The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
RFP QUESTIONS RFP 16-250-SOL-00001
Questions were due by: 10/8/15 by 1:00 pm ET Project Name: Technical Assistance for the MCHB Division of Home Visiting and Early Childhood Systems
| # |
| Question |
| Section of RFP |
| Page |
Government Response (to be provided)
| 1 |
| What is the anticipated period of performance for the Base Year in terms of month and date? |
| Attachment A - SOW |
| 73 |
| Estimated date mid-November to mid-December. |
| 2 |
| Is the GPAT considered part of the 80 pages within the Technical Proposal? |
| M.5.1 |
| 59 |
| No. |
| 3 |
| The SOW describes deliverables at certain days. Are the days considered business days or calendar days? |
Schedule of Deliverables. For the Tasks listed, can the number of days shown be indicated as “business days” for 3.2, 3.3, 4.2, 10.1, 10.3, and 11 rather than just “days.”
Attachment A – SOW and F.4 73 – 86 and 14-15 Calendar days apply unless otherwise noted.
| 4 |
| The SOW mentions that the contractor shall develop and maintain a secure web based technical assistance tracking system. Is this system different from the TATS system? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 5 |
| 76 |
| Yes. |
| 5 |
| For the State TA Plans, is the expectation that the contractor will develop all 56 TA plans each year or at other intervals? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 7 |
| 77 |
| States have been working on their TA plans over the last year, and they are in various stages of development. The contractor will build upon the existing 56 TA plans each year. |
| 6 |
| How many of the State TA plans were completed by the previous or incumbent contractor in the previous or current iteration of the contract? Will the new contractor have the responsibility of completing all 56 TA State Plans in the Base Year? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 5 |
| 77 |
| States have been working on their TA plans over the last year, and they are in various stages of development. The contractor shall be responsible for updating and revising the 56 state plans each year. |
| 7 |
| Since the SOW states that the contractor shall handle the licensure requirements for alternate webinar technology, is the expectation that the contractor will utilize HRSA’s Adobe Connect? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 8 |
| 78 |
| No. |
| 8 |
| What is the average length of the webinars? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 8.1 |
| 78 |
| Webinars vary in length from 60 to 90 minutes. |
| 9 |
| For the 115 one-on-one TA occurrences via telephone, e-mail or both, is there an expectation of utilizing Subject Matter Experts for all if the TA occurrences? If not, how many consultant days are anticipated for all 115 TA events? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 9.1 |
| 81 |
| The contractor will propose staffing levels. We consider consultants to be subject matter experts. For proposal purposes, offerors should assume 75 occurrences will require 2 hours; 20 will require 6 hours; and 20 will require multiple interventions totaling 8 hours. |
| 10 |
| For the SME Visits, what is the anticipated HRSA daily rate of pay for consultants? |
| Attachment A – SOW; Task 9.2 |
| 81 |
| The rate may not exceed $750/day. |
| 11 |
| Should the purchase of personal computers for project personnel be budgeted as supplies? |
No, the purchase of personal computers for project personnel should not be charged to supplies. Computers/laptops are considered real property/equipment not supplies and the offerors are expected to have the necessary infrastructure and resources to perform the work. Section H.13 of the RFP states that “HRSA does not intend to authorize or provide funds for the purchase, lease, rental, or maintenance of any equipment under this contract.”
| 12 |
| Page 72 of the RFP, section 7.2, references a sample state technical assistance plan, which does not appear to be included in the attachments. Could HRSA please provide a copy of the sample TA plan? |
| 72 |
| Please see Sample Plan attached. |
| 13 |
| Is there an incumbent contractor for this work? If so, then please provide the name of the contractor. |
| General |
| N/A |
| This is a new requirement. |
| 14 |
| What is the Government referring to in terms of BPA since this is a full and open competition? |
| SF 33, Item 5 |
| 2 |
| As a full and open competition, all qualified parties may participate including current HRSA BPA holders. Insert N/A if not applicable. |
| 15 |
| Prior Authorization of Certain Direct Costs. If a subcontractor is a member of an Offeror’s team, does the prime still need to seek approval to award a subcontract to that subcontractor if the scope of work and costs essentially are the same as what was proposed and accepted by the Government as part of the awarded contract? |
| B.5.3.a |
| 7 |
| Prior authorization of subcontracts applies as prescribed in FAR 52.244-2 Subcontracts (OCT 2010). |
| 16 |
| Is the Government saying that the indirect rates can never go higher than the current fixed ceiling rates and can never go higher over the 5-year contract period? What happens if there is a new NICRA with a higher rate ceiling? |
| B.5.4.c |
| 7–8 |
| The fixed ceiling rates current at the time of award shall apply for the 5-year contract period. |
| 17 |
| The Key Personnel section identifies the following person as essential to the work being performed under the contract: Principal Investigator/Project Manager. However, the Personnel section requires a Project Director. Does the Government require a Principal Investigator/Project Manager or a Project Director? |
| G.4 |
M.5.4.A Please see revised Technical Evaluation Criteria and the revised Attachment B: Labor Categories.
Project Director shall be used.
| 18 |
| Communication Products. How much time should a contractor estimate for obtaining the required additional clearances? |
| H.1 |
| 21 |
| The Contractor should plan using the due dates as listed in the Schedule of Deliverables. The COR will organize clearance approval as necessary. |
| 19 |
| How much time should a contractor factor in for obtaining the necessary background investigation of the proposed personnel? |
| H.11 |
| 25 |
| If a background investigation is necessary, Government notification will be issued. For the purpose of this proposal, no time needs to be allocated for background investigations. |
| 20 |
| Will the Government accept the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) as an appendix and not part of the page limit? |
| L.4.5 |
| 51 |
| No, the QASP is part of the Technical Proposal and is included in the page limit. |
| 21 |
| Are subcontractors allowed to submit sealed bid packages containing confidential cost data along with the Prime’s proposal? |
| L.5 |
| 51–54 |
| Subcontractors may submit a separate email with their cost data. |
| 22 |
| Since the solicitation requires the completion of Attachment H by past performance references, will the Government accept a table detailing the contracts for which past performance questionnaires were submitted? |
| L.5.2.a.4 |
| 53 |
| No, a table is not sufficient. |
| 23 |
| Administrative and Management Data. This paragraph calls for the contractor to provide name and title of the Project Manager for the base IDIQ contract. Then it states that the Key Personnel will be responsible for overall management of the base IDIQ contract. As this is not an IDIQ contract, per L.12, please provide clarification/correction of this section. |
| L.5.2.g |
| 54 |
| This was an oversight. Please see revised RFP and provide Key Personnel for the contract. |
| 24 |
| Is the GPAT included in the page limit? |
| M.5.1 |
| 59 |
| See question #2. |
| 25 |
| Will the Government accept job descriptions for positions where a resume is not available? |
| M.5.4.A |
| 62 |
| No, the technical evaluation criteria require resumes for all personnel on this project. |
| 26 |
| Does the Government anticipate a single TA Specialist assigned to each region or can the TA Specialist cover multiple regions? |
| M.5.4.A |
| 63 |
| The contractor should determine the level of effort necessary to fulfill the tasks in the statement of work. A single TA specialist may cover multiple regions. |
| 27 |
| Will the Government accept the project management plan as an appendix and not part of the page limit? |
| M.5.5 |
| 64 |
| No, the project plan is part of the technical proposal and is included in the page limit. |
| 28 |
| Will the Government accept up to three past performance references as a combined total from both the prime and subcontractor? |
| M.5.7 |
| 68 |
| Up to three past performance references should be received on behalf of the prime contractor. |
| 29 |
| During the kickoff meeting, it notes various plans to be reviewed. Does the Government require a draft data plan as part of the proposal submission? If so, will the Government accept the data plan as an appendix and not part of the page limit? |
| Attachment A, Section IV, Task 1.1 |
| 74 |
| Yes, draft plans are part of the technical proposal submission. They are counted in the page limit. |
| 30 |
| Will the Government accept the timeline as an appendix and not part of the page limit? |
| Attachment A, Section IV, Task 2.1 |
| 74 |
| The timeline is part of the technical proposal. Yes, it will be included in the page limit. |
| 31 |
| The Government requires a list of staff providing technical assistance, and their contact information, as part of the monthly report. Should this list include staff and consultants, or just staff? |
| Attachment A, Section IV, Task 4.2 |
| 75 |
| Yes, it should include staff providing technical assistance including consultants. |
| 32 |
| Task 5 requires the contractor to “develop and maintain a secure web-based technical assistance tracking system.” Is it HRSA’s intent that the awarded contractor will design and maintain an entirely new infrastructure for receiving, tracking, and acting on TA requests, distinct from the Technical Assistance Tracking System (TATS) being used at HRSA now in several of its Bureaus? |
| Attachment A, Section IV, Task 5 |
| 76 |
| Yes, the contractor shall develop and maintain a secure web based technical assistance tracking system. This system is distinct from TATS. |
| 33 |
| Will the Government accept the CQI Plan as an appendix and not part of the page limit? |
| Attachment A, Section IV, Task 6.1 |
| 77 |
| The CQI plan is part of the technical proposal. It will be included in the page limit. |
| 34 |
| May the Offeror propose additional labor categories to accomplish the work? |
| Attachment B |
| 87 |
| Yes. |
| 35 |
| The RFP is missing pages numbered 112-116. Is there missing information or is the pagination incorrect |
| Instructions for Completion of SF-LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying |
| Follows 111 |
| There are no pages missing. That is a numbering error. |
| 36 |
| The GPAT—listed as part of the 80-page limit of the technical proposal—is a 10-page form in portrait layout with the right column cut off, extending beyond the width of the page. When put into landscape layout—to capture all columns—it becomes a 14-page document. Since there is a possibility that this document could expand longer when data is entered, can it be as an appendix? |
M.5 – Evaluation Criteria and Assigned Points/Weights and Attachment D – GPAT
96-105
The GPAT is not part of page limit. Please see reformatted GPAT in the revised RFP.
a. What elements are requested for Past Performance? Is it a request to list the organizations that are submitting the Past Performance Survey-Questionnaires or something else? If something else, detailed instructions are needed. (See further questions below for uncertain placement of this information—technical or business proposal.)
b. Clarification is needed for the placement of the above Past Performance information —Technical Proposal or Business Proposal:
· “Volume I–Technical Proposal must not contain references to cost; however, … past performance, etc., must be contained in the technical proposal so that your understanding of the statement of work may be evaluated.”
· “Business Proposal – should include the following:
· “Administrative & Proposed Contractual Documents… Past Performance, etc.”
· “In order to establish uniformity, the technical proposal must be organized in the following sections:
“ 7. Past Performance “
· “a. The Offeror, at a minimum, must submit the following information in sufficient detail to enable a complete analysis of the Offeror’s management capabilities and responsibility:
“ 4. Record of past performance as required in Section M”
· “Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth below based on a 100 point total.
“ 7. Past Performance”
L.1.2 – General Information
L.1.2 – General Information, Volume II—Business Proposal
L.4.3 – Technical Proposal Instructions – Volume I
L.5.2, Administrative and Management Data [Business proposal]
M.5, Evaluation Criteria and Assigned Points/Weights – Technical Evaluation Criteria
Past performance surveys are requested according to page 67 of the RFP.
A list of organizations submitting past performance questionnaires is not necessary.
Offerors may also discuss their past performance in their technical proposals.
| 38 |
| The research and evaluation experts are called out as key staff in additional to technical assistance experts. Please clarify the expected role of these research experts in providing TA and in specific tasks or subtasks. |
| M.5. Evaluation Criteria and Assigned Points/Weights |
| 63 |
| The role of the research and evaluation experts includes CQI and evaluation of all activities outlined in the scope of work for reporting functions. In addition, the research and evaluation expert may participate in Tasks 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12 |
| 39 |
| Beyond fold-outs, please confirm that text in tables, graphics, and charts within the narrative can be 10 Times New Roman. |
| Section L L.1.4 |
| 49 |
| Yes, tables, graphics and charts may be 10 point font Times New Roman. |
| 40 |
| The labor category qualifications and descriptions in the Evaluation Criteria do not match the labor category qualifications and descriptions in Attachment B. Which of these should vendors adhere to? |
| M.5. Evaluation Criteria and Assigned Points/Weights & Section J. Attachment B. Labor Categories |
| 62-63 & 87-89 |
| Please see the revised technical evaluation criteria and the revised labor category qualifications. |
| 41 |
| Confirm that Webinar presenters cannot be remunerated. If the contractor staff is presenting, can staff time be charged? |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 78 |
| Some webinar moderators and presenters may be federal employees, grantees, or stakeholders who will not be paid through this contract. |
If Contracting Staff are presenting, staff time can be charged to the contract.
| 42 |
| Will HRSA encourage faculty experts from existing HV initiatives to be available as Webinar experts? |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 82-84 |
| The Contractor shall recommend Webinar experts with input from the COR. |
| 43 |
| Confirm that subject matter experts for site visits can be paid but only up to $750/day. |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 82-84 |
| Please see question 10. |
| 44 |
| Confirm that model developers will not be remunerated for conference calls, in-person meetings or Webinars. |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 82-84 |
| Model developers are not paid under this contract. |
| 45 |
| Clarify whether identification and recruitment of presenters for in-person meetings is done by HRSA or collaboratively with contractor. |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 82-84 |
| Collaboratively. |
| 46 |
| Clarify whether other stakeholders beyond model developers who attend in-person meetings will be reimbursed for their time and travel. If so, clarify whether the contractor or HRSA will remunerate them. |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 82-84 |
| For Task 10.2, In-Person Model Develop Meetings, the participants will be reimbursed through their own organizations, not through this contract. |
The Contractor will not have to reimburse them.
| 47 |
| Can related cooperative agreements be submitted as past performance references? |
| Attachment H |
| 119-123 |
| Past performance surveys from related cooperative agreements are acceptable. |
| 48 |
| Can a large state TA contract be submitted as a past performance reference? |
| Attachment H |
| 119-123 |
| A past performance survey completed by a State for a TA contract is acceptable. Not the contract itself. |
| 49 |
| Please confirm that there are no evaluation points associated with the small business subcontracting plan. |
| M.5, Evaluation Criteria and Assigned Points/Weights – Technical Evaluation Criteria |
| 59 |
| There are no technical evaluation points associated with the subcontracting plan. |
| 50 |
| Regarding the specific expectations for small business subcontracting goals, will a company who submits a proposal which includes a plan that does not meet all of these goals be disqualified or otherwise penalized? |
| Attachment I. Small Business Subcontracting Plan |
| 128-129 |
| Subcontracting plans will be reviewed and negotiated prior to award. Please see Section I of the RFP which contains clauses pertaining to subcontracting plans. |
| 51 |
| Subtask 9.1 and Task 11 mention coordinating activities with other HRSA and ACF Technical Assistance providers. Will these technical assistance contracts end during the period of performance for this contract, and if so, will there be a re-competition for those contracts? |
Other TA contracts and subsequent re-competitions will not be addressed here. Please check fbo.gov for future competitions.
| 52 |
| Can you provide sample topics, estimated level of effort, and expertise required for the two (2) data reports anticipated in addition to the regular monthly reports? Will these reports require research expertise? |
| Attachment A. IV. Tasks |
| 76 |
| Sample topics include: (1) analysis of TA topics by state, and (2) analysis of the demographic data collected on states and communities. Levels of effort are not provided since each offeror will determine the level of effort necessary to complete each task. |
See Section M.4 for Personnel and Organizational expertise required for this contract which would apply to reporting functions.
