Amendment_No_1_Gerald_Ford_Q&As.pdf

1630J4-18-R-00001 AMENDMENT 1

GERALD FORD QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

1. Page # / Reference Page 4, Section B.1

Discussion

Question/Comment Is this RFP a total small business set-aside? The FBO announced it as such, but the RFP does not identify the restriction.

Government Response Yes.

2. Page # / Reference Page 4, Section B.2

Discussion

Question/Comment 1. Please clarify the third paragraph that states: “FFP CLINs 0002, 1002, 2002, and 3002 in the Pricing Schedule shall be based on fully burdened hourly rates.” The referenced CLINs are not consistently used for cost categories related to “hourly rates.” For example, SubCLINs under the parent CLIN 0002 include costs for academic supplies, clothing, dorm supplies, etc.

Will the statement be corrected to “…shall be based on fully burdened hourly rates?”

2. Paragraph six states: “…overall CLIN amount will be provided by the Government and will not be considered as part of the Offeror’s total evaluated cost.” Is this section intended to refer to the CR NTE for Capital-type funding for Construction/Rehab, Equipment, CTST and Demonstration Projects (CLINs 0010, 0011, 0012 & 0013), not the CR NTE for operations? There are statements that Cost Reimbursable NTE amounts will be provided at time of award.

3. The RFP states, “Cost Reimbursable Not-to-Exceed (NTE) overall CLIN amount will be provided by the Government and will not be considered as part of the Offeror’s total evaluated cost. Contractors will invoice for actual costs during the performance of this contract. The Contractor agrees to notify the Government in accordance with FAR 52.232-22 (c), when the Cost Reimbursable NTE reaches 75% of the set amount.” Please clarify this statement as the CR NTE lines are required to be listed on the J-1 Pricing Schedule. Does this mean DOL will manually exclude all proposed CR NTE lines from their evaluated cost approach; and, include only the offeror’s FFP calculated costs on the J-1?

Government Response 1. Yes. These items are considered fixed price items that make up the overall Center Operations price.

2. Paragraph 6 refers to the Cost-Reimbursable Not-to-Exceed Line Items, which are not considered part of the Offeror’s proposed price.

3. The CR NTE amounts are not part of the evaluated cost.

3. Page # / Reference Page 4, Section B.2 & Page 35, Section G.4

Discussion

Question/Comment Section B states: “…the Contractor to bill ½ of that unit price per semi-monthly invoice at the parent CLIN.” Please clarify/correct.

1. The language in Section G for invoicing is inconsistent, which requires detail for the fully burdened labor rates.

a. The semi-month unit price will include the fully burdened labor rates. The FFP CLINs include staff lines and non-staff lines.

b. Please explain why the invoicing for the Fixed Price CLINs/SubCLINs should not be as described in Section B. The detail labor rate for each employee should not be necessary.

Billing by the unit cost will allow the contractor to bill for all of the SubCLINs (labor and non-labor) in the same format.

2. Define the “Staffing Report from the FMS system” that is referenced to be included for the billing period. Is this a new report? The current FMS system report is not adequate for this purpose.

3. It appears this contract will have a different invoicing process from the current PRH procedures for vouchering. Will the PRH be updated to provide the new guidelines and format?

Government Response 1. This language is consistent. Sections B and G require the contractor to bill/invoice ½ of the unit price on a semi-monthly basis.

a. Confirmed. This is correct.

b. Confirmed. This is correct.

2. The FMS System has an area in Staffing Report that provides the information required for invoicing.

3. The PRH will be updated as applicable.

4. Page # / Reference Pages 5-12, Section B.2

Discussion

Question/Comment 1. Please confirm the CR CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003 and 3003 will be expected to be managed on the overall cost total by Parent CLINs, instead of by SubCLINs. The contract may require adjustments amongst the SubCLIN lines in option year budgets based on actual experience.

2. CLIN 0001 is titled Phase-In. CLIN 3006 is titled Phase-out.

Please confirm the costs associated with these periods are cost reimbursable as the RFP is not clear. What is CLIN 0010, Termination? How does this compare to the Phase-out? What are the instructions for proposing the Termination CLIN?

Government Response 1. Confirmed. This is correct.

2. Phase-In and Phase-Out costs shall be provided on a Firm Fixed Price basis.

5. Page # / Reference Page 6, Section B.2 and Page 35, Section G.7 & Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment Surge CLIN – The Pricing Schedule includes a CLIN for pricing of

Surge OBS. The government notes: “Changes reflected in OBS shall be based on per student price (in blocks of ten)”. This appears to be a unit price in blocks of 10.

1. The increase in OBS is not a simple calculation using SY cost.

Many of the costs in operating a center do not change proportionately with OBS changes; therefore, adjusting the contract strictly based on cost per student in blocks of ten is not reflective of what costs will change due to lower/higher OBS.

Some costs are fixed regardless of OBS. Additionally; the costs may differ based on trades that may be revised, the residential or non-residential designation of the slots, etc. Will the government consider other methods to adjust the contract OBS instead of using per student price in blocks of ten?

2. The Pricing Summary does not consistently reference the proposed quantity. Some periods are blank while one option includes a quantity of 10.

3. How will the surge rate, which is comprised of FFP and CR components, be modified into a contract that is a combination of FFP and CR CLINs? Please advise.

Government Response 1. Offerors should average costs that include all costs per student. Currently, there is no other option or method to adjust the contract other than OBS per student price in blocks of ten.

2. The only reference to “10” is the Surge CLIN, which is correct.

3. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

6. Page # / Reference Page 14, Section C.1.D, Page 21, Section C.3.E.7 & Page 27, Section F.5

Discussion Question/Comment Based on the new requirements of the RFP, various sections of the PRH are not relevant and/or require revision.

1. The PRH is referenced in the RFP as the requirement to follow including complying with all updates and amendments. Will the PRH be updated for this FFP contract?

2. The PRH requirements must be held constant based on time of proposal/award. Otherwise, as the program lines are fixed price (Lines 01, 02, 03 and 04 – Academic and CTT), contractors will be forced to submit Requests for Equitable Adjustments (REA) regularly as the proposed/fixed contract prices will be based on the current requirements. The Job Corps’ annual revisions to the performance measures also have cost implications that will impact the fixed price lines. For example, the Office of Job Corps annually adjusts the performance measures and weights, which may shift the contractor’s focus and cause changes in the costs of the Fixed Price lines.

3. Provide a description of the monthly contract reporting responsibilities, as the PRH financial requirements must change with the implementation of the Fixed Price components. The RFP includes the contract clause about financial management according to the PRH. Currently the PRH does not address financial management of a Firm-Fixed-Price contract. As the majority of the CLINs are fixed price, please confirm the contract will be granted a PRH waiver for budget and expense reporting.

These changes may also require FMS system revisions.

4. Section F.5 cites Exhibit 5-2, which requires a lot of financial reporting for cost-reimbursable contracts. Please confirm the financial requirements are only applicable for the cost-reimbursable CLINs.

Government Response 1. Performance measures do not cause a significant impact on cost.

2 The PRH will be updated as applicable.

3. Where the PRH is silent, the contract will take precedence.

4. The Cost Reimbursement Not-To-Exceed CLINs are: 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and its corresponding SubClins.

7. Page # / Reference Page 28/F .5 Discussion Question/Comment 1. The RFP indicates Outreach and Admissions services will be performed under this contract. Please clarify if there are OA requirements for this SOW. And, the center gap table has one total and the arrival by month has a different total.

2. The Gerald Ford Center is listed as having an OA contract with arrival goals of 426 but the expected recruitment area, or geographic assignment, is not referenced anywhere in the RFP.

Will the contractor be allowed to, or be expected to, recruit across the entire state of Michigan?

3. Please clarify the intent and inclusion of the Annual Arrival by Month Table on page 28 of the RFP. How can/will the awardee/operator be held responsible for month-to-month fluctuations in this arrival table, if the center operator arrives all files received from the 3rd party OA provider?

Government Response 1. OA will not be performed under this contract.

2. OA not applicable to this contract.

3. OA not applicable to this contract.

8. Page # / Reference Page 30-32, Section G.3 & Attachment J-1 Discussion

Question/Comment The fee information is incomplete and inconsistent in the RFP and Attachment J-1. The RFP language would not be adequate to implement in a contract award. Please revise and clarify.

1. The Technical Performance Incentive Fee section describes the potential for contractors to earn a “technical performance excellence bonus” in addition to the regular technical performance fee. Neither the Center Operations fee chart nor the Attachment J-1 includes a section for the calculation of this Performance Excellence Bonus. A rate and calculation must be identified in the proposal/contract. Please confirm the rate is 0.50%, as outlined in other Job Corps RFP’s. Clarify whether the offeror should revise the form.

2. The RFP fee chart is inconsistent with the Attachment J-1, Assessments & Incentive Fees, B. Incentive Fees Chart. Is the contractor expected to revise the Attachment J-1 and formulas?

a. The bases for the fee calculations are not clear. It appears the Cost Incentive is calculated using only the Cost Reimbursable CLINs. Is the Technical Fee based on the entire contract?

b. The fees are calculated using the Total Estimated Cost Amounts in the Section A-Demand for Payment table of the same worksheet. Is the Total Estimated Cost including or excluding fees? If the Total Estimated Cost amount includes incentive fees, how can the same base be used to calculate the fees again? The fee calculation must utilize a based before fees.

c. All of the contract costs contribute to the technical performance of the center; therefore, the entire contract value should be used to calculate the technical incentive fees.

Therefore, the base for fee calculations should be different for the two fees-technical incentive and cost incentive.

3. Based on Section G, it appears the Pricing Summary and Schedule cost reimbursable SubCLIN for Profit should be the Cost Incentive Fee amount.

a. The CLIN for this Attachment J-1 is from the CR NTE worksheet, which is marked to be set at award. Please confirm offerors are expected to propose the average cost incentive fee at 2%, which is consistent with the Technical Incentive Fee proposed at average?

b. If not, how is the Cost Incentive Fee presented in the Pricing Schedule? What does the CLIN 0004 for Profit listed in the CR CLIN represent?

Government Response 1. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

2. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

3a & 3b: See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

9. Page # / Reference Page 30 -31/G.3 Discussion Question/Comment The RFP indicates that both the cost incentive and technical performance fee will be calculated at year-end. Please confirm that no fee can be invoiced on a monthly basis.

Government Response The contractor’s performance and the amount of technical performance incentive fee earned shall be determined annually after the close of the contract year.

10. Page # / Reference Page 31, Section G.3 Discussion Question/Comment The cost incentive fee section excludes FAR-required information. FAR 16.405-1, Cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts, states: “This contract type specifies a target cost, a target fee, minimum and maximum fees, and a fee adjustment formula.”

1. The RFP/contract must clearly identify the terms for fee adjustment. Please confirm the following for compliance with the FAR:

a. The total of the Cost Reimbursable CLINS 0003 and similarly in option years, are the “Target Cost”;

b. Average Cost Incentive Fee represents “Target Fee;”

c. The Fee Adjustment Formula is 50% government and 50% contractor for over runs and under runs, consistent with other Job Corps contracts.

2. Will the form be revised or another form included outlining the target costs by year for center operations?

3. Please confirm contractors are allowed to invoice the Average Cost Incentive Fees of 2% throughout the contract years. Section G.3.2 does not address invoicing Cost Incentive Fees. Please revise the language accordingly.

Government Response 1a, 1b, & 1c: This a Firm Fixed Price contract with Cost Reimbursement Not-To-Exceed CLINs that are: 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and its corresponding SubClins.

2. The contractor’s performance and the amount of technical performance incentive fee earned shall be determined annually after the close of the contract year.

11. Page # / Reference Page 35/G.8 Discussion Question/Comment Student Per Year Cost and Per Day Cost: This paragraph states that the government will provide the CR NTE line item amounts.

Please clarify how the offeror should complete this section and the Attachment J-1 worksheet. Does the government expect the offeror to propose cost amounts for the FFP lines only or should the offeror estimate cost reimbursement line amounts in order to complete Attachment J-1?

12. Page # / Reference Page 36, Section G.12

Question/Comment The language of this section is not clear or adequate for contract implementation. As the RFP later becomes the contract, the language must be clarified/revised in the RFP/proposal phase.

According to FAR 11.501(b), “Liquidated damages are used to compensate the Government for probable damages. Therefore, the liquidated damages rate must be a reasonable forecast of just compensation for the harm that is caused by late delivery or untimely performance of the particular contract.”

1. The RFP states that the contractor agrees to have a maximum vacancy rating not exceeding 4%. Please define the financial or liquidated damages assessment for exceeding the 4%? The RFP is not complete in this regard. This would be double jeopardy to assess for a vacancy rate exceeding 4% as well as a specified fill rate for designated positions.

2. Please clarify how the allowable maximum vacancy rating of 4% or less is calculated (based on vacant FTE’s or salary amounts). The calculation must be standardized and defined in the contract.

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

a. Coverage provided by other positions, substitutes, overtime, etc. Contractors propose coverage for vacancies in critical areas, such as security, residential living, etc.

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. Please detail what is meant by the “value specified for the vacant position”. Assessments at 50% or 100% of a specified position rate after 30 or 60 days seems punitive.

5. Please confirm the assessments for vacancies only pertain to the position titles identified in the chart, not to other vacant positions.

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;

otherwise, the contract will not reconcile.

7. How will the government determine the 30-day vacancy window? How will this be reported to the government?

8. Would the government reconsider the 30-day requirement to fill vacancies for the Center Director, Senior Residential Counselor, Security Personnel and the Academic Supervisor? It typically takes longer than 30 days to post and advertise a vacancy; obtain and assess resumes and potential applicants;

interview for the position; vet senior candidates with the Region (including interviewing for CD candidates); and then to provide the selected candidate time to give appropriate notice to their current employer.

9. The chart of positions includes Security Personnel. As the other positions in this listing are management or senior staff, please confirm the reference of “Security Personnel” should be revised to “Security Supervisor.”

Government Response 1. The damages assessment is equal to 50% of the value (salary) specified for the vacant position from days 31-60. Demand for payment will be assessed for the full value (salary) specified for the vacant position(s) after 60 days.

2. The maximum vacancy rating will be based on total FTE.

3. No consideration will be given when coverage is provided by other positions. (i.e.: substitutes, overtime, etc., proposed float savings).

4. The value specified is the salary set for the vacant position.

5. Assessments for vacancies only pertain to Section G. 12 of the

RFP.

6. There will be no liquidated damages, but specifically “damages” which will be collected via a demand for payment letter signed by the Contracting Officer.

7. The vacancy window starts when the vacancy occurs, then 30 days out, unless filled.

8. No.

9. Yes, Security Supervisor could be one of the appropriate responses.

13. Page # / Reference Page 36, Section G.13 Discussion Question/Comment The language of this section is not clear or adequate for a contract implementation. As the RFP later becomes the contract, the language must be clarified/revised in the RFP/proposal phase. According to FAR 11.501(b), “Liquidated damages are used to compensate the Government for probable damages. Therefore, the liquidated damages rate must be a reasonable forecast of just compensation for the harm that is caused by late delivery or untimely performance of the particular contract.” We request the government to re-consider this section.

1. Job Corps policy and program changes significantly impact the OBS levels and student retention (i.e., enrollment freezes, student retention policies, behavior discipline guidelines, etc.), which are not within the contractor’s control.

2. What is the government’s plan if the center’s OBS is below 95% at time of transition? The new operator could potentially be penalized in the second month of operation at no fault of its own. Please confirm this clause will not be applicable during the first year of the contract.

3. This section should be removed if the Outreach/Admission requirement is not included in this procurement. When the OA services are separate from the center contract, the arrivals and therefore maintaining the OBS is dependent on the third-party OA contractor’s performance.

4. As students enter Job Corps and terminate throughout the year, contractors are required to maintain an average OBS during the contract year. It is unreasonable to assess damages on a daily calculation of 95%. A contract year average OBS % is more reasonable and realistic.

5. Please clarify the “value specified” as referenced in this section. The contract does not include a section identifying a value for vacant OBS slots. As only a portion of the contract is fixed price, it is not reasonable to base the assessment on the full student per day cost. The cost reimbursable costs are based on actual costs and are not incurred if the OBS is low.

6. Additionally, 20% or 100% of the value appears punitive and excessive. For example, in the Gerald R. Ford contract, 5% of the contracted OBS is less than 11 students. Minimal cost savings would be generated by the absence of 11 students for one additional day beyond 30 days. Will the government consider revising the calculation similar to the language for excessive leave days based on 20% of Student Per Day Cost?

7. 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.

Government Response 1. The language is correct.

2. This clause is applicable throughout the contract period of performance.

3. It is the contractor’s responsibility to work closely with third party OA providers to ensure the center has an adequate supply of applicants for enrollment.

4. This is not a question.

5. Value specified equals the student year cost.

6. This is not punitive. The expectations are for the center to have a 100% OBS, not to save costs.

7. Damages will be assessed via a Demand for Payment Letter and either paid via deduction from a voucher or the contractor is to remit as instructed in the letter.

14. Page # / Reference Pages 36 – 37/G-13 Discussion Question/Comment 1. This requirement in the RFP states that any new awardee will be required to increase the Center’s OBS to a minimum of 95% within 31 days following the contract start date, or damages shall be assessed, as also described in this section, and subtracted from a subsequent voucher.

2. Given this procurement does not include or require OA or CTS as part of the center operations SOW, the awardee will be dependent upon DOL’s assigned 3rd Party OA provider to continuously supply sufficient levels of folders and new arrivals (per page 28 of RFP) in order for the center to reach and maintain full OBS. From a responsibility standpoint, it would be more fair and reasonable for DOL to include an analysis of the performance of the 3rd Party OA provider in producing a sufficient level of folders and new arrivals before invoking this type of OBS liquidated damage assessment on a new awardee.

Will DOL review and consider this type of pre-review of the OA responsible party?

Government Response 1. Confirmed. This is correct.

2. It is the contractor’s responsibility to work closely with third party OA providers to ensure the center has an adequate supply of applicants for enrollment.

15. Page # / Reference Page 37, Section G.15 Discussion Question/Comment This section references reimbursement for GSA rental charges.

Currently Job Corps contractors do not process payments for GSA rental charges, instead payments are handled by the national office. It appears this section is irrelevant and should be removed.

Government Response Correct. This section is marked as Not Applicable.

16. Page # / Reference Page 40/H.6 Discussion Question/Comment With regard to Senior Residential Counselors and Residential

Counselors listed in Section H.6.C., Wage Comparability and Wage/Minimum Table, are all Residential staff positions being defined and included in this Table under H.6.C; or, can offerors include other subordinate Residential staff positions, which may include non-degreed positions to work under the supervision of Residential Counselors and/or Senior Residential Counselors? In other words, are all Residential staff positions specifically being required by DOL to meet educational requirements listed in the

PRH?

Government Response Yes.

17. Page # / Reference Page 41, Section H.6.C Discussion Question/Comment 1. Clarify the educational and experience requirements of the

Residential Counselor/Advisor position.

a. In the PRH, the residential positions have been revised to counselors with degrees. This RFP contradicts the PRH.

b. Is this RFP requiring a different position from the PRH as Residential Advisors?

c. The Counselor position has a much higher salary than the Residential Counselor/Advisor position.

d. Will the Senior Residential Counselor position be revised to Senior Residential Advisor to be consistent with the Residential Advisor position?

Government Response Per the PRH: The Residential Counselor position will be added with the award of each new center contract. The Residential Advisor position will be phased out with the award of each new center contract. The Senior Residential Advisor position will be phased out with the award of each new center contract.

18. Page # / Reference Page 51, Section H.23

Question/Comment 1. Section H.23 does not include a G&A form table, nor does the

Attachment J-1 file. It appears the RFP is incomplete without the G&A table. Additionally, the last paragraph in this Section seems incomplete missing a narrative section.

2. Typically for close-out purposes, cost reimbursable contracts must identify the contracted ceiling rate. Where will this be identified in the proposal/contract?

Government Response 1. This language is correct.

2. This a Firm Fixed Price contract with Cost Reimbursement Not-To-Exceed CLINs that are: 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003 and its corresponding SubClins.

19. Page # / Reference Page 61, Section I Discussion Question/Comment FAR 52.245-1 – Government Property (April 2012) is incorporated by reference. The RFP is incomplete regarding the materials for the FFP contract.

1. What will be available to a contractor in the new contract? In order to properly estimate the phase in costs, contractors must be provided estimated values of the following supplies at the time of transition-in:

a. Academic supplies & materials – Line 02

Government Response In accordance with the PRH Appendix 505 expendable property is not reportable (academic supplies and materials).

20. Page # / Reference Page 76, Section K.1 Discussion Question/Comment FAR clause 52.219-22 Small Disadvantaged Business Status certification is marked as applicable. Please confirm that this clause is not applicable since this clause is marked RESERVED in the FAR.

Government Response It should have been marked “Reserved.”

21. Page # / Reference Pages 87, 90, &96/L.6 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify submission requirements, as per the following: is the expectation that the proposal submission be done by four hard copies, USB Flash Drive AND by email?

a. Page 87 of the RFP requires four hard copies and one electronic version.

b. Page 90 of the RFP indicates "Please submit electronically to Reegion5Proposal@dol.gov and Jackman.Jeannette@dol.gov using the "request delivery receipt" message option."

c. Page 96 indicates "offerors shall provide the following on a USB Flash Drive using Microsoft Office."

Government Response The proposals shall be submitted by email and by 4 hardcopies.

The USB Flash Drive is not required.

22. Page # / Reference Page 89, Section L.6.I

Discussion Question/Comment The instructions at the top of the page reference Attachment J-

3. Please confirm this attachment is irrelevant to this proposal and will be removed from this section.

Government Response Confirm. There is no Attachment J-3.

23. Page # / Reference Page 90, Section L.6 Discussion Question/Comment The submission instructions are confusing.

1 Are the email addresses for submission correct? The CO’s email address is different from the CO designated for this procurement.

2. The due date is listed as January 05 and January 08 in this section. Please clarify.

Government Response

24. Page # / Reference Page 96/Par Factor 5 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify that the BMP must include both an Attachment J1 showing all costs and a complete Narrative Detail showing all costs?

Government Response The email addresses for proposal submission are correct. Refer to amendment 1 for the revised proposal due date.

25. Page # / Reference Page 98/Para b Discussion Question/Comment 1. Under the Pricing Schedule and Cost Detail., the first paragraph states the Not-To-Exceed (NTE) line items will be provided by the government. Does this include the cost reimbursement line items? Please clarify if the offeror is expected to provide estimated amounts for Sub CLIN 0003.

2. Please confirm offerors should include the average cost incentive fee of 2.0% on the cost reimbursable CLINs 0003, 1003, etc. This section excludes cost incentive fees, but the Attachment J-1 requires input.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

26. Page # / Reference Page 98, Para c Discussion Question/Comment The Narrative Cost Detail section appears irrelevant to the solicitation.

1. Please confirm this section will be removed as the Attachment J-1 requires the line information.

2. The reference to ETA 2110, Attachment J-3 is not relevant.

The form is marked “RESERVED” in the J section.

3. Attachment J-1 requires detail for the FFP lines. The section requiring salary detail seems redundant as it will be provided in the Attachment J-1 file.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

27. Page # / Reference Page 99, Para c Discussion Question/Comment The government must clarify the phase-in/phase-out processes for the change in the contract type from the current cost reimbursable contract to a firm-fixed-price contract (i.e., title passage for materials/inventory on hand, identification of property/materials, etc.).

1. As some inventory items will be chargeable to the Fixed Price lines, how will the supplies/materials be transferred between contractors during transition? Here are some examples of FFP SubCLINs:

a. Academic & CTT supplies (Lines 02 & 04)

b. Residential & recreation supplies (Line 06)

c. Student clothing (Line 08)

d. Dorm supplies, including linens (Line 10)

e. Staff and student office supplies (Line 16)

Government Response Each contractor must submit their proposed Phase-In/Phase-Out plan. As far as the Phase In/Phase out period, the incumbent contractor will stay under the same contract type until phase is completed. The new contractor will be under the new contract type during the Phase-In period. Each Phase/In/Phase out plan should designate how FFP SubCLINs should transfer under their plan.

28. Page # / Reference Page 103/M.2 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify how the required Oral Presentation will be weighted in the Evaluation Criteria currently contained in Section M of the RFP.

Government Response The oral presentation is not weighted as an evaluation factor.

Section M of the solicitation contains the evaluation factors.

29. Page # / Reference Page # / Reference General Question Discussion Question/Comment The GSA Fleet/Vehicle List was not included as attachment with the RFP. Will DOL be providing the GSA Fleet/Vehicle List in a forthcoming amendment in order that the appropriate insurance costs can be estimated?

Government Response See Amendment 1 for attachment.

30. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment 1. Please confirm the amount of fee that should be proposed for the Cost Incentive Fee and Technical Performance Fee.

2. Is there a separate cost incentive fee for the FFP lines from the fully loaded total that incorporates the fee that is included in each line item? What cost fee is expected to be recorded on the "incentive fee" worksheet.

Government Response 1. 1.2%

2. No. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

31. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify the column for surge capacity. The table indicates the period of performance is two years and then one-year options but the link is for a daily total for a block of ten only.

Government Response The Center will be evaluated each year including the 1st year of the base period. If the Operator has an OBS increase of 10 valid placements, then the contract value for the next period would be increased.

32. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify the expectation for the FFP worksheets and the links to the pricing summary. The FFP worksheets row formulas result in monthly totals but the table and the pricing summary suggest a total for the period of performance by CLIN. Please clarify.

Government Response This is correct.

33. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment 1. Overall Contract Value Table tab: Overall Contract value column does not include cost reimbursable CLINS and associated G&A and profit. Where will the total overall cost of the contract be reported?

2. Overall Contract Value Table tab: Why does the “Overall Contract Value” column not include costs associated with performance fees from the last column of the table. Currently nowhere on the spreadsheet is a grand total of all proposed costs provided.

3. Overall Contract Value Table tab: The formula in the “Overall FTE Personnel Total” column does include the cell reference for the FTE totals from each personnel tab. Presently only FTE totals for academic personnel are reported in the “overall FTE personal total” column. Also, the formula is only picking up the FTE total from the “Contractor FTE” column and does not include FTE’s from the “Subcontractor FTE” column.

4. Pricing Summary tab: The schedule provides a place for each performance period for a Grand Total but there is no formula in the spreadsheet to calculate a Grand Total.

5. Personnel tabs: There is no formula to total the “Subcontractor FTE” column, which is needed for the FTE’s reported in the “Overall Contract Value table” tab.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

34. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment 1. Please clarify the formulas in the pricing summary worksheet and the FFP line worksheets; the pricing summary worksheet is multiplying by the contract period 24 or 12 months that is loaded into column C.

2. The FFP line items, per the example given for line 01 is computing an amount for the contract periods. Does the government want the FFP worksheets amounts to be for one month and annualized on the pricing summary worksheet.

Please clarify and to be consistent change the formulas or allow the offeror to change the formula.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

35. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment There is no CLIN for outreach and admissions. Please clarify.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

36. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment The J-1 Form, as shown on pages 5-12, includes both firm fixed price and cost reimbursement not to exceed line items.

Typically, an operator does not calculate certain line items on a monthly basis, for example: 02 Other Academics Expenses, 04 Other CTT Expenses, and 06 Other Career Success Expenses, because these line items include costs that can vary from month to month. For example, in the 02 line item, operators typically allocate funding on an annual basis for a total number of anticipated HSE exams. Operators cannot predictably allocate this line item on a monthly basis as the number of exams will vary based on multiple factors. Also, allocating a monthly allotment for text book purchases is not feasible. The same scenario applies to the 04 line item. Operators allocate funding on an annual basis so that we have a pool of money available to cover the cost of credentials. Operators do not have set dates for credential testing as this varies from month to month based on when students complete training. This method of funding will force operators to hold students who have completed until the next month if they have exhausted their funding in the 02 or 04 line items. Please review and consider revising this pricing approach as it is not appropriate for Job Corp’s management and operations in these types of cost areas.

Government Response Currently, there are no plans for making a revision of this type.

37. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment There are many formula and linking issues with the Attachment

J-1 Pricing Schedule, but the file includes instructions not to revise the formulas. Please clarify/revise the worksheet.

1. It appears the Attachment J-1 Pricing Summary is intended to summarize the base period total and option year annual amounts. The detail worksheets in the current file do not function properly to produce these totals.

2. In the labor/staffing worksheets, there is a column titled “Monthly Hours,” but based on the sample data provided it appears the annual hours should be entered. Is that correct?

3. Are offerors expected to revise the formulas to correct the calculations? If so, how will the government ensure the accuracy and consistency of the proposals for evaluation purposes?

4. Formula Examples:

a. The FFP CLIN references 28-Contractor’s Technical Performance Incentive Fee, but it is linked to the calculation of the Cost Incentive Fee on the DFP & Incentive Fees tab.

b. The FFP CLIN total in the Pricing Summary does not include the SubCLIN 28 amount; therefore, the total is understated.

c. The CR NTE CLIN total does not include the Profit SubCLINs;

therefore, the total is understated.

Government Response 1. This is correct. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

2. Monthly as the Pricing Summary Table will calculate each year.

3. No.

4(a)(b)(c): See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

38. Page # / Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment There are many problems with the Attachment J-1, as mentioned previously. The integrity of the file is questionable as the formulas and links are inconsistent and incomplete.

Additional issues are summarized below:

1. Positions by Title and Holidays

a. Are offerors expected to categorize positions in the detailed personnel worksheets according to the Positions by Title worksheet categories of Managers, Instructors and Staff

Support? If so, please clarify how contractors should categorize duplicated positions that appear in multiple columns (i.e., Accountant title in Manager and Instructor categories, Physician title in all three columns-Manager, Instructor and Staff Support).

b. Are contractors required to follow the 10 holidays listed?

2. Overall Contract Value Table

a. Is the Surge CLIN price part of the overall evaluated price?

b. The Cost Reimbursable NTE total amount is incorrect. The formula is linked to FFP CLINs, not CR, and only a portion of the contract years are included. The total is not represented correctly. Please revise.

3. How are offerors expected to complete the forms for the Other FFP Expenses?

a. Some worksheets include unidentified columns, but the worksheets include total formulas.

b. For the FFP Other Expenses, is it sufficient for the proposal to only include totals on each worksheet?

4. The CR NTE worksheet includes the CR Other Expenses, but it is marked as “NTE AMOUNTS TO BE SET AT AWARD.”

a. Please confirm the statement is incorrect for this section and the offeror is expected to complete this worksheet.

b. The Totals fields are not summing correctly. The G&A and Profit lines have been excluded, so this worksheet will not tie to the Pricing Summary sheet.

c. Please clarify the applicability of the Line 27 Detail worksheet to the proposal requirements. The CR NTE worksheet includes a line for Line 27.

i. Please confirm the detailed worksheet is for tracking after award as the worksheet makes reference to expenses.

ii. The Total field is not calculating the costs correctly. The Airfare, Rental Car, Mileage and Miscellaneous cells are excluded from the total.

iii. The detail worksheet does not properly calculate per diem.

According to the government regulations, the first and last days of travel must be at a reduced rate, instead of the full per diem rate.

d. proposed price in the Unit Price column. The worksheet applies the 40% & 60% only to the Unit Price value.

5. Subcontractor Pricing – Please confirm this worksheet is to be used after award, as it calculates a difference between the columns for price and cost.

6. Outreach and Admissions – Is this sheet applicable to this solicitation?

7. Transition Construction – The CLINs do not agree with the Attachment J-1.

8. Throughout the proposal the first two contract years are presented as a base period. Will the base period be managed as one period in all cost management/budget aspects, including the cost-reimbursable CLINs? In the past, Job Corps has required separate budgets for each contract year, including separate years for the base period. If each year is managed separately, the government must provide a form identifying the two separate contract years in the base period.

Government Response 1. a. Contractors should list the position in each area it occurs and then in the amount of FTE you should place a number 2, 4, 6…etc.

1. b. The Government does not dictate what Holidays you observe. These are the Federal Holidays.

3. a. Yes, contractors should propose the titles for those Other Expenses worksheets.

3. b. No, otherwise we will not know what those totals are meant to represent.

4a. No, the Government will provide the NTE Amounts in this revision.

b. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

c. Line 27 is for Travel and Training.

i. This is correct

ii. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

iii. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

d. This is correct

5. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

6. No.

7. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

8. Yes.

39. Page # / Reference Attachment J-3

Question/Comment Please confirm that the J-3 is not required for this solicitation.

Government Response See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J-1.

40. Page # / Reference Attachment J-4 Discussion Question/Comment 1. The J4 Staffing Chart posted on Fed Biz included position title and FTE count. Are we required to follow this Staffing Chart including position title and total FTE count?

Government Response No. The Attachment J-4 is a sample document only. The position titles and FTE count does not necessarily represent the government expectations. The offeror can propose any position titles or FTE count. See amendment 1 for revised Attachment J- 1.

41. Page # / Reference Attachment J-5 Discussion

Question/Comment The J-5 Attachment is a duplicate of the CTT table. Not all of these trades typically qualify for CTST funding. Please confirm the following trades with corresponding slots are eligible for CTST funding at $500/training slot:

-Carpentry – 20 -Facilities Maintenance – 24

Government Response Confirmed. Carpentry and Facilities Maintenance are the only trades that qualify for CTST funding.

42. Page # / Reference Attachment J-12 Discussion Question/Comment Does the water usage information provided include sewer costs?

If not, please provide the similar historical information for sewer costs.

Government Response Yes. Sewer cost is included in the water usage information.