Amendment_000001_18-233-SOL-00581_NRFC.pdf

(x)

18-233-SOL-00581

x x

1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted ; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT

THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted , such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

x

DAM

Bethesda MD 20814 8th Floor 7700 Wisconsin Avenue

DHHS/PSC/AMS/DAM

08/17/2018000001

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS. IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) is not extended.is extended, Items 8 and 15, and returning

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended , by one of the following methods: (a) By completing

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

FACILITY CODE CODE

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6)CODE 6. ISSUED BY

PAGE OF PAGES

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.3. EFFECTIVE DATE2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

08/07/2018

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority) appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return __________________ copies to the issuing office.

ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse (NRFC)

Amendment 000001 is for the purpose of responding to questions to solicitation

18-233-SOL-00581.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

RYAN L. COLLINS

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9 A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect .

18-233-SOL-00581

National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse Amendment 000001 – Responses to Questions

Regarding the HHS Section 508 Compliance Template in Section J.2 of the RFP, HHS has a new Product Accessibility (PAT) requirement as described at https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/contracting/index.html, which requires that a VPAT version 2.0 or later, filled out to instructions, be completed to meet the HHS PAT requirement. Would the government like us to complete the VPAT Version 2.0 instead of the older template provided in J.2?

Response: Yes, please complete the most recent version. Attached to this amendment is a VPAT version which can be completed.

On page 92 of the solicitation, it says that offerors should be “using not less than 12 point font.” Can the government make an exception to allow offerors to use smaller than 12 pt.

font in tables and graphics?

Response: Offerors may use a smaller point type for tables and graphics. However, Offerors must ensure that tables and graphic fonts are large enough so that they are easily readable. Offerors may not insert extensive text into a table, graph, or chart in an effort to circumvent the stated page limitation.

3. On page 92 of the solicitation, it says that “Technical proposals shall be limited to 60 double-spaced pages.” Can the government make an exception so that tables and/or graphics do not need to be double-spaced?

Response: Offerors may use single-spacing for tables and graphics. However, Offerors must ensure that tables and graphic fonts are easily readable. Offerors may not insert extensive text into a table, graph, or chart in order to circumvent the stated page limitations.

4. Does the government intend that the IT Security Requirements presented on pages 24-44 be addressed in the Security Plan submitted post-award, or that those topics be covered by the offeror within this proposal response? If within this proposal, can the responses to those sections be provided as an appendix instead of within the page count?

Response: OFA intends that the IT Security Requirements be detailed in the post-award Security Plan. However, Offerors must include a brief discussion describing its understanding of the IT Security Requirements and a high-level outline of the Security Plan. This description and outline may be provided in the appendix, which will not be included in the page count.

Will the government please confirm Linda Jules-O’Neil’s email address, as different email addresses are provided in the solicitation on pages 67/91 and 102.

Response: Email address is as follows: Linda.Jules-ONeil@psc.hhs.gov.

https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/contracting/index.html

In RFP section 3.1, can the government please explain the FPS role on the project?

Response: The reference to “FPS” was included in error. Offerors should ignore this and any other similar references to FPSs.

In RFP section 6.3 (1), for the national fatherhood conference, will the government please confirm that 700 participants and 550 sleeping rooms are accurate estimates for venue needs at this time.

Response: The estimate provided was included in error. If Optional Task 6.3 is exercised, OFA anticipates between 250 – 350 attendees and a need for no more than 300 sleeping rooms.

In RFP sections 6.3 (3) and 6.4 (3), are honorarium amounts per day costs or flat rates?

Response: The honorarium amounts are per day costs.

In RFP section 6.6, will each administrative staff (total of 3) be expected to attend the national conference and 5 roundtables?

Response: As stated, administrative support for any activity will be on an as-needed basis at the request of the COR. Offerors should use their best judgement to determine whether to plan and budget for all three administrative staff participation in specified activities.

In RFP section 6.6, will the government please confirm the estimated number of unfunded practitioners and the estimated number of site visits to each unfunded practitioner?

Response: It is assumed that the site visit and unfunded practitioner activities described in Task 6.6 are directly related to Task 6.4. Therefore, OFA anticipates that each roundtable event may include representatives from 10 to 15 unfunded fatherhood organizations to be identified post award. Offerors should anticipate selecting a representative sample from among the 10-15 unfunded organizations and conduct 3-5 site visits as directed by the COR. The site visits must not exceed more than 1 ½ days.

On page 106, the government lists the “Senior Writer” as one of the key personnel positions. On page 97 in the Proposal Bidding Assumptions, no hours are provided for the Senior Writer position, but instead for a Senior Technical Writer. Is the Senior Technical Writer the same as the Senior Writer, and if so, which term does the government prefer?

Response: Yes. The difference in terminology was unintended. Senior Writer is the preferred title.

On page 106, the government lists the “Senior Writer” as one of the key personnel positions. Can the government please provide additional detail on the scope of that work (e.g., is the person meant to be a senior technical writer or a researcher)?

Response: Offerors should use their best judgment in determining what skill and proficiency level is needed from the Senior Writer in view of the SOW’s description of the subject-matter expertise, types of written products, and other proficiencies listed that will satisfy the needs of the SOW.

13. Is there is an incumbent contractor? If so, could you please provide the current or previous contract number? Or is this a new requirement for the government?

Yes, there is an incumbent. The contract number is HHSP233201400037C.

This is not a new requirement for the Government.