMUM CONTRACT GUARANTEE

(a) Maximum. The maximum contract ceiling value of the contract in this single award procurement is established at $87 million dollars.

(b) Minimum. The minimum guaranteed award amount for this Contract is $10,000. The exercise of the option period does not re-establish the contract minimum.

Should the contract expire or be unilaterally terminated for convenience by the Government without the contractor receiving the minimum guaranteed award amount, the contractor may present a claim to the contracting officer for an amount not to exceed the minimum guaranteed award amount. The minimum guaranteed award amount is not applicable if the contract is terminated for default or is bilaterally cancelled by the parties.

The contractor has one year after contract termination or expiration to submit their claim to the contracting officer or waives entitlement.

(c) The Government has no obligation to issue Task Orders (TO) to the Contractor beyond the amount specified in paragraph (b) of this clause.

(d) There is no maximum dollar ceiling for an individual Task Order

B.3 TRAVEL PRICING

Contractor personnel may be required to travel to support the requirements of this Contract and will be stated in individual TOs. Travel may be required for all 50 States, and U.S Territories. For those TOs requiring travel, the Contractor shall include estimated travel pricing requirements in their proposal as required by the CO.

If authorized in the Task Order, travel will be reimbursed at actual cost in accordance with the limitations set forth in DEA Travel Clause 2852.231-70 and FAR Subpart 31.205-46, Travel Costs. Profit shall not be applied to travel costs. To the extent authorized by the Task Order, Contractors may apply indirect costs to travel in accordance with the Contractor’s usual accounting practices consistent with FAR 31.2.

The CO will identify a not-to-exceed travel ceiling under a separate CLIN on the Task Order.

B.4 CONSIDERATION AND PAYMENT

The following represents the price schedules for this contract. One Full Time Employee equals 1,920 annual hours.

Table B.1 – Base Period: Effective Date of Contract Award through 12 Months Thereafter

CLIN # Labor Hour Category Quantity of Hours

Unit Unit Price

0001 Project Manager 1,920 Hour $

0002 Site Manager 1,920 Hour $

0003 Software Consultant 19,200 Hour $

0004 Senior Software Developer

30,720 Hour $

0005 Senior Oracle Web Developer

1,440 Hour $

0006 Intermediate Software Developer

17,280 Hour $

0007 Junior Software Developer

9,600 Hour $

0008 MS Access Developer 1,440 Hour $

0009 Requirements Analyst/Knowledge Support

9,600 Hour $

0010 Requirements Analyst 11,520 Hour $

0011 Tester 9,600 Hour $

0012 Scrum Master 1,920 Hour $

0013 Microsoft Application Consultant

5,760 Hour $

Table B.2 – Option Period 1: 12 Months after Expiration of the Base Period

CLIN # Labor Hour Category Quantity of Hours Unit Unit Price

1001 Project Manager 1,920 Hour $

1002 Site Manager 1,920 Hour $

1003 Software Consultant 19,200 Hour $

1004 Senior Software Developer

30,720 Hour $

1005 Senior Oracle Web Developer

1,440 Hour $

1006 Intermediate Software Developer

17,280 Hour $

1007 Junior Software Developer

9,600 Hour $

1008 MS Access Developer 1,440 Hour $

1009 Requirements Analyst/Knowledge

Support

9,600 Hour $

1010 Requirements Analyst 11,520 Hour $

1011 Tester 9,600 Hour $

1012 Scrum Master 1,920 Hour $

1013 Microsoft Application Consultant

5,760 Hour $

Table B.3 – Option Period 2: 12 Months after Expiration of Option Period 1

2001 Project Manager 1,920 Hour $

2002 Site Manager 1,920 Hour $

2003 Software Consultant 19,200 Hour $

2004 Senior Software Developer

30,720 Hour $

2005 Senior Oracle Web Developer

1,440 Hour $

2006 Intermediate Software Developer

17,280 Hour $

2007 Junior Software Developer

9,600 Hour $

2008 MS Access Developer 1,440 Hour $

2009 Requirements Analyst/Knowledge

Support

9,600 Hour $

2010 Requirements Analyst 11,520 Hour $

2011 Tester 9,600 Hour $

Scrum Master

Microsoft Application Consultant

1,920

5,760

Hour

Hour

Table B.4 – Option Period 3: 12 Months after Expiration of Option Period 2

3001 Project Manager 1,920 Hour $

3002 Site Manager 1,920 Hour $

3003 Software Consultant 19,200 Hour $

3004 Senior Software Developer

30,720 Hour $

3005 Senior Oracle Web Developer

1,440 Hour $

3006 Intermediate Software Developer

17,280 Hour $

3007 Junior Software Developer

9,600 Hour $

3008 MS Access Developer 1,440 Hour $

3009 Requirements Analyst/Knowledge

Support

9,600 Hour $

3010 Requirements Analyst 11,520 Hour $

3011 Tester 9,600 Hour $

Scrum Master

Microsoft Application Consultant

1,920

5,760

Hour $

Table B.5 – Option Period 4: 12 Months after Expiration of Option Period 3

4001 Project Manager 1,920 Hour $

4002 Site Manager 1,920 Hour $

4003 Software Consultant 19,200 Hour $

4004 Senior Software Developer

30,720 Hour $

4005 Senior Oracle Web Developer

1,440 Hour $

4006 Intermediate Software Developer

17,280 Hour $

4007 Junior Software Developer

9,600 Hour $

4008 MS Access Developer 1,440 Hour $

4009 Requirements Analyst/Knowledge

Support

9,600 Hour $

4010 Requirements Analyst 11,520 Hour $

4011 Tester 9,600 Hour $

Scrum Master

Microsoft Application Consultant

1,920

5,760

Hour

Hour

Total Amount of Base plus Four Option Periods: ___$_________________________

This contract shall be effective on the date of the Contracting Officer’s signature, and shall remain in effect until one year thereafter, and upon acceptance/execution of each subsequent option year period if exercised.

[End of Section]

SECTION C – DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATION/STATEMENT OF

WORK

C.1 INTRODUCTION

The mission of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is to enforce the controlled substances laws and regulations and to bring to the criminal and civil justice systems those organizations involved in the growing, manufacture, or distribution of controlled substances appearing in or destined for illicit traffic in the United States. DEA has a presence in more than 350 domestic offices in 22 divisions within the U.S. and 75 foreign offices. DEA’s operation and support activities are distributed across five core business lines that include the following:

• Investigative

• Forensic

• Financial

• Intelligence

• Administration

The core business lines require significant Information Technology (IT) resources to carry out key processes. In support of the DEA mission, these IT services include developing, deploying, and maintaining DEA’s mission critical and business applications as well as their supporting infrastructure.

C.2 BACKGROUND

The Office of Information Systems (SI) is the major, central source of software development for DEA’s mission critical applications. The Software Operations Section (SIS) within SI manages the development of applications and major enhancements using the agile software methodology. SIS provides supporting estimates and schedules and coordinates resources to successfully complete the project and manage the project scope. SIS ensures communication/use of standard practices of the agile software methodology, software configuration standards, and functional testing standards.

The Software Development Section (SIS) in SI established a de-facto “Concorde” standard in its section in 2010 when DEA’s core case management application was developed as the first of the Concorde web applications with single sign on and zero footprint.

Concorde is a business-driven IT program providing unified access to, and the sharing of information in accordance with, the DEA mission and the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) strategic plan. The concept of the Concorde Program is to eliminate stove-piped systems by integrating business functions and allowing for information sharing across the five main DEA business lines.

Concorde’s technical architecture is multi-tiered and implements the Model-View-Controller (MVC) architectural pattern using elements of the Microsoft ASP.NET MVC framework. Some of the code that implements views is written in JavaScript and specifically the jQuery JavaScript library.

Concorde is delivered to and runs within the Internet Explorer 10 browser on the user’s workstation.

Concorde applications and other Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU) applications are hosted on DEA’s SBU Firebird network.

As prescribed by the Agile methodology, work continues to be performed by development teams prioritized in monthly “Sprints”. As a result, there are currently over 65 applications developed on the Concorde platform. Although the majority of software applications in SIS are Concorde applications, there still remains a mixture of technologies that require operations and maintenance support, to include one non-Concorde .NET application, approximately five legacy applications utilizing Oracle Forms and Reports and 20 Microsoft Access applications. Regardless of platform, development teams follow the Agile Software Development Methodology to build and deliver high quality software.

Currently, Agile SCRUM teams develop new Concorde applications, while providing operations and maintenance support to existing Concorde and non-Concorde legacy applications. The interruption to address operational issues on production applications impacts the team’s ability to focus on the prioritized development application and reduces overall team velocity and delivery of applications.

As technology advances, DEA applications must maintain pace to leverage faster, more secure technological upgrades. The current version of Concorde was founded upon a code release of DEA’s case management system in November of 2010. This version was based upon .NET Framework 4.0.

Since that time, Microsoft has released a substantial update to the .NET technology stack called .NET Core. This update is faster, more secure, and has a smaller footprint. It opens the door for enhanced future integration with both mobile and cloud technologies and provides for better interoperability options for Concorde to communicate with other Law Enforcement software systems. As DEA’s case management system was the foundational core of Concorde, it will be one of the first applications to be re-developed in .NET Core. To leverage the upgrades of .NET Core, over 65 existing Concorde applications will require the modernization effort. The re-development of DEA’s case management system in .NET Core is in its infancy, and as it nears completion, all new Concorde applications will be developed using .NET Core and the .NET standard libraries created in Concorde.

DEA customers who have a request for a new application or an enhancement to an existing Concorde application, make a request through the Chief Information Officer (CIO) front door via the completion of a Project Analysis Worksheet (PAW), defining the high-level business need. After a technical analysis is conducted to determine the technical feasibility, resource availability and any potential risks, the Deputy Chief Information Officer (DCIO) reviews and determines if the request should move forward to DEA’s Sprint Scoring Committee. The requestor presents his business case to the committee and through an existing pre-defined scorecard process, the DEA Sprint Scoring Committee scores each request, resulting in a monthly Sprint Programming Prioritization List. As development teams near the completion of one application, members of the development team will work with SI’s Business Program Office and the customer to develop a System Information Package

(SIP), or an Initial PAW Review document (IPRD), which defines high level requirements and the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) to be developed. On average, two to four new applications and/or enhancement requests are added to the list monthly.

C.3 OBJECTIVE

The objective of this effort is to continue to develop and deliver quality software applications in the Concorde framework, provide operations and maintenance support to existing Concorde and non- Concorde applications, increase efficiencies across teams, and expedite the delivery of applications.

Acceptable quality will be identified once applications are tested by developers, independently unit tested by a contractor tester and tested and approved by the Government Product Owner.