16-0002-1_Amendment_1_9-2-16.pdf

6A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

Stephanie A. Servoss, Clerk of the Court

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

I

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

09/02/2016

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

United States Tax Court 400 Second Street, NW Washington, DC 20217

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

08/23/2016

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, 7 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 telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOVVLEDGMENT 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 your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter 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 ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. 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 NO.

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 7 is not, 7 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 Solicitation is amended to incorporate attached questions and answers.

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

NSN 7540-01-15243070

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rat 10-83)

Previous edition unusable Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Audit Services Solicitation Q & A September 2, 2016

Ql. Is there an incumbent auditor, and if so, Who?

Q2. Where can copies be obtained of the last three audits of the Tax Court's financial statements, internal control reports, and FISMA audit reports?

Q3. Within the past five years, has the Tax Court previously had an audit performed that included testing of the internal controls relevant to the aspects identified in Section C.2? If so, when was the audit performed and by whom?

Al-A3: The Tax Court's most recent performance audit resulted in a final report in September, 2012. The Court will provide the successful offeror with that report after award.

Q4. Given that the Court's personnel travel to various locations throughout the country to hold proceedings, could the Court please confirm that travel to areas other than Washington, D.C. is neither expected nor required?

A4. This confirms that contractor travel to areas other than Washington, D.C. is neither expected nor required.

Q5. The Introduction to the solicitation indicates that Sections A, B.2, G.1, G.3, and K must be completed. Section G.1 (Contract Administration) does not appear to have an item for completion, and Section G.3 appears to be incomplete. Section B.2, however, has information to populate. Could the Court please confirm that the sections referenced in the introduction are accurate and, if so, provide the page number of the items for completion?

A5. Sections A, B.2, G.2, and K should be completed by offerors and submitted with proposals. Sections G.1 and G.3 were included in the list on page B-1 in error.

Q6. Would the Court please provide the name of the organizations/firms planning to attend the Pre-Offer Conference scheduled for September 8th?

A6. As of September 2, 2016, the Tax Court has been informed that representatives of the following firms plan to attend the Pre Offer Conference scheduled for September 8:

CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP Crowe Horwath LLP TriMerge Consulting Group Hamilton Enterprises, LLC Carmichael, Brasher, Tuve11 & Company Harper, Rains, Knight & Company Kearney & Company

Q7. Which individuals/positions, if any, is the Court considering to be key personnel?

A7. Section L.2(a) of the solicitation provides that offers may include resumes of key personnel and/or individuals who will provide the services requested. Offerors are free to determine whether or not to include such resumes, and to determine which, if any, individuals that will be providing services qualify as key personnel.

Q8. Does the Court have an anticipated date or week of award?

A8. The Court anticipates awarding a contract as soon as practicable after offers are due on September 16, 2016, and in any event by September 30, 2016.

Q9. The Court has specified six areas that will be included in the scope of the performance audit. Within each of these six areas, has the Court defined specific performance audit objectives, the criteria needed to evaluate the objectives, and/or the measurement(s) that will be used to determine adherence to the criteria?

Q10. Will the Court be providing specific audit objectives related to the six business processes listed in section C.2 of the solicitation? Or will the auditor be required to develop specific audit objectives related to the six business processes during the planning phase of the engagement?

A9-10. The Court expects to develop specific internal control performance audit objectives, including the criteria needed to evaluate them and measurements that will be used to determine adherence to the criteria, in conjunction with the contractor during the planning phase of the engagement.

The Court expects that the audit objectives to be developed will include assessments of the extent to which internal controls provide reasonable assurance about whether (1) resources are used in compliance with laws, regulations, or other requirements, (2) resources are safeguarded against unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition, and (3) management information, such as performance measures are complete, accurate, and consistent to support performance and decision making.

Q11. Does the Court have documented policies and procedures for key processes within each of the six areas?

All. The Court expects that the contractor's report will discuss the extent to which the Court lacks appropriate documented policies and procedures for key processes within each of the six areas.

Q12. Will the Court consider allowing progress payments based on submission of the draft report and final report/exit conference?

Al2. The Court has considered the possibility of allowing progress payments based on, for example, submission of the draft report and the final report/exit conference. However, the Court has determined that it will only provide for payment in full after the final exit conference.

Q13. Does the Court have an estimated level of effort and/or budget for the performance audit services?

A13. The Court does not have an estimated level of effort or budget for the performance audit services requested in the solicitation.

Q14. What is the Tax Court's Official system of record?

A14. The Tax Court uses a customized version of Microsoft Dynamics GP (formerly Great Plains) as its system of record.

Q15. Clause 7-20, incorporated by reference by Clause 3-3, identifies several different security checks and clearances as being potentially applicable. Will the Government please clarify the level of security check or clearance that will be required under this engagement?

A15. For contractor representative who visits the Tax Courthouse, the contractor must provide satisfactory results within the last two years of a background check, consisting of a fingerprint check as defined in the Guide to Judiciary Policy, Vol. 12, sec. 570.40.