The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
15JPSS26R00000037 Asset Forfeiture Administrative Support Services Attachment 9
| Question No. |
| RFP Section and Attachment No. if applicable |
| RFP or Attachment Page No. |
| Vendor’s Question |
| DOJ Answer |
| Is it possible to learn which LCATs are new and deviate from the current contract? |
| We added additional levels to the Records Examiner/Analyst positions and added several new labor categories: Cryptocurrency Specialist, Junior Financial Analyst, Financial Analyst, Senior Financial Analyst, Litigation Financial Analyst, Jr. Technical Writer, Technical Writer, and Sr. Technical Writer. We removed the Data Analyst position. |
| How many FTEs or what is the LOE of the LCATs? |
| Currently around 1400 FTEs. |
| 3 |
| RFP, Contract Terms and Conditions (Section 2) |
| 17 |
| Section F references a Supervisory Technical Writer, however there is no Supervisory Technical Writer in the Labor Category Descriptions. Can the Government clarify if Section F is referencing a Supervisor Forfeiture Financial Specialist? |
| Yes. The Government confirms Section F should reference a Supervisory Forfeiture Financial Specialist in lieu of a Supervisory Technical Writer. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 4 |
| RFP, Instructions for Proposal Preparation |
| 42 |
| Due to the file size, will the Government accept .pdf files to ensure successful email transmission? |
| Yes. The Government will accept .pdf files. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 5 |
| RFP, Instructions for Proposal Preparation |
| 42 |
| Will the Government confirm the file size limitations for email? |
| 10 MB |
| 6 |
| RFP, Instructions for Proposal Preparation |
| 42 |
| Due to file sizes, will the Government accept multiple emails submission from the offeror? |
| Yes. The Government will accept multiple email submissions. |
| 7 |
| RFP, SF 1449, Section 2 |
| 42 |
| SF1449 States proposals due at 10 AM, Section 2 Proposal Schedule notes the time as 10:00 AM EST, and Section 3 Proposal Due and Time notes submission is by 10:30 AM EST. Can the Government confirm the submission time for June 8th? |
| The submission time for proposals is due at 10:00am EST on June 8, 2026. The RFP has been updated. |
| 8 |
| RFP, Section 6, Instructions table |
| 43 |
| The volume listing within the table does not match the volume descriptions in the following section. Can the Government update the volume references? |
| The volume references have been updated in red font. |
| 9 |
| RFP, Section 6, Instructions table |
| 43 |
| Will the Government confirm that Volumes II - V are to be submitted as written documents, as well as, be presented within the oral presentation? |
| Each Offeror shall submit via electronic means a written proposal for Volumes I, III, IV, V and VI. The slide deck for the oral presentation will cover Volumes II, III and V only. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 10 |
| RFP, Section 6 Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| The Solicitation establishes a 30‑page limitation for Volume I (Entire Business Proposal), since Price information (Sections 7-8, 10) is included in Volume I, will the Government consider increasing the page limitation to 50 pages? |
| The RFP has been updated in red font to indicate that there are no page limitations for Volume I. |
| 11 |
| RFP, Section 6 Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| Will the Government consider moving Attachment 2 Pricing Tables, Attachment 12 Task Order 1 Pricing, Attachment 6 Labor Classification Table, and the Price Support Information from Volume I into Volume VII Price? |
| No. |
| 12 |
| RFP, Section 6, Instructions table |
| 43 |
| The instructions table lists Volume VII: Price, however there is no explanation of what is to be included. Will the Government clarify what is to be included in this volume? |
| This has been removed. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 13 |
| RFP, Section 6 Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| Will the Government confirm Volume VII Price as an unlimited page count? |
| This requirement has been removed. |
| 14 |
| RFP, Volume I - Entire Business Proposal |
| 43 |
| Can the Government confirm its intent to incorporate the awarded Offeror’s proposal into the resulting contract, at least for the purpose of establishing the baseline for any future price adjustments referenced on page 16, Section 2‑4 (Specialist Requirements), and more specifically under FAR 52.222‑43, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Labor Standards—Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option Contracts), including the labor categories, rates, and supporting assumptions reflected in the proposal? |
| Yes. |
| 15 |
| RFP, Volume I - Entire Business Proposal, Section 6. Small Business Subcontracting Plan. |
| 43-44 |
| The solicitation identifies an estimated contract ceiling value of $1.3B. For purposes of completing the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, can the Government confirm that these dollars should be distributed with the offeror’s proposed SB goals? |
| No. These dollars should not be distributed with the offeror’s proposed small business goals, they should be distributed among subcontracting dollars not the ceiling value. |
| 16 |
| RFP, Volume I - Entire Business Proposal, Section 8 Pricing Tables and Volume VII - Price. |
| 43-44 |
| The solicitation requires an explanation describing the basis and elements contained in the Price Support Information. Please confirm whether this narrative is intended to be addressed in Volume I (Entire Business Proposal), or to accompany the supporting documentation in Volume VII (Pricing). |
| This should be addressed in Volume I. |
| 17 |
| RFP, Instructions, Volume I (10) TO1 Pricing |
| 44 |
| Attachment 12 is listed as part of Volume I and as Volume IV. Can the Government clarify which volume Attachment 12 should be submitted with? |
| Attachment 12 should be listed as part of Volume V. This has been updated in the RFP. |
| 18 |
| RFP, Oral Presentation |
| 44 |
| Can the Government confirm the Oral Presentation Portion 2 (60 mins) will only cover Volumes II-V? |
| 60 minutes shall cover Volumes II, III, and V. |
| 19 |
| RFP, Volume I - Entire Business Proposal, Section 9, Executive Summary. |
| 44 |
| The solicitation instructs Offerors in the Executive Summary to identify any major subcontractor. The Corporate Experience section further defines subcontractors performing major or critical aspects of the SOW as those providing key personnel or performing more than 50 percent of a task or functional area. |
Can the Government confirm that this definition applies consistently for both the Executive Summary and Corporate Experience, such that a subcontractor is considered “major” only when the subcontractor (a) is proposed to provide key personnel and/or (b) is proposed to perform more than 50 percent of a task or functional area?
Yes. This definition should apply consistently for both the Executive Summary and Corporate Experience.
| 20 |
| RFP, Orals Presentation |
| 44-45 |
| The solicitation limits oral presentations to two (2) subject matter experts/key personnel. Given that Corporate Experience is an enterprise‑level evaluation factor (not program‑specific), Offeror respectfully requests one non-key (corporate representative) for a total of 3 presenters to be included for any interactive dialogue. |
| Only the proposed subject matter experts shall attend oral presentations. No more than 2 persons from the Offerors company may attend the Oral presentation. |
| 21 |
| RFP, Volume IV - Response to Task Order 1 |
| 45-46 |
| The solicitation states that Attachment 12, Task Order 1 Pricing Tables, shall include direct labor rates. Based on the pricing instructions for Volume VII, the term “direct labor rates” is interpreted to mean unburdened labor rates. Since Attachment 12 calculates extended prices by applying labor hours to price units, can the Government clarify whether the “direct labor rates” requested are intended to be unburdened direct labor rates or fully burdened labor rates? |
| They should be fully burdened labor rates. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 22 |
| RFP, Evaluation Factors (Section 4) |
| 50 |
| Can the Government confirm that the Offeror shall include all the requirements from Volume II Corporate Experience – Volume V Response to Task Order 1 SOW in the orals presentation? |
| Each Offeror shall submit via electronic means a written proposal for Volumes I, III, IV, V and VI. The slide deck for the oral presentation will cover Volumes II, III and V only. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 23 |
| RFP, Evaluation Criteria, Section 4 (Factor 4) |
| 50 |
| "Adjectival Ratings. Proposals will be adjectivally rated against each of the evaluation factors set forth in this plan and in the solicitation. No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Factor 3, Price". However Factor 3 is referencing Staffing Plan, will the Government clarify which factor is not included in the adjectival ratings? |
| The RFP has been updated to reflect Factor 6 as Price. We are no longer using adjectival ratings and using confidence ratings for Factors 1 - 4. Confidence ratings will not be applied to Factor 6 - Price. |
| 24 |
| Attachment 1, AFASS SOW (Section 8) |
| 16 |
| In Section 8, the opening sentence states “total ordering period of seven years” however the table below lists base + 4 option years. Can the Government please clarify? |
| This has been updated in the SOW in red font. |
| 25 |
| Attachment 2, Pricing Tables |
Section 1 (page 6) of the solicitation titled Schedule of Supplies/Services and Attachment 1, SOW (page 17), have references to materials and/or travel as contract requirements; however, the Government‑provided pricing tables do not include a mechanism to price these cost elements. In addition, FAR 52.216‑18 (Ordering) contemplates the ordering of supplies or services as incorporated under this contract vehicle.
To ensure pricing coverage for the full scope of requirements at the delivery order, would the Government consider adding a separate CLIN for Other Direct Costs (ODCs) and clarifying that ODCs under this contract include travel, materials, and training?
The pricing table has been updated to include ODC line items such as travel, materials, and training. These items will be billed as pass-through costs with no multiplier applied.
| The attachment header is referencing the wrong solicitation number |
| This has been updated. |
| 27 |
| Attachment 5, Labor Category Description |
| Page 21 |
| The Government states an Operations Supervisor will have at least 20 FTE contract positions. However, under the RFP page 17, 2.1.e, the document references at least 10 FTEs. Can the Government confirm the RFP language of 10 FTEs is accurate? |
| This has been corrected to at least 10 FTEs. |
| The attachment header is referencing the wrong solicitation number |
| This has been revised. |
| 29 |
| Section 4, Business Proposal, 8) Pricing Tables |
| 43 |
| Request for Current Staffing Data. The 2018 AFASS solicitation included an attachment titled “Attachment 2 - Current Contractor Service by Service Location.” |
Can the Government provide this same information (including ordered positions by labor category, location, and ordering agency) for the current solicitation to aid offerors in developing proposals, including development of required small business subcontracting plans?
Yes. This is included as an attachment, “Current Services by Location”.
| 30 |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| Workforce Tenure. The 2018 AFASS solicitation included details on the tenure of each active contract employee. Can the Government provide a similar summary of the tenure of the incumbent contract workforce to aid offerors in accurately accounting for workforce leave accruals? |
| This information will be provided during post-award. |
| 31 |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| Pricing Methodology for “All Other” Locations. The five “All Other” locations in the pricing tables cover hundreds of locations that are outside the listed MSAs. In the 2018 solicitation, the pricing instructions provided an “example WD” to be used as the basis for pricing all non-exempt CLINs. This “example WD” was used for evaluation purposes. However, the instructions also required bidders to propose an “adjustment factor” to apply to the WD rate in order to compute a billing rate for each of the numerous locations included in the “All Other” category. |
The current solicitation does not include instructions for completing the “All Other” pricing. Can the Government provide an “example WD” to be used by bidders for pricing the non-exempt positions in the “All Other” category? In addition, can the Government confirm that bidders should provide an “adjustment factor” to be used to compute hourly billing rates during contract performance?
If multiple WDs could potentially apply across the five “All Other” locations, offerors should use the highest applicable rate to ensure compliance with the Service Contract Act. Offerors will not be required to use an adjustment factor.
| 32 |
| N/A |
| N/A |
| Other Direct Costs (ODCs). The Pricing Table in the prior 2018 solicitation included a line on the Totals page for the anticipated costs of certain reimbursable ODCs. However, the current pricing table, as well as the pricing instructions, do not mention reimbursable ODCs. |
Can the Government provide further explanation regarding the types of costs that are considered reimbursable? Also, can the Government clarify whether a bidder’s price proposal should address ODC costs?
The pricing table has been updated to include ODC line items such as travel, materials, and training. These items will be billed as pass-through costs with no multiplier applied.
| 33 |
| Volume V - Past Performance |
| 46 |
| Affiliate Past Performance: In line with established GAO precedent, can Offerors include affiliate company past performance as its own prime past performance as long as the Offeror intends to utilize resources of the affiliate company in the performance of the AFASS contract? |
| Yes. |
| 34 |
| Volume V - Past Performance |
| 46 |
| The RFP currently states that performance should have been "completed in the last three (3) years from the date of the RFP." Can the Government please confirm that ongoing contracts may be utilized as past performance references? If yes, will the Government consider amending this language to "ongoing or completed within the last three (3) years prior to the RFP closing date"? |
| Yes. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 35 |
| Section 6 Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| Document Formatting: Can the Government confirm that the cover page, table of contents, and acronym list are outside of page count for each volume? |
| Yes. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 36 |
| Volume II – Management Approach |
| 45 |
| Key Personnel: Can the Government provide a list of agencies that currently have an active Agency Manager assigned, as well as the current locations (City/State) for all ordered Project Directors? |
Also, can the Government confirm that Offerors are only required to submit resumes for positions that are currently ordered and active (i.e., the specific Agency Managers and Project Directors identified by the Government, one Regional Director per region, and a single Program Manager)?
Program Manager and Regional Directors are located at Corporate or Remote Sites.
Project Directors:
DEA (600 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA) MNF (1400 New York Avenue, Washington, DC)
Agency Managers:
USMS (1215 S. Clark, Arlington, VA) ATF (99 New York Ave, Washington, DC) FBI (935 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington, DC) USPIS (900 Brentwood Rd NE, Washington, DC
Offerors are required to submit resumes for positions that are currently ordered and active (i.e., the specific Agency Managers and Project Directors identified by the Government, one Regional Director per region, and a single Program Manager).
| 37 |
| Section 6 – Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| Volume Numbering: Section 6 of the Instructions to Offerors outlines a seven-volume structure; however, subsequent paragraphs contain conflicting numbering (e.g., both Corporate Experience and Management Approach are referenced as Volume II). To ensure proper volume separation and compliance with the Oral Presentation requirements, will the Government confirm the following numbering sequence? |
· Volume I: Entire Business Proposal
· Volume II: Corporate Experience
· Volume III: Management Approach
· Volume IV: Staffing Plan
· Volume V: Response to Task Order 1 SOW
· Volume VI: Past Performance
· Volume VII: Price The RFP has been updated in red font regarding the volume structure.
| 38 |
| Volume V – Past Performance |
| 46 |
| Past Performance: Factor 5 requires Offerors to demonstrate the recency, relevancy, scope, and complexity of each reference, with a limit of 2 pages per reference. Will the Government consider allowing an additional 1-page Past Performance introduction in this section, not counted within the per-reference page limit? |
| No. |
| 39 |
| Volume V – Past Performance |
| 46 |
| Past Performance: Should Offerors submit a past performance citation for each Major Subcontractor? |
| Yes. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 40 |
| Section 4. Evaluation Factors: |
| 50 |
| Oral Presentation: Regarding the Oral Presentation, will the Government provide additional guidance on the evaluation methodology and scoring criteria (e.g., a scoring matrix or adjectival ratings)? |
| See Table 1 – Factors 1 – 4 Confidence Ratings on page 50. |
| 41 |
| Section 2. Procurement Schedule and Section 3. Proposal Due Date and Submission |
| Proposal Due Date: There is a discrepancy between Section 2 and Section 3 of the instructions. Section 2 lists the due time as 10:00 AM, while Section 3 lists it as 10:30 AM EST on June 8, 2026. Will the Government please clarify the official submission time? |
| The submission time for proposals is due at 10:00am EST on June 8, 2026. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 42 |
| Attachment 1 – AFASS – SOW |
Section 10. Security Requirements
| 17 |
| Joint Venture Facility Clearance: The solicitation requires the Contractor to possess a Top Secret Facility Clearance. Will the Government please clarify if, in the case of a Joint Venture Offeror, the JV itself must possess the FCL at the time of proposal submission, or if it is sufficient for one or more of the individual members of the Joint Venture to hold the required FCL? |
| It is sufficient for the individual members of the Joint Venture to hold the required FCL, as opposed to the Joint Venture itself. |
| 43 |
| Volume V – Past Performance |
| 46 |
| CPARs: Regarding Attachment 10, the RFP states that Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) are due by June 1, 2026, while the Full Proposal is due June 8, 2026. If an Offeror elects to submit Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) in lieu of PPQs, will the Government clarify the required submission timeline? Specifically, should CPARs be submitted by the June 1st deadline for PPQs, or should they be included as an attachment to Volume VI (Past Performance) due on June 8th? |
| CPARS are due as an attachment to Volume VI (Past Performance) by June 8th. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 44 |
| Attachment 11 – Task Order 1 – SOW |
| N/A |
| Task Order Statement of Work: To ensure the highest level of technical accuracy, will the Government please identify the ordering agency for the Task Order SOW? Understanding the specific agency context will allow Offerors to best tailor their approach. |
| Asset Forfeiture Management Staff |
| 45 |
| Volume V – Past Performance |
| 46 |
| Past Performance for Joint Venture Offerors: In the case of a Joint Venture Offeror, will the Government confirm that it will evaluate a past performance reference performed by an individual JV member as equivalent to a past performance reference performed by the JV itself? |
| Yes. Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv), for offerors that are joint ventures, the evaluation shall take into account past performance of the joint venture. If the joint venture does not demonstrate past performance for award, the contracting officer shall consider the past performance of each party to the joint venture. |
| 46 |
| Section 4 - Solicitation Provisions |
6. Proposal Content
| 43 |
| Business Proposal: The page limitations table in Section 4 – Solicitation Provisions states a 30-page limit for the Entire Business Proposal (Volume I). Several of the items in Volume I are typically excluded from page count (e.g., subcontracting plan; Attachment 2; Attachment 6; price support information) due to their length. Can the Government please confirm which items count against the 30-page Volume I limit, and which are excluded? |
| The RFP has been updated in red font to indicate that there are no page limitations for Volume I. |
| 47 |
| Section 4 – Solicitation Provisions: Factor 2 – Management Approach |
| 45 |
| Content to be Included in Management Approach. Instructions state, “Offeror shall provide a narrative that explains their approach to managing and staffing the contract.” |
Can the Government clarify staffing topics that should be addressed within the Management Approach versus the Staffing Plan? Does the reference to staffing in the Management Approach instructions specifically refer to key personnel resumes only?
For the Management Approach, the Offeror shall provide a narrative that explains their approach to managing and staffing the contract. The management approach shall reflect the Offeror's understanding of the contract objectives, the contract requirements, and how the Offeror intends to successfully provide the required services. If the offeror intends to work with subcontractors, the Offeror shall provide the name(s) of the subcontractor(s) and explain how the offeror plans to manage the subcontractor(s).
Offerors shall not merely state the solicitation requirements, but present a rationale methodology for fulfillment of the requirements. The Offeror shall also provide resumes for the proposed Key Personnel: Program Manager, Regional Director, Agency Manager, and Project Director. Each resume must include a description of position duties and qualifications, as well as information about the qualifications of the individual proposed.
| 48 |
| Section 4 – Solicitation Provisions: |
Evaluation Factors:
Factor 2 – Management Approach
| 51 |
| Evaluation of Key Personnel Experience. The RFP states, “Resumes will be evaluated based on the currency, quality and depth of experience of personnel working on similar projects (size, scope, magnitude, duration, and complexity).” |
Can the Government please provide further details on how these factors will specifically be applied to the evaluation of key personnel experience?
Resumes for key personnel will be evaluated by comparing the individual’s documented history against the specific requirements of the solicitation, focusing on how their past work directly mirrors the size, scope, magnitude, duration, and complexity of the project.
| 49 |
| Section 4 - Solicitation Provisions: Oral Presentations |
| 44 |
| Oral Presentation Participants - Corporate Subject Matter Experts. The Instructions state that "the Offeror's participants in the oral presentation shall be limited to subject matter experts proposed by the Offeror," with attendance capped at two participants. Within the same section, the Rules of Engagement for Oral Presentations reference "proposed subject matter experts/key personnel." |
Can the Government please confirm that Oral Presentation participants can be anyone selected by the Offeror with expertise in the Offeror’s corporate experience and proposed approach to accomplish the AFASS SOW tasks?
Yes.
| 50 |
| RFP Section 4 - Solicitation Provisions: Volume V – Past Performance |
| 46 |
| Past Performance Recency Period. The RFP limits past performance references to projects completed within the three years preceding proposal submission. Given the unusual scope and complexity of the AFASS requirement, the number of comparable federal administrative support contracts is narrow, and a three-year recency window risks excluding directly relevant references despite reflecting work of equal or greater scope and complexity. A five-year recency period is common on other large federal support services procurements, and extending the recency window to five years would preserve the Government's full evaluation discretion under Factor 5, including the ability to weight more recent references more heavily, while giving the Government a fuller picture of each Offeror's ability to perform AFASS-relevant work. Will the Government consider extending the past performance recency period from three years to five years preceding proposal submission? |
| Yes. The RFP has been updated in red font. |
| 51 |
| SOW Section 8 – Period of Performance |
| 16 |
| Contract Period of Performance Discrepancy. The SOW period of performance table shows a base year period plus four option year periods, for a total of five years. However, the language above the table states that the period of performance “shall be for a total ordering period of seven years.” Can the Government clarify whether the resulting contract will be for five or seven years? |
| The SOW has been updated in red font. The resulting contract will be for five years. |
| 52 |
| Section 6 Proposal Content |
| 43 |
| Attachment Font Requirements: The solicitation specifies that proposal content must be in 12-point Times New Roman font (smaller for tables and graphics). However, several mandatory templates provided by the Government (e.g., Attachment 8 - Small Business Subcontracting Plan) utilize different fonts and sizes. Will the Government confirm that Offerors should maintain the original formatting of these provided templates, and that these documents are exempt from the standard font and size requirements? |
| The Offerors should maintain the original formatting of the provided templates, and these documents are exempt from the standard font and size requirements. |