Final_Milwaukee.pdf

Solicitation Number: 1630J4-18-R-00002

MILWAUKEE QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Government Response

1. Reference Page 7-14, Section B.2 Pricing Schedule & Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment The FFP OA and CTS CLINs are not consistent in the RFP with the Attachment J-1.

The RFP states the following:

CLIN 0007 – Initial Grad Placement (616) CLIN 0008 – Initial Former Enrollee (616)

CLIN 0009 – Q2 (154)

CLIN 0010 – Q4 (154)

Attachment J-1 states the following:

Pricing Summary CLIN 0007 – Grad Placement, Initial CLIN 0008 – Grad, 6 months CLIN 0009 – Q2 Former Enrollee, Initial CLIN 0010 – Q4 Former Enrollee, 6 months

Please confirm the CLINs should be changed to the following:

CLIN 0007 – Grad Placement, Initial CLIN 0008 – Grad, Q2 CLIN 0009 – Former Enrollee, Initial CLIN 0010 – Former Enrollee, Q2

Government Response The J.1. Attachment is for the Contractor to place those numbers provided in the RFP in those same areas in the Pricing Summary.

2. Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment The Attachment J-1 requests detail for the FFP CLINs. As this is a proposal for firm-fixed price (FFP) components, what is the purpose of requesting the costing detail for this proposal which includes a price analysis evaluation?

FAR 15.404-1(b)(1) states: “Price analysis is the process of examining and evaluating a proposed price without evaluating its separate cost elements and proposed profit.”

Government Response That information is being collected for historical data and will not be included in the price analysis.

3. Reference Attachment J-1 Discussion Question/Comment There are some problems with the Attachment J-1, as mentioned previously. The integrity of the file is questionable because 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 Tab

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

b. What Total should the Overall Contract Value represent-FFP and Incentive Fees only? The Overall OA and CTS totals are not included in the Overall Contract Value formula.

3. The Personnel Line worksheets calculate monthly rates, not an annual rate. These amounts are then transferred to the Pricing Summary schedule, which should provide the annual totals.

a. The Pricing Summary does not multiply the monthly rates on the detail worksheets by the quantities listed in the summary schedule.

Therefore, the Pricing Summary is only a listing of the monthly rates, not the base period or the annual option amounts.

b. Throughout the file, the base period is not formulated any differently from the option years.

The calculations should include adjustments for the 2-year base period, which would result in figures twice as much as an annual option period.

c. Please confirm offerors should list the period total hours, not monthly hours in order to calculate the costs correctly on the Pricing Summary.

4. The CR NTE worksheet includes the CR Other Expenses, but it is marked as “NTE AMOUNTS ARE

PROVIDED.”

a. Will the RFP be amended to provide the amounts for the procurement?

5. Outreach Admissions - Please confirm contractors are expected to enter the total proposed price in the Unit Price column. The worksheet applies the 40% & 60% only to the Unit Price value.

6. 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 should provide a form identifying the two separate contract years in the base period.

Government Response 1.(a) – Offerors can place duplicate positions, under “Other Positions”.

1.(b) – The holidays are there for reference.

2.(a) – Yes.

2.(b) – Yes. See revised J.1.

3.(a) – (c) – See revised J.1

4. (a) – The amounts are provided in the J.1

5. Correct. However, the percentages are 60/40, see amendment.

6. Yes.

4. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Overall Contract Value table, the formula for Overall Technical Performance Incentive Fee (cells J13:J17) sum the total of overall contract value cells rather than calculating just the incentive fee value.

Can the formulas be altered by the Respondent?

Government Response Yes. However, please see revised J.1

5. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion

Question/Comment On the tab labeled Overall Contract Value table, the rows to the table include each contract period plus Outreach and Admissions. Should Outreach and Admissions row include costs for all contract periods combined? Overall Outreach and Admin Exp is included as a column, therefore would Overall Outreach and Admin Exp column be zero for all contract periods except for Outreach and Admissions row? Can the formulas be altered by the Respondent

Government Response Yes, you can alter. Please see revised J.1

6. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Detail Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Overall Contract Value table, the formula for Overall Contract Value in cell I19 sums the total of only Overall Personnel Expense, Overall Other Exp, and Overall Technical Performance Incentive Fee.

The formula excludes Overall Outreach and Admin Exp, Overall Career Transition Services Exp, and Overall Surge CLIN (Only exercised if change in OBS). Please clarify the formula.

Government Response Please see revised J.1

7. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Detail Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Overall Contract Value table, the formula for Overall Technical Performance Incentive Fee in cell J19 excludes cell J17 for Outreach and Admissions. Can the respondent change the formula to include the fee for Outreach and Admissions?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

8. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Detail Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Pricing Summary, column F calculates line totals from other tabs including personnel expense lines, however the personnel expense lines are calculating monthly costs rather than annual costs. For example, cell F5 is the total from tab Line 01 Academic Personnel cell M13, but that total is based on monthly hours from row D instead of annual hours. Can the formulas in row D on the personnel expense tabs be changed to annual hours rather than monthly?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

9. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion

Question/Comment On the tab labeled DFP & Incentive Fees, the formula in cells B48:B51 and B55:B58 refer to cells that are unused.

Can these formulas be updated by the Respondent to refer to totals from the tab labeled Pricing Summary cells F38:F43, F83:F88, F127, and F128:F133?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

10. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Pricing Summary, the Center

Operations are labeled as FFP. The RFP states Center Operations is CPIF and Outreach and Admissions/Career Transition Services is FFP. Please clarify.

Government Response Please see revised J.1

11. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled DFP & Incentive Fees, the formula for

O/A Minimum Technical Incentive Fee does not calculate based on the Total Estimated Cost. Can the Respondent update the formula?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

12. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled DFP & Incentive Fees, the formula for

O/A Average Technical Performance Incentive Fee does not calculate based on the Total Estimated Cost. Can the Respondent update the formula?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

13. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled DFP & Incentive Fees, the formula for

CTS Average Technical Performance Incentive Fee does not calculate based on the Total Estimated Cost. Can the Respondent update the formula

Government Response

14. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled DFP & Incentive Fees, O/A and CTS fees do not feed back to the Pricing Summary tab. Please clarify how the Respondent should include the fees in the Overall Contract value.

Government Response Please see revised J.1

15. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Transition Construction, cells

G21:G46 are highlighted yellow signifying that the formula should not be altered, however the formula is missing. Can the Respondent input the formula?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

16. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Pricing Summary, Transition In/Out are not included in the Overall Contract Value. Will the cost of transition be excluded from the evaluation?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

17. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Outreach and Admissions, the Total column H calculates a percentage of the unit price, but feeds to the Pricing Summary tab as an annual cost. Can the Respondent update the formula to reflect an annual cost?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

18. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment On the tab labeled Pricing Summary, cells F190:F193, F196:F199, and F202:F205 are missing formulas. Can the Respondent update the cells with the correct formula?

Government Response Please see revised J.1

19. Reference H.6.C, Page 43 (also Attachment J-1 and J-4) Discussion Question/Comment The position titles are inconsistent among the various sections and attachments in this RFP.

Please confirm that the Government is not directing how Contractor’s structure their organization and employee agreements and that offerors may use actual job titles other than the titles specified in the RFP and attachments.

Government Response Please see revised J.1

20. Reference Attachment_J-1_Price_Details Discussion Question/Comment There appear to be multiple issues as stated below with the J-1 attachment. May offerors correct the J-1 attachment to reflect accurate proposed costs for the Milwaukee RFP?

• Tab- Overall Contract Value: Entering $100 of cost in Option Year 1 (i.e.

• cell D14) calculates an Overall Contract Value of $200.

• Tab- Overall Contract Value: There is a row for “Outreach and

• Admissions”, but also a column for “Outreach and Admission Expense”.

• Tab -Position by Titles and Holidays: Any deviation from the exact titles

• in the personnel line tabs is not allowed in this protected workbook;

• personnel titles are not consistent between the J-4 and J-1.

• All personnel tabs: The drop-downs used to indicate Staff Title prevent

• offerors from properly placing Managers in the appropriate rows if titles

• have any variation from those available by the drop-down. The majority of

• staffing may be incorrectly placed in the “Other Positions (Specify)”

• section.

• All personnel tabs: Offerors must enter a value such as 4,160 as “Monthly

• Hours” in order to calculate the Total Cost. It is unclear if the column

• “Monthly Hours” should instead be “Hours”.

• All personnel tabs: The value entered by the offeror for “FTE” is not used

• in the government’s total cost formula. In order to capture accurate total

• costs it is unclear if offerors should list each FTE separately (i.e. 3 rows

• for each of the 3 academic instructors).

• Tab- Line 01 Academic Personnel: Cell L17 has a formula to calculate fee

• at 4.8% of direct and indirect cost.

• Tab -Transition Construction: This tab is red with

“construction” in the

• title. It is unclear whether the offeror should populate this tab.

• There are no tabs in the J-1 attachment for Line

07, Line 12, Line 19, Line

• 21, Line 23, Line 26 and Line 27.

• Tab- Line 08 Clothing – The item column is titled

“Uniform Cost Per

• Student”, unlike all the other non-personnel tabs that have a names

• matching the ETA 2110 Line. Offerors propose costs in this line that are

• not student uniforms, but meet the broader definition of ‘Clothing’. For

• example, PRH Appendix 502 requires ditty bags be costed to Line 08.

• Tab- Line 10 and Line 14- There are items the

Government has

• specifically listed. Offerors are not limited propose costs for these specific

• items only as outlined in PRH Chapter 5, Appendix 502.

• Page 5

• Tab - Pricing Summary CLIN 0016

(Termination): There is no

• corresponding tab on which the offeror may provide the cost detail. The

• RFP does not reference this CLIN. Is the

Termination CLIN an

• alternative description for Phase-Out expenses as described in the RFP?

• Tab- Pricing Summary CLIN 0011 (Surge CLIN):

“NSP”. This acronym is

• not clarified.

• Tab- Pricing Summary: There are no formulas to generate a CLIN 0004

• cost on the Pricing Summary.

• Tab- Pricing Summary, sub-CLIN 28

(contractor’s technical performance

• incentive fee): This CLIN is not included in the formula for parent CLIN

• 0002 (center operations). It is unclear if this is an error.

• Tab- Pricing Summary and “Outreach and Admissions: Please clarify the

• difference in CLIN descriptions between the J-1 attachment’s “Pricing

• Summary” and “Outreach and Admissions” tabs.

On the Pricing summary

• tab, CLIN 0008 is “CTS/Graduates, 6 months” and on the Outreach and

• Admissions tab it is “CTS/Former Enrollee, Initial”. These are

• significantly different items to be priced.

• Tab - Outreach and Admissions: It is unclear if offerors should enter into

• “column F” a unit price (as the column is labeled) such as $1,000 or a total

• price such as $1,000,000.

Government Response Please see revised J.1

21. Reference Discussion Question/Comment Government Response

1. Reference Page 4. Section B.1 Discussion Question/Comment The Outreach and Admissions (OA) arrival goals of 962 a year in the state of Wisconsin is nearly triple the number of students served at the Milwaukee (272 OBS) and Blackwell (160 OBS) Centers. Currently, there are 200 students from the State of Wisconsin enrolled in the Job Corps Program. In PY16, there were 471 total arrivals from the State of Wisconsin. Please reconsider the number of annual arrivals for Centers within the state of Wisconsin.

Paragraph states an “arrival of a minimum of 962 students into the Job Corps program annually.” The Executive Information system listed an actual arrival of 227 students to the Milwaukee Center from 3/1/17-2/28/18 and 116 students to the Blackwell Center from 3/1/17-2/28/18. This totals 343 students arrived. Please clarify the expected minimum arrival of 962 which seems high and unreasonable due to the OBS needs and actual arrivals of both centers.

The RFP states an OBS of 272. The current OBS is 237. Please confirm the correct OBS for this solicitation.

Paragraph 5 states “The contractor shall provide Career Transition Services annually for 770 youth returning to the state(s) of Wisconsin.” The Executive Information System for 3/1/17 – 2/28/18 listed an actual placement of 293 youth from the Milwaukee Center and 148 youth from the Blackwell Center totaling 441 youth placed. Please clarify the expected placement of 770 youth for this contract.

Government Response The goals associated with outreach and admission shall remain the same as stated.

2. Reference B1, Page 4 Discussion Question/Comment The Post Center CTS goals of 770 youth in the state of

Wisconsin far exceeds the actual number of students separating from the Milwaukee and Blackwell Centers. Please reconsider the estimated number of students in the State of Wisconsin CTS caseload

Government Response The goals associated with outreach and admission shall remain the same as stated.

3. Reference B.2, Page 7 Discussion Question/Comment This section contains the quantity “154” for CLINS 0009 and

0010 regarding Q2 and Q4 placement of Graduates and Former Enrollees. Please confirm that the contractor will be paid for placements exceeding this quantity.

Under B.2. Pricing Schedule, on Page 7 of RFP, should all the Quantities shown for OA and CTS CLINs be doubled since this section of the Pricing Schedule applies to the two (2) base year, 24 month period?

Under B.2. Pricing Schedule, CLINs 0007 and 0008 both list a Quantity of 616. Should CLIN 007 list a Quantity of 616 Graduates and CLIN 0008 list a Quantity of 154 of FEs, with both these Quantities doubled for the initial 24 month base period? Please confirm these Quantities.

Under B.2. Pricing Schedule, CLINs 0009 and 0010 both list a Quantity of 154 for Q2 and Q4 CTS services. Should this Quantity be 770, with the Quantity doubled for the initial 24 month base period? Please confirm this Quantity.

Government Response The Operator will be paid 60% of achieved goals for Q2 placements once verified the balance of 40% will be paid for Q4 placements upon receipt of 678 placement documents.

The combined goal per year for Graduates and Former Enrollees is 770.

4. Reference Section C, Page 16 Discussion Question/Comment The RFP includes 30 Nonresidential Students (15 Male and

15 Female) as part of the Milwaukee Center’s Total Planned Average On-Board Strength. This number is not reflected in Section F., which shows 0 Nonresidential Students for the Milwaukee Center within the Annual Arrival by Center – GAP Table. Please clarify how many Nonresidential students the operator will be expected to annually arrive at the Milwaukee Center.

Government Response The operator is expected to arrive as many Non-residential students as necessary to maintain an OBS of 15 male and 15 female Nonresidential Students.

5. Reference G4(h)(1), Page 37 Discussion Question/Comment This section requires the contractor attach the Staffing Report from the FMS system for the billing period. The Staffing Report from FMS is an end of month reporting requirement required on the 12th of each month for the preceding month.

Please confirm this requirement does not apply to the Mid- Month Public Voucher as there is no Vacancy Report to correspond to the 15th of the month and that for monthly billings, the contractor should attach a Vacancy Report for the month preceding the billing period in alignment with the FMS reporting requirement.

Government Response Confirmed, this statement is accurate.

6. Reference G.4(i)(5), Page 37 Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm that ETA form 678 (placement verification document) may be used to receive payment for graduates and former enrollees who did not take the six-month survey, Quarter 2 surveys, and Quarter 4 surveys

Government Response Offeror must follow instructions as stated in G.4(i)(5)

7. Reference G.9, Page 39 Discussion Question/Comment DOL has historically calculated damages at 15% of student day cost for ineligible enrollment. Please confirm that the contractor will be assessed 15% of the student per day cost for ineligible enrollment.

Government Response This is correct as written.

8. Reference Discussion Question/Comment Please provide a GSA vehicle listing.

Will DOL provide a GSA Vehicle List in order that required insurance coverage can be properly estimated for this government owned property?

Please provide a center vehicle listing as the offeror is required to insure the vehicles under the FFP CLIN.

Government Response IA GSA Vehicle list will be provided.

9. Reference Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify the unusual 80 slots for the Nurse Aide/Home

Health Aide CTT program. Is this designed to be 60 slots for classroom training and 20 slots for clinical training?

Government Response The Offeror is expected to propose how to utilize the 80 slots designed for this trade.

10. Reference H.6.C, Page 43 Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm that the Government is directing Contractors on employee compensation by requiring the use the “BLS average mean” pay as the minimum even though the BLS average mean is the mid-range pay of a labor grade.

Government Response The government is not directing Contractors on employee compensation.

11. Reference H.6.C, Page 43 Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm that the Government is directing Contractors to utilize compensation through mandated minimums as the basis for Job Corps labor grades with progressive mid and max pay rates which will result in increased costs to the program.

Government Response The government is not directing Contractors on employee compensation.

12. Reference Page 69, Attachment J-12 Discussion Question/Comment Please provide a J-12 to reflect total utility utilization at

Milwaukee JCC. The J-12 does not provide a listing of all utilities utilization.

Will the incumbent operator be providing the last 12 months of utility expenses for all utility categories, including the costs associated with maintaining the Geothermal plant?

Please consider providing more detailed Utility Expense information than what is currentlycontained in Attachment J-

12. The current J-12 information (i.e., gas cards) does not provide the full Utility expense report(s) for budgeting.

The Utilities attachment identifies the center’s gas cards and the lists of small purchases. The attachment does not provide the center’s utility costs for natural gas, electricity, water, sewer, etc. Will the government be providing an updated attachment with the detailed costs or an overall utility total amount for offerors to propose?

Government Response The J-12 will be provided.

13. Reference CTS Page 21 Discussion Question/Comment Welding is listed as a center operated-trade. Is this correct?

CTS goals are stated as 616 Grads and 154 FE’s for students enrolled at Milwaukee and Blackwell and returning to Wisconsin. Considering annual throughput, these goals appear excessive.

Please confirm/clarify CTS goals.

Please confirm the annual CTS placement goals of 616 Graduates and 154 Former Enrollees.

CHART ON PAGE 21

*Existing ACT Program Location Milwaukee Area Technical College (MATC) 700 W State St, Milwaukee, WI 53233 QUESTION: What is the Program offering at (MATC)?

Government Response Welding is a center-operated trade. The CTS goals remain as stated. MATC is an Advanced Career Training program students are at liberty to select from the available course listings.

14. Reference Page 33 - 34 Discussion Question/Comment Can the offeror expect the PY17, PY18 and subsequent

Program Years performance standards to be timely published by OJC that would allow the earned Tech Performance incentive fees to be calculated after each contract year? As of 3/27/18, the PY17 performance standards have not been published by OJC which precludes the calculation and payment of the fee noted here.

Government Response Yes

15. Reference Page 39 Discussion Question/Comment G.4 DEMAND FOR PAYMENT FOR FAILURE TO MAINTAIN

STAFFING LEVELS

The Contractor shall have a maximum vacancy rate not exceeding 4%. The Contractor has the specified days to fill the following positions: Demand for payment will not be assessed at the value specified for the vacant positions within the first 30 days of the vacancy. Demand for payment will be assessed at the rate of 50 percent of the value specified for the vacant position, from days 31 through 60.

Demand for payment will be assessed at the full value specified for the vacant positions after 60 days. Demand for payment will be assessed and subtracted from a subsequent voucher.

What is meant by “Demand for Payment”? How will the “value” of a position be determined? What are the mechanics involved in this process?

Please clarify the information and calculation the government uses to determine the vacancy rate. Since it is unclear how the vacancy rate is used or not used in determining the number of days a position is vacant, please clarify.

Relative to this specification, what consideration has been given to the additional PRH requirement of a criminal background check Credential Verification for Employees of Job Corps Contractors as stated in PRH Chapter 5 that may cause delays in hiring beyond the contractor’s control?

According to the PRH, Regional Director approval is needed for Center Directors. What consideration has been given to the delays beyond the operator’s control regarding this specification.

Please explain the basis or process the government will use to make a determination as to the number of days a given position is vacant. Will this basis or process be made available to the contractor so both parties have access to the same information to make this calculation / determination?

Government Response Applicable vacancy rate will be determined by the staff vacancy report in the Job Corp financial management system.

16. Reference Page 104 Discussion Question/Comment a. Staff Salary Structure and Compensation Plan

1) Offerors shall propose salary levels using prevailing wage rate data from the local labor market.

2) Staff Salaries This shall include a description of the offeror’s staff salaries including annual salary ranges for each position.

QUESTION: If the prevailing wage differs from the prescribed wages on the H. 6. C. table on page 43 of this RFP, which wage shall the offeror be required to propose? Please clarify.

Government Response The goals shall remain the same as stated.

17. Reference F.5 Arrivals p.31 Discussion Question/Comment The arrival goal of 962 (612 Milwaukee and 210 Blackwell) appears to be excessive for the stated centers. Please confirm/clarify arrival goals.

OA Deliverable, the annual arrival goals of 962 for Milwaukee and Blackwell appear to be very high based on their respective current contracted OBS. Please confirm the annual arrival goal of 962.

Government Response Confirmed

18. Reference B.2, P.7 Discussion Question/Comment Page 7 – Under CLINs 0007-0010, the descriptions of the billing breakdown do not coincide with the quantities as presented for CTS. The CTS goals as presented on Page 22 do not match the billing breakdown on Page 7. For example, 616 graduates are listed on Page 22 as the goal, yet on Page 7, the 616 is being applied to both initial graduates as well as initial former enrollees. This quantity is not being consistently applied. Please clarify.

Government Response The correct numbers are 616 graduates and 154 former enrollees for a total of 770.

26. Reference Attachment J-5 Discussion Question/Comment Was the schedule contained therein intentionally left blank?

Please confirm in accordance with the PRH the following trades with corresponding slots are eligible for CTST funding at $500/training slot:

Please confirm according to the PRH, the following trades are eligible for government-provided CTST funding:

Cement Masonry = 20 Welding = 24 Manufacturing Technology = 30 As CLIN 0002, SubCLIN 04 is FFP, the offerors need to have confirmation of this additional funding for costing purposes.

Government Response The trades identified are eligible for CTST funding.

Government Response

1. Reference Discussion Question/Comment L.7 Instructions for Proposal Submission instructs delivery of proposal to depository identified in SF-33 Block 9, but Block 9 is blank. SF-33 page 1 Block 7 provides the Dallas office address, but page 2 identifies Delivery Location as Chicago office address. Please verify address to deliver the proposal.

Government Response 525 S. Griffin St, Suite 405, Dallas, Texas 75202

2. Reference CTS, p.21 Discussion Question/Comment CTS goals are stated as 616 Grads and 154 FE’s for students enrolled at Milwaukee and Blackwell and returning to Wisconsin. Considering annual throughput, these goals appear excessive.

Please confirm/clarify CTS goals.

Government Response The goals associated with outreach and admission shall remain the same as stated.

3. Reference Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm if 10/1/18 is the start of the transition/phase-in or the actual contract start date.

Government Response Contract start date will Oct 1, 2018

4. Reference L.7.H, p.91 Discussion Question/Comment The RFP limits presenters to 7 that are allowed in the room at one time. Please clarify if a non-presenting technician to operate the audio/visual equipment is permitted in addition to the 7 presenters.

Government Response Yes

5. Reference L.7.I, p.94 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify if the 20-page “Narrative of the Oral

Presentation” is just for the Technical Approach”.

Government Response The written narrative must be all inclusive of the oral presentation.

6. Reference L.7.I, pg.94 Discussion Question/Comment The formatting chart appears to have missing text on the last line of the “Font size” row.

Government Response The font size of each presentation slide must be a size legible for the pages consecutively number within each sections.

7. Reference L.7.I, pg. 94 Discussion Question/Comment Will the government permit a font size of 8 on graphs and charts for the written submission? This is the standard size used for desktop publishing graphics and is still readable.

Government Response Yes for graphs and charts only.

8. Reference L.7.I, pg. 95 Discussion Question/Comment The formatting chart excludes title pages and tables of content from the page count. Please confirm that the slide count also excludes title page and table of contents.

Government Response Confirmed excludes Government Response

10. Reference B.2, P.4-5 Discussion Question/Comment Pages 4-5 – Under B.2 in the explanation for CLINs 0007 and 0008 it says that the 60%/40% split of the unit price will be between initial graduates and former enrollees.

Also, in the explanation for CLINs 0009 and 0010 it says that the 60%/40% split of the unit price will be between Q2 graduates/former enrollees and Q4 graduates/former enrollees.

This is a different breakdown of the 60%/40% split than what we have seen on other recent RFPs. Is this an intentional change or should the breakdown be as follows, to be consistent with other RFPs:

CLIN 0007 – 60% of Unit Price for Graduate Initial Placements CLIN 0008 – 40% of Unit Price for Graduate Q2 CLIN 0009 – 60% of Unit Price for Former Enrollee Initial Placements CLIN 0010 – 40% of Unit Price for Former Enrollee Q2 If the breakdown presented in the Pricing Schedule is intentional, we do not believe there is a fair split of unit price between billing for Graduates and Former Enrollees. Based on the goals on page 22, the Graduates make up 80% of the goal. The unit price breakdown should then reflect an 80/20% split between Graduates and Former Enrollees to reflect their respective percentages of the goal.

Government Response Prices should be based on 60% expected graduates and 40% expected former Enrollees.

Reference B.2, P.5

11. Discussion Question/Comment Page 5 – Under B.2 it says “The Contractor shall propose the overall G&A, Profit/Fee amounts applicable to the Cost Reimbursement Not-to-Exceed CLINs.” However, two paragraphs below it says that the Cost Reimbursable CLIN amount will be provided by the government. Since offerors will not know the CLIN amount until award, is it correct to assume that we should propose the G&A and Profit percentage that will be applied to the Cost Reimbursement CLIN rather than the dollar amount?

Government Response

12. Reference I.5, P. 64-65 Discussion Question/Comment Pages 64-65 - The inclusion of this clause would indicate that the contract type is a Fixed-Price contract with economic adjustment as defined by FAR 16.203.

However this contract has been referred to throughout the RFP as FFP and CR NTE combination. Please consider removing this clause

Government Response

13. Reference L.8, P.105 Discussion .

Question/Comment Page 105 – Under Factor 5, paragraph c. Pricing

Schedule and Cost Detail, it mentions that offerors should propose cost incentive fee at 2.0%. This is the only mention of cost incentive fee in the RFP. Only Technical Performance Incentive Fee is mentioned in section G.3 on page 33. Please add language in section G to account for and explain the cost incentive fee.

Government Response Question/Comment Government Response

18. Reference Page 6, Section B.2 and Page 30, F.3 Discussion Question/Comment Please clarify the Period of Performance. Section F refers to

Section B and the form in Section B is blank and does not identify the applicable dates.

Government Response Base 10/1/2018 – 09/30/2020 Option I 10/1/2020 – 9/30/2021 Option II 10/1 2021 – 9/30/2022 Option III 10/1/2022 – 9/30-2023

Reference H.6.C, Page 43 (also Attachment J-1 and J-4)

20. Discussion Question/Comment The position titles are inconsistent among the various sections and attachments in this RFP.

Please confirm that the Government is not directing how Contractor’s structure their organization and employee agreements and that offerors may use actual job titles other than the titles specified in the RFP and attachments.

Government Response See the revised Attachment J-1

21. Reference Pages 6-14, Section B.2 Pricing Schedule Discussion Question/Comment 1. The Pricing Schedule in Section B.2 is not identical to the

Pricing Summary in the Excel file. Please clarify which form is correct. Please confirm the forms will be updated/revised to be consistent.

2. As the RFP later becomes the contract, please clarify how the Attachment J-1 will be referenced in the final awarded contract. Several of the tables in the J-1 are not consistent with the RFP or are entirely excluded from the RFP.

Government Response See the revised Attachment J-1

23. Reference Pages 6-14 Section B.2 Pricing Schedule 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. Most worksheets are calculating a monthly amount, some are annual.

Furthermore, the Pricing Summary does not multiply the monthly rate times the applicable number of months.

Therefore, the Pricing Summary does not reflect correct amounts.

2. 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?

3. The Attachment J-1 calculation for the technical fees differs from the RFP. Please confirm contractors can revise the Attachment J-1 formulas.

Government Response See attached revised Attachment J-1 Reference Page 7, Section B.2 Pricing Schedule, Page 38, Section

24. 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 directly change as 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. If the surge price is based on student year cost, the total will be a composition of the FFP and CR components. How would this amount be modified into a contract that is a combination of FFP and CR CLINs? The CR amounts should be separated in the contract. Please advise.

Government Response See the revised attachment J-1

25. Reference Page 8-14, Section B.2, Pricing Schedule Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm offerors are not required to provide amounts for the capital CRA, Equipment and Career Technical Skills Training CLINs (0012, 0013, 0014, 0015, etc.).

Government Response Confirm

26. Reference Pages 6 & 14, Section B.2 Pricing Schedule Discussion Question/Comment CLIN 0001 is titled Phase-In. CLIN 3012 is titled Phase-Out.

Please confirm the costs associated with the Phase-In and Phase-Out are cost reimbursable as the RFP is not clear.

Government Response Phase In and Phase Out costs shall be provided on a Firm Fixed Price Basis

28. Reference Page 34-36, Section G.3, Page 105, Section L.7, Factor 5, c & 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 should 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 implies the incentive fees are not applicable to OA/CTS, but the Attachment J-1 includes a section to calculate the fees. Please confirm the Technical Performance Fees are not applicable to the OA/CTS CLINs.

3. The fee bases for the fee calculations are not clear. The RFP narrative describes the calculation to be on total direct and indirect costs. The Attachment J-1 is not formatted similarly.

Are contractors allowed to revise the formulas?

4. Section G of the RFP does not include narrative about the cost incentive fees, but Section L instructs offerors to propose the cost incentive fees at the average rate of 2%. Additionally, the Attachment J-1 includes sections for cost incentive fees.

Please clarify the cost incentive fees. Please confirm the cost-incentive fees are only applicable to the CR NTE lines (Operations).

Government Response See the revised Attachment J-1

29. Reference Page 34, 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 G&A and similarly in option years, are the “Target Cost”;

b. Average Cost Incentive Fee represents “Target Fee” at 2%;

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 throughout the contract years.

Section G.3 does not address invoicing Cost Incentive Fees.

Please revise the language accordingly.

Government Response Reference Page 39, Section G.12

30. Discussion Question/Comment The language of this section is not clear or adequate for contract implementation. As the RFP later becomes the contract, the language needs to 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. In addition, 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 needs to 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 31 or 60 days seems punitive. Is it to be prorated based on days as 100% of annual doesn’t make sense for a 31 to 60-day vacancy.

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; if not, 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); conduct background checks required by the PRH and then to provide the selected candidate time to give appropriate notice to their current employer. A longer period of time is more reasonable for some of these positions (120 days).

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

Government Response The Staff Vacancies is applicable to all positions proposed by the contractor.

The 4% maximum vacancy rate will be calculated against the staffing report from the FMS system for each billing cycle.

Those four positions are required to be filled within the specified timeframe.

A new process will need to be created.

31. Reference Page 40-41, Section G.15 & Attachment J-1 (Pricing Schedule and Outreach Admissions worksheets)

Discussion Question/Comment It appears the “total unit price” referenced in Section G and

Attachment J-1 is the total OA or CTS amount proposed for the services. Please confirm that based on the outline of the pricing schedule, the contractor will bill a semi-monthly rate of the respective OA and CTS amounts each billing period.

Otherwise, the forms are not formatted to accommodate per unit pricing. Additionally, please revise Section G.15 accordingly.

Government Response See the revised Attachment J-1

33. Reference Page 48, Section H.6.B Discussion Question/Comment Please confirm the reference to Attachment J.14 should be corrected to Attachment J.16 for the Davis-Bacon wage determinations.

Government Response Yes

35. Reference Page 52, Section H.23 Discussion Question/Comment Indirect Cost Rates - Section H.23 includes the G&A form table, but neither the proposal instructions nor Attachment J- 1 includes this form.

Where will this information be presented in the proposal?

Government Response See the revised Attachment J-1

Milwaukee JCC -QUESTIONS _Gwen