Final_Edison_Clarification_Questions_.docx

EDISON JOB CORPS CENTER

SOLICITATION NUMBER

1630J1-18-R-00004 Amendment 0004

1. The responses to material questions with regard to fee is contradictory and require further clarification:

a. The Government response to clarifications with regard to Government instructions to bill fee are contradicted by the response that instructs no fee will be allowed to be billed until the fees are earned. Final determination of the fee earned does not take place until after each contract year. Understanding how and if fee will be allowed to be billed is a fundamental question that must be addressed for offerors.

b. We understand that the average fee of 2% should be proposed for evaluation purposes, but there remains questions to what will be the allowed fee that can be billed after award and the process, if any, that the Government can take to change the allowed billable fee.

Response- See RFP Sections G.3.1 and G.3.2 below:

G.3.1: Technical Performance Incentive Fee:

Under the terms of this cost plus incentive fee contract, the contractor shall have the opportunity to earn a technical performance incentive fee and a technical performance excellence bonus for center operations, and for Outreach/Admissions (OA), and Career Transition Services (CTS), if applicable, based on achievement of goals. The technical performance incentive fee shall range from 0% to 2.4% of total direct and indirect costs, excluding fee, CRA, equipment, CTST, and demonstration projects.

Annually, the Employment & Training Administration (ETA) will establish and publish the performance range for the upcoming Program Year (PY). Performance ranges may fluctuate from year to year based on performance history for the preceding year. To ensure that eventual costs to the Government do not exceed budget availability, the performance range will be set so that there is a balanced distribution between higher and lower performers.

The performance range will identify maximum and minimum incentive fee payment levels as follows:

Maximum: level at which the contractor receives the maximum available incentive fee payment (2.4%) of proposed costs.

Minimum: level below which the contractor receives no incentive fee payment (0%)

Incremental incentive fee payment levels will be established for each level of OMS performance (to one decimal point) within each Program Year’s established performance range; i.e., amounts will be established incrementally for 90.0%, 90.1%, 90.2%, etc.

The contractor’s performance and the amount of technical performance incentive fee earned shall be determined annually after the close of the contract year, based on achievement of Program Year goals within the Job Corps’ Outcome Measurement System (OMS). Each contractor’s performance will be evaluated based on the portion of the contract year that occurred during the Program Year for which the performance range was in effect.

In order to motivate and reward excellence in performance, those contractors whose performance exceeds the top of the National Performance Range will be eligible to earn a technical performance excellence bonus.

Under the resultant terms of this contract, the performance range will identify incentive fee payment levels as follows for Center Operations:

Center Operations:

(0%)

Fee (2.0%)

(4.0%) Maximum Technical Performance Fee (2.4%)

If applicable under this RFP and the resultant contract, the technical performance incentive fees for OA and CTS shall be as follows.

G.3.2 Billing and Payment of Cost Incentive Fees:

The contractor will be permitted to invoice the 2.0% average cost incentive fee on a twice a monthly basis, to be included in the invoice described in Section G.5, Invoice Requirements. On its invoice, the contractor would invoice the total minimum cost incentive fee in equal increments.

Upon completion of the contract year, the Contracting Officer will determine the amount of cost incentive fee earned by the contractor, using the cost incentive fee calculation identified in the table above. If additional cost incentive fee is earned, above the average 2.0% which the contractor has already billed, the Contracting Officer will issue a bi-lateral contract modification to increase the estimated cost and funding on the contract’s cost incentive fee line. Upon receipt of the modification, the contractor would include the additional cost incentive fee earned on the next monthly invoice. If there is no additional fee earned, the Contracting Office will advise the contractor accordingly.

Technical Performance Incentive Fee:

Upon completion of the contract year, the Contracting Officer will utilize the Job Corps’ Outcome Measurement System (OMS) data to evaluate the contractor’s overall technical performance, based on achievement of Program Years’ goals, and will determine the level of technical performance incentive fee earned by the contractor. The Contracting Officer will then issue a bi-lateral contract modification to increase the estimated cost and funding on the contract’s technical performance incentive fee line if incentive fee is earned. Upon receipt of the modification, the contractor would include the technical performance incentive fee earned on the next monthly invoice. Performance Excellence Bonuses will be awarded at the end of the contract year as well. Please note that the contractor shall not invoice for any technical performance incentive fee. Offerors shall propose the average technical performance incentive fee of 1.2% and then there is technical performance incentive fee earned during a performance period, the Regional Contracting Office will advise the contractor accordingly.

2. The Request for Clarification document responded to two questions for item 28 with OCM to respond. We have not yet received a response from OCM.

(1) The RFP states that the contractor agrees to have a maximum vacancy rating not exceeding 4%. Is there a financial or liquidated damages assessment for exceeding the 4%? If so, what is the assessment calculation? Response - per page 31 – “ Damages will be assessed at the rate of 50 percent of the value specified for the vacant position(s) from days 31 through 60. Damages will be assessed at the full value specified for the vacant positions after 60 days. Damages will be assessed and subtracted from a subsequent voucher.”

(2) Please clarify how the allowable maximum vacancy rating of 4% or less is calculated (based on FTE’s or salaries). Response – see above response

(3) In the 4% maximum vacancy limitation, will considerations/adjustments be made for the following:

a. Coverage provided by other positions, substitutes, overtime, etc. Response - No

b. Proposed float savings - With the expectation that turnover and vacancies will occur, it has been standard practice to propose float/vacancy savings and reduce the proposed costing accordingly.

(4) How will the government determine the 30-day vacancy window? Response – the date contract starts. How will this be reported to the government? Response – email to the COR as well as in CITRIX – Financial Management System (FMS)

(5) Please detail what is meant by the “value specified for the vacant position”. The proposal will provide only the annual position amount. It would be excessive to utilize 50% of the annual labor cost to determine the liquidated damages for one month. Response-“value specified for the vacant position” is the amount listed for the position in the contract. Liquidated damages will be calculated in accordance with Section G.12 of the RFP.

(6) Please confirm the liquidated damages will be executed via contract modification by the Government before the contractor is to subtract the amount from a subsequent voucher. Response- Liquidated damages will be assessed and subtracted from a subsequent voucher.

(7) Please confirm Section G.12 is not applicable to the CTS section.

Response- Correct, Section G.12 is not applicable to CTS.

3. Listing of GSA vehicles are no longer part of attachment J.10 (EPMS) and therefore has not been provided by the Government for this RFP. See attached list of vehicles.

4. The Government’s response did not address the confusion with regard to who would be categorized as Security Guard or Residential Counselor. This could be the difference between a responsive and responsible submission and one that is not responsive.

a. Are offerors allowed to have staff in the security department supporting Security Guards who are not themselves categorized as Security Guards?

Response- Yes

b. Are offerors allowed to have staff in the dormitories supporting student living and development and Residential Counselors that are not categorized themselves as Residential Counselors.

Response- Yes

5. The response to our request for clarifications raised an additional request for clarification. The response for item 53 said there are 3 instructors for the Advanced Auto trade, with 72 slots. Since these are Advanced Training slots, the students are no longer in academic classes so they are in their CTT classroom all day. 3 instructors for 72 Advanced Training slots would make the student/teacher ration 24/1. The PRH requires a ratio of 12-15 to one. Should we interpret this as meaning there are actually 36 Full Time slots (72 half time)? The same question applies to Advanced Plumbing, where the clarification response shows there are 20 slots. Since this is also an advanced trade, students are not in academics anymore. So, should we assume this means 10 Full Time slots (20 half time)? Are the slots listed in item 10, specific to advanced training trades (automotive and plumbing), half time slots? This will make a difference in our proposed staffing levels.

Response- The 72 slots are 36 full-time slots for Advanced Auto. With 3 instructors, the student-teacher ratio is 12/1. Similarly, the Advanced Plumbing trade with its 20 slots has 10 full-time slots.