16PBGC18R0010_-_Questions_-_08_09_2018_-_v1.pdf

Solicitation 16PBGC18R0010 – Peer Review of PIMS (MAP-21)

Questions:

Question #1:

The Statement of Objectives (Section C) shows deliverables due within 3 and 6 months of the contract date for the Bankruptcy component and within 4 and 6 months of the contract date for the Multiemployer Contagion component. However, Section F indicates that the period of performance is 12 months. Are the due dates and period of performance listed correctly?

For what it’s worth: the deadlines seem tight. I would prefer the project be spread over 12 months, e.g., by relaxing the due dates or by allowing the two components to be addressed sequentially rather than in parallel.

Response: Please see the attached Statement of Objectives for the changes to the deliverables deadlines.

Question #2:

The deliverables in Bankruptcy Part 1a describes a report on the evaluation and potential refinements while the deliverables in Bankruptcy Part 1b references a report on the development of model refinements. For Part 1b, we interpret that you are seeking the service provider to propose updates to parameters; is this correct? If not, please clarify.

Response: The contractor shall provide updates, refinements, or changes to the existing model, or the framework for an alternative model.

Question #3:

Can you confirm that structural changes and coding changes are not intended to be implemented by the service provider? If they are intended to be implemented in PIMS, can you describe further the anticipated scope of this activity?

Response: The contractor will not be implementing changes to the code. The contractor shall be responsible for providing sufficient information for PBGC to implement the changes.

Question #4:

For the Contagion deliverable is the list of contributing employers and their associated information provided by the PBGC?

Response: PBGC shall provide information from the 5500 database.

Question #5:

Should the service provider expect to have access to the PBGC’s historical data on pension funds and associated sponsors?

Response: PBGC shall provide publicly available data that PBGC maintains on plans and sponsors after contract award.

Question #6:

Is it the provider’s responsibility to identify and secure interviews with commercial lenders and providers of capital, or will the PBGC identify these companies?

Response: The contractor is required to “identify and secure interviews with commercial lenders and providers of capital.” The contractor shall adhere to the Office of Management and Budget’s Federal Collection of Information guidelines. More information is available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/federal-collection-information/.

Question #7:

Can you confirm that the contagion scenarios referred to in Deliverable Contagion 1e refer to scenario outcomes for individual ME plans and not broader scenarios apply to the broader pension system? If not, can you please further explain the type of scenario analysis expected?

Response: The contractor shall provide outcomes for both individual ME plans and scenarios for the broader ME system.

Question #8:

The deliverables in Contagion Part 2 references a final report on scenario analyses. Does the scope of the work include execution of these analyses or only recommendations of these analyses as described in Contagion Part 1?

Response: The deliverable in Contagion Part 2 shall assess the impact of the recommended scenarios and sensitivity analyses on PBGC and multiemployer plan universe.

Question #9:

For the QASP, do we need to submit a separate quality control plan and is that included in the provided page count limit?

Response: The contractor shall submit a separate quality control plan from the QASP. The quality control plan page limit is not included in the page count limit listed in section L – Instructions to Offerors of the solicitation.

Question #10:

PBGC collects Form 5500 filings and attachments from the plans. Is PBGC willing to provide to the contractor all the 5500 data and other publicly available data it has collected? Subject to the https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/federal-collection-information/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/federal-collection-information/ appropriate non-disclosure agreement, would the contractor have access to relevant but non-public information from PBGC?

Response: PBGC will share non-public information that PBGC maintains, except for certain sensitive case-related data.

Question #11:

Given the type of engagement, should we just put in a fixed price or would you also like us to fill in a unit price? How should we interpret the unit price?

Response: Please follow the instructions listed in Section B – Price Schedule, Section L – Instructions to Offerors, and Section M – Evaluation Factors for Award. The unit price represents the price/month.

Question #12:

What do the Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) refer to?

Response: A Performance Work Statement (PWS) is a statement of work for performance-based acquisitions that describes the required results in clear, specific and objective terms with measurable outcomes. See FAR 37.6 – Performance Based Acquisition.

The Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is a document used by the Government to measure the quality of the deliverables. The plan ensures that a systematic quality assurance method is employed by the PBGC to achieve the outcomes of the Performance Work Statement. The Quality Control Plan includes the methods the Offeror will employ to ensure the quality standards in the QASP are met/exceeded.