QUESTIONS_AND_RESPONSES_RFP__1605DC-17-R-00014.docx

Questions and Responses

RFP #1605DC-17-R-00014

Q1. Federal Business Opportunities, Notice Details (page 2) and Proposal Submission Requirements, Delivery of Offers (pages 61-62). The solicitation Notice Details indicates that proposals should be emailed to the contract specialist and that a hard copy should be mailed to the Department of Labor. Also, in the Proposal Submission Requirements section of the solicitation, the RFP provides methods for delivering offers. If it is required for offerors to provide both an email and hard copy submission, can offerors submit the online response by the submission deadline (i.e., 7/21/2017) with the hardcopy delivered within two business days after the submission deadline?

Response: No, offerors cannot submit the online response by the submission deadline with the hardcopy delivered within two business days after the submission deadline. All interested offerors must provide all requested items by the submission deadline. NO EXCEPTIONS

Q2. SF1449 and Section B. Could DOL please clarify whether offerors should complete the pricing information on the attached SF1449 form, as well as Section B, or would it be sufficient for offerors to include pricing on Section B only?

Response: Offerors should submit complete pricing information on the SF1449 in Section B.

Q3. SF1449 and Section B. The SF1449 form and Section B both provide CLINS for CALR I, CALR II, enhanced public records access and/or investigative search capabilities, and Online Legal Education (i.e., CLINs 0001-4004). The solicitation also provides for the Evaluation of Additional Offerings (Volume II, Sub-Factor 5). Will DOL consider revising the SF1449 form and Section B to include CLINS for additional offerings. In the alternative, may offerors modify Section B as necessary?

Response: DOL will not be making any changes to the CLIN structure for this procurement. Offerors remain free to submit information on any additional offerings beyond the solicitation requirements that the offeror chooses to include in its proposal as part of the already-established CLINs.

Q4. SF1449 and Section B. It is this offeror’s understanding that the current number of active users is significantly higher than 800 or 1,000. Is DOL anticipating a significant reduction in users requiring access to online legal research and public records services?

Response: DOL’s estimate for the number of users of CALR services for this requirement (CALR II) is listed in the Solicitation. At this time, DOL expects to have between 800 and 1000 users; depending on various factors (e.g., staffing, resources, budget, and price), the number may vary. Furthermore, DOL also seeks greater cost flexibility with the CALR II contract than it has with its present computer assisted legal research contract, starting with a base level of users and adding users in excess of that base level as demand and funding permit.

If DOL is not anticipating a significant reduction in the number of the users, can DOL please confirm the number of users who will require access under the next contract?

Response: DOL’s estimate for the number of users of CALR services for this requirement (CALR II) is listed in the Solicitation. DOL seeks baseline pricing for scenarios of both 800 and 1,000 baseline users, and DOL then seeks pricing for Additional Users as described in the Solicitation. DOL expects that the add-on costs for Additional Users will differ, depending on whether the baseline is 800 users or 1,000 users.

Q5 . SF1449 and Section B, CLIN 0002. The solicitation indicates that DOL would like the ability to purchase CALR II access for Additional Users in increments of 100. Does DOL anticipate increasing the number of users beyond 1,000 during the proposed contract term? If so, how many additional users are anticipated during the proposed term?

Response: DOL’s estimate for the number of users of CALR services for this requirement (CALR II) is listed in the Solicitation. At this time, DOL expects to have between 800 and 1000 users, depending on various factors (e.g., staffing, resources, budget, and price), the number may vary. Furthermore, DOL also seeks greater cost flexibility with the CALR II contract than it has with its present computer assisted legal research contract, starting with a base level of users and adding users in excess of that base level as demand and funding permit. DOL included CLIN 0002 because it believes that it will make use of this CLIN in either the base or option years.

Q6. SF1449 and Section B, CLIN 0003. For CLIN 0003, can DOL please indicate how many users DOL anticipates will need access to enhanced public records and/or investigator search capabilities? Can DOL please identify the specific offices and/or divisions that might require access to enhanced public records and/or investigator search capabilities?

Response: DOL’s estimate for the number of users for CLIN 0003 will likely be between 0 and 100 depending on various factors (e.g., resources, budget, pricing, and workload demands). To the extent an offeror proposes providing additional licenses or includes the enhanced public records as part of the base offering, DOL may make these services available to more users. At this time, however, DOL is requesting pricing in 50 user increments. DOL believes that the minimum increment set forth in the Solicitation represents one minimum case scenario; actual pricing, combined with DOL’s annual budget, will drive the extent to which CLIN 0003 services may be purchased for a larger user base—or whether CLIN 0003 services will be purchased at all for a given period of performance. As DOL noted in Section 3.1 of the Solicitation, SOL has fifteen (15) office locations, though DOL as a whole has additional field offices in these and other locations.

Q7. SF1449 and Section B, CLIN 0004. For CLIN 0004, can DOL please indicate how many users DOL anticipates will need access to online legal education materials?

Response: DOL’s estimate for the number of users for CLIN 0004 will likely be between 0 and 600 depending on various factors (e.g., resources, budget, pricing, and workload demands) and will include attorneys, paralegals and legal assistants. To the extent an offeror proposes providing additional licenses or includes online legal education products as part of the base offering, DOL may make these services available to more users. At this time, however, DOL is requesting pricing in 50 user increments. DOL believes that the minimum increment set forth in the Solicitation represents one minimum case scenario; actual pricing, combined with DOL’s annual budget, will drive the extent to which CLIN 0004 services may be purchased for a larger user base—or whether CLIN 0004 services will be purchased at all for a given period of performance

Q8. Statement of Work, section 4.0, Scope of Contract (page 8). The introduction to section 4.0, Scope of Contract, indicates a need for dockets information. However, is no further mention of dockets in the solicitation. Can you confirm this offeror’s understanding that dockets are not contemplated under this solicitation?

If dockets are contemplated under this solicitation, can DOL please provide additional information, including the following:

1. What is the DOL’s standard use case regarding dockets access?

1. Can DOL please provide usage information of the dockets court access?

1. If DOL requires the ability to track dockets:

1. Can DOL please provide usage information with respect to tracking of dockets (e.g., rough number and common courts)?

1. Does DOL anticipate that future use of tracking dockets will be in line with current usage? Or is an increase in usage anticipated?

1. If DOL requires access to PDF documents:

1. Can DOL please provide information regarding PDF usage (e.g., rough number, common courts)?

1. Does DOL anticipate that future use of PDFs will be in line with current usage? Or is an increase in usage anticipated?

Response: DOL does not require access to dockets information as a mandatory component of the CALR II contract. Offerors are welcome to submit information regarding their docket searching and tracking as an “additional service” as defined by the Solicitation, such as, but not limited to, the court filings and data/documents included.

Q9. Section 4.2, CALR Use Cases (page 9). The solicitation states that the offeror, “shall provide all connection resources necessary (i.e., equipment, software, and telecommunications services) so that DOL users can access its CALR systems via an existing third-party Internet connection (i.e., an Internet connection not provided directly by Offeror)”. Can DOL confirm this offeror’s understanding that the intent of the solicitation is for offerors to provide access to an internet-based legal research service and not the connection resources necessary to access the service?

Response: Confirmed. It is the expectation that DOL users would have some form of Internet connection to devices used to access CALR II services without any such access being provided by the offeror. Offerors are expected, however, to provide any and all hardware and software required behind the URL(s) they provide as a gateway(s) to CALR II services.

Q10. Section 5.6, DOL-Wide Reports. In section 5.6.2, DOL Reports, section (a), DOL provides monthly reporting requirements. Under the current contract, this offeror is providing three reports:

0. Active Users Report (for each office, a total number passwords for each category of Batch, WN, CLEAR, and LIVENOTE)

0. Office Connect Time Report (for each office the number of “connected hours” for WN and “connected hours” for CLEAR)

0. Database Usage Report (Databases listed alphabetically with # of hours, Print lines/docs, and Searches for each Database. This report also includes a column identifying whether the database in “included” in their Plan or is “ancillary-out of plan”.)

We note that the reporting requirements contemplated under this solicitation would provide slightly different data than what is captured in DOL’s current reports. Would it be acceptable for the offeror to keep providing these reports, in lieu of the reports described in the solicitation?

No, offeror is to provide reports as described in this solicitation

If not, can DOL respond to the following questions?:

1. Regarding Session Connect Time (2), does DOL require connect time per office, or per user? Can DOL provide a sample of the information required?

1. Regarding Number of Sessions (3), Are they asking for a “count” of the number of times the users sign in/sign out, by office? By user? Should this reporting element be included with the Session Connect Time reporting element? Can DOL provide a sample of the information required?

1. Regarding Number of Users (4), is DOL seeking the “count” of users in each office (similar to their current “Active Users” report), or is DOL asking that we provide the number of users accessing each database?

Response: DOL responds as follows:

1. In its usage report, Offeror should include connect time per office, while also offering the ability for DOL to easily obtain information per individual user within a given office, as needed.

1. DOL is interested in tracking both which authorized users are making use of the CALR II services and the frequency with which specific individual users access the CALR II services. Thus, DOL can envision one report that breaks out CALR II usage by user, where such report includes, among other information, the following: user / username / number of times sign in/out / total connect time

1. DOL is interested in tracking the number of users accessing each database; DOL is interested in seeing which CALR II resources are most heavily used and which are least used.

Q11. Proposal Volume Requirements (page 56). The table in the Proposal Volume Requirements section indicates that the Executive Summary should be provided as Volume I of the proposal. As a standalone volume, the Executive Summary may not be as effective as including it with the Technical, Past Performance, and Price volumes. Would DOL consider reducing the proposal organization to three volumes and allow offerors to provide an Executive Summary in each volume, if applicable?

Response: DOL wishes to have a single unified Executive Summary. If they wish, offerors may also include introductory summaries in each of the three other volumes, subject to the page limitations specified in the Solicitation.

Q12. Proposal Volume Requirements (page 56-57). The table in the Proposal Volume Requirements section provides page limits for some of the required sections. In order to present a comprehensive description of the features and services to be provided and to include complete answers to all of the requirements in the Statement of Work, would DOL consider eliminating the page limit requirements? If DOL will not remove all of the requirements, would DOL consider the following:

o Volume II, Sub-Factor 2, System Capabilities – To ensure that offerors provide DOL with information to effectively evaluate responses, would DOL consider extending the page limit to 25-30 pages?

o Volume II, Sub-Factor 4, Transition and Training – To ensure that offerors provide DOL with information to effectively evaluate responses, would DOL consider extending the page limit to 15 pages?

o Volume II, Sub-Factor 5, Additional Offerings – To ensure that offerors provide DOL with information to effectively evaluate responses, would DOL consider extending the page limit to 25-30 pages?

Response: DOL does not wish to increase or lift the page limit requirements stated in the Solicitation. However, as also stated in DOL’s response to question 20, DOL has agreed that the offeror responses to the Sample Tasks may be included as appendixes that will not count against the page limits for volume II, Technical.

Q13. Proposal Submission Requirements (pages 58-60). The Proposal Submission Requirements section lists the Volumes of the response document and the corresponding Sub-Factors, although it appears that some of the Volume numbers do not match the Volume numbers provided in the proposal organization table provided on pages 56-57. For example:

o Sub-Factor 2, System Capabilities, most likely belongs in Volume II—Technical, not Volume III, as outlined on page 58.

o Sub-Factor 3, People and Public Records, most likely belongs in Volume II—Technical, not Volume IV, as outlined on page 60.

o Sub-Factor 4, Transition, Training, Support Services, and Quality Assurance, most likely belongs in Volume II—Technical, not Volume V, as outlined on page 60.

o Sub-Factor 5, Evaluation of Additional Offerings, most likely belongs in Volume II—Technical, not Volume V, as outlined on page 60.

Please clarify as offerors need to confirm that they have organized the response correctly.

Response: The offeror is correct; DOL wishes each Sub-Factor, other than Past Performance and Price, to be addressed in Volume II, Technical.

Q14. Proposal Submission Requirements (pages 58-60). It appears that each of the requirements in the Statement of Work are addressed in the DOL’s proposed response structure (i.e., Sub-Factors) with the exception of two requirements: 4.6, Database Maintenance, and 4.8., Documentation. Does DOL require a response to these requirements? If so, could DOL please clarify where offerors should respond to each of these requirements in the proposal?

Response: Offerors should include information about Database Maintenance and Documentation as part of its response to Sub-Factor 4, “Transition, Training, Support Services, and Quality Assurance.”

Q15. Proposal Submission Requirements, Volume IV Price (page 61). Offerors are advised to include a completed copy of their Representations and Certifications—Commercial Items with their offers. If an offeror maintains a current and up-to-date version of its Representations and Certifications on the System for Award Management (SAM) site, will that suffice?

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

1.

Q16. Section 4.0 Scope of Contract: “Dockets” is listed for on-line computerized access but there is no further description of this requirement.

a. Is there an RFP section missing that describes the requirement for dockets?

b. Is PACER or a third-party docket service currently being used? If a third-party is providing, who is it and is there a separate cost for this service? If not included in a current flat rate, what is the annual cost?

c. What are DOL user requirements for a docket service?

d. Should a docket service be included in an offeror’s annual flat rate charge?

Response: DOL does not require access to dockets information as a mandatory component of the CALR II contract. Offerors are welcome to submit information regarding their docket searching and tracking as an “additional service” as defined by the Solicitation, such as, but not limited to, the court filings and data/documents included.

Q17. Section 4.7.2 Private Files: In order to set up hosting of this repository and include in an annual flat rate charge, please provide the following information:

a. What is the current size of the private database?

b. What are the current file formats?

c. How many users require access?

d. Can you provide a sample list of metadata?

Response: The current private database contains briefs and document templates, and it is available to all DOL Office of the Solicitor users (and not to DOL general CALR users); this would be the majority of the current CALR users. In a typical month, 10-20 documents are uploaded into the private database as part of ongoing updates; it is estimated that the database holds approximately 5,000 documents at this time. Documents are uploaded in fully-searchable Adobe PDF format.

Q18. Section 4.7.3 Non-mandatory Functions: In order to provide a priced option for CLIN 0004 On-Demand Continuing Legal Education, please provide the following information:

a. Under Section 6.2 Scalability and Adjustment of User Levels, for on-demand CLE in the final bullet, it references “as described in Section 4.7.4”. However, that particular section is missing for the RFP.

b. How many users are currently participating and how many does DOL want to participate in this new contract?

c. What is the current budget spend for the CLE program?

Response: Regarding the reference to 4.7.4, that is an incorrect reference. On-demand CLE is referenced in 4.7.3.

DOL’s estimate for the number of users for CLIN 0004 will likely be between 0 and 600 depending on various factors (e.g., resources, budget, pricing, and workload demands). To the extent an offeror proposes providing additional licenses or includes online legal education products as part of the base offering, DOL may make these services available to more users. At this time, however, DOL is requesting pricing in 50 user increments. DOL believes that the minimum increment set forth in the Solicitation represents one minimum case scenario; actual pricing, combined with DOL’s annual budget, will drive the extent to which CLIN 0004 services may be purchased for a larger user base—or whether CLIN 0004 services will be purchased at all for a given period of performance.

DOL declines to provide any further information on CLE spending.

Q19. Proposal Volume Requirements: The RFP asks for four (4) primary Volumes: I. Executive Summary, II. Technical, III. Past Performance and IV. Price. However, under Technical Volume II, it also asks for each Sub-Factor to be provided in Volume’s II thru VI. Please clarify. Should we disregard the volume reference under each sub-factor?

Response: Yes. DOL wishes each Sub-Factor, other than Past Performance and Price, to be addressed solely in Volume II, Technical.

Q20. Proposal Submission Requirements/Sub-Factor 2 System Capabilities: This section has a 10-page limit. In order to adequately address the overall requirement plus the two Sample Tasks, can DOL increase the page limit to 20 pages or allow for the Sample Task responses to be provided in an Appendix and not count toward the page limit?

Response: DOL has no objection to an offeror placing the Sample Task responses in an Appendix that will not count against the page limit.