19AQMM26Q0469 QA FINAL.pdf

# Solicitation Reference Section/Exhibit Question Answer

Under Competency Standard EC1599, “Development of Analytical Products for Criminal Investigations,” Element 4 of 4, “Prepare and Present the Criminal Analysis Report,” Performance Criterion 1 states: “Presents the Criminal Analysis Report to the requesting user.”

This activity requires an additional person, other than the evaluator, to act as the competent authority requesting the criminal analysis product and report, and to whom the candidate presents both documents. Accordingly, the evaluation team would need to include three evaluators plus this additional expert.

Has this additional role been accounted for in the staffing requirements? We recommend including it to ensure full implementation of the competency standard.

The Contractor is responsible for conducting all evaluations in full compliance with CONOCER procedures and all elements and performance criteria of Competency Standard EC1599, including Element 4, Performance Criterion 1. The staffing ratios for evaluators are found in Section 6 and establish the minimum number of evaluators. Vendors shall describe in their quotations how they will fulfill the requesting-user role and shall include any associated costs in their quoted per-evaluation prices. No additional Government-furnished personnel will be provided.

For the simulated case studies to be used in evaluating Competency Standard EC1599, “Development of Analytical Products for Criminal Investigations,” there are currently two tactical analysis cases and one strategic analysis case.

Will the contractor be permitted to develop new simulated case studies, or must evaluations use exclusively the cases provided by INL?

Evaluations shall be conducted using the simulated case study materials provided by INL, as stated in Section 6 of the SOW. INL currently has three case studies for Competency Standard EC1599: two tactical analysis cases and one strategic analysis case. INL will provide these materials electronically after contract award. The Contractor may propose new or modified case studies. Any proposed case study must fully align with the EC1599 evaluation instrument and CONOCER procedures, and requires INL's written approval before use. Contractor-developed case studies are not a separately priced deliverable. Vendors shall not include development costs in their quotations. In accordance with Section 8, all case study materials developed under this contract shall become the property of the U.S. Government.

To help us better understand the requirement and prepare for future CONOCER-related opportunities, we would appreciate any guidance you can provide regarding access to the following materials:

•EC1599 competency standard documenta on •Applicable evalua on criteria and assessment instruments •Evaluator qualifica on requirements •Publicly available CONOCER reference materials relevant to this requirement

The Government of Mexico maintains public resources on CONOCER on the following website:

https://conocer.gob.mx/

4 SF1449 Cover Page / Section B The solicitation cover page identifies NAICS 541519 while Section B references awards under NAICS 541990. Please confirm the correct NAICS code and applicable size standard for this procurement.

541519 is incorrect. 541990 as stated in Section B and on the SAM.gov solicitation posting on the GPE.

5 SF1449 Cover Page / FAR Clauses The solicitation is described as unrestricted; however, FAR 52.219-6 (Notice of Total Small Business Set-Aside) is included. Please confirm whether this procurement is unrestricted or set aside for a particular business category.

This requirement is unrestricted. 52.219-6 was included in error and has been removed in Amendment 0001.

6 Attachment 1 SOW Section 4 The SOW references an estimated 850 competency certification evaluations and up to 850 certifications. Attachment 2 pricing reflects annual quantities of 432 evaluations and 432 certifications. Please clarify the Government's estimated annual requirement and planning basis.

Quantities listed in Attachment 2 are estimates, consistent with the description in the SOW. Actual needs for the initial order are found on Attachment 2.1.

7 Attachment 2 Pricing Spreadsheet For CLIN 001 and CLIN 002, should offerors assume that every evaluated participant is expected to be certified, or should offerors assume some percentage of evaluated participants may not achieve certification?

Vendors should not assume that every evaluated participant will achieve certification. Certification depends on each candidate's performance under CONOCER procedures and the EC1599 Competency Standard. The quantities in Attachment 2 are estimates for pricing and evaluation purposes only.

CLIN 001 (Evaluations) will be paid at the quoted unit price for each certification evaluation completed in accordance with CONOCER procedures, regardless of whether the candidate is approved. CLIN 002 (Certifications) will be paid at the quoted unit price only for certificates actually issued to approved candidates. Vendors shall quote a unit price for each CLIN that covers all costs associated with that unit and shall not adjust unit prices based on an assumed approval rate. See Section B.4

8 Attachment 2.1 TORP #1 Please confirm that TORP #1 is expected to utilize the quantities identified in the pricing spreadsheet (432 evaluations, 432 certifications, and 36 evaluator travel events).

Confirmed. The Government intends to award TO1 concurrently with the IDIQ based on pricing and quantities listed on Attachment 2.1 TORP #1.

19AQMM26Q0469 CONOCER Criminal Analyst Certification Services (INL Mexico): Solicitation Q&A

9 Attachment 1 SOW Section 7 The SOW requires the contractor to be formally registered with CONOCER as an Evaluation and Certification Institution.

May this requirement be satisfied through a subcontractor, teaming partner, joint venture member, or other performing entity, or must the prime offeror itself hold the registration?

The prime offeror is not required to hold the CONOCER registration itself. The requirement in Section 7 may be met by the prime offeror, or by a subcontractor, teaming partner, or joint venture member that is formally registered with CONOCER as an Evaluation and Certification Institution and accredited for Competency Standard EC1599.

If the registration is held by an entity other than the prime offeror, the quotation shall:

Identify the registered entity and describe its role in performing the contract;

Provide evidence of the entity's current CONOCER registration and EC1599 accreditation; and Include a signed letter of commitment, teaming agreement, or joint venture agreement confirming the entity's participation.

The prime contractor remains fully responsible for performance of all contract requirements, including work performed by the registered entity. The registration and accreditation must remain current for the entire period of performance. The Contractor shall not replace the registered entity without the Contracting Officer's prior written approval. The SOW will be amended to reflect this clarification

10 Attachment 1 SOW Sections 7 and 8 What documentation should offerors provide to demonstrate that proposed evaluators are recognized and certified by CONOCER in relevant standards?

For each proposed evaluator, offerors shall submit the following with their quotation:

CONOCER evaluator certification: A copy of the evaluator's current CONOCER certificate of competency in the evaluation of candidates based on competency standards [EC0076, or the current applicable CONOCER evaluator standard], including the certificate folio number.

EC1599 certification and authorization: A copy of the evaluator's current CONOCER certificate in Competency Standard EC1599, including the folio number, and evidence that the evaluator is registered as an evaluator for EC1599 under the offeror's CONOCER accreditation as an Evaluation and Certification Institution.

Résumé: A résumé showing that the evaluator meets each experience requirement in Section 8 of the SOW, including dates, employing institutions, and roles.

Letter of commitment: A signed statement confirming the evaluator's availability to perform under the contract if awarded.

Certificates must be current and verifiable in CONOCER's National Registry of Persons with Certified Competencies (RENAP). The Government reserves the right to verify all submitted documentation with CONOCER. Offerors may redact personal identifiers such as the CURP from certificates submitted with the quotation, provided the evaluator's name and certificate folio number remain legible. Full biodata for "Courtesy Vetting Plus" shall be submitted after award, as described in Section 8.

Offerors shall submit this documentation for at least six evaluators, as required in Section 7. Any evaluator added or substituted after award must meet the same requirements and requires INL's written approval before performing under the contract. The SOW will be amended to specify these standards and documentation requirements.

11 Section L-3.1 Key Personnel Is there a preferred format for demonstrating compliance with the evaluator qualifications, such as a qualification matrix, or should compliance be addressed solely within individual resumes?

No qualification matrix or other specific format is required. Offerors shall demonstrate that each proposed evaluator meets the qualification requirements in Sections 7 and 8 of the SOW through the evaluator's individual résumé in addition to the other required documents as described in Question 10.

Each résumé shall clearly address every requirement in Sections 7 and 8 and shall include enough detail to verify compliance. This includes dates of employment, employing institutions, positions held, relevant duties, specialized tools used, and the CONOCER certifications held, with standard number and folio number.

The Government will determine compliance based on the information in the résumés. Any requirement that a résumé does not clearly support will be considered not met.

12 Section L-3.1 Key Personnel The solicitation requires a minimum Spanish language level of 4/4. Is formal language testing required, or may offerors demonstrate compliance through native proficiency and professional experience?

Formal language testing is not required. Offerors may demonstrate that each proposed evaluator meets the minimum Spanish proficiency level of 4/4 through native proficiency, education completed in Spanish, and professional experience performing duties in Spanish. This information shall be clearly reflected in the evaluator's résumé, as described in the response to Question 7.

Offerors may submit the results of a formal language test if one is available, but this is not required. The Government reserves the right to verify the language proficiency of any proposed evaluator, including through an interview, before approving the evaluator to perform under the contract.

13 Attachment 1 SOW Section 8 The SOW requires at least two years of criminal justice system experience since 2016. Please confirm that experience may be accumulated across multiple organizations and positions.

Yes. The minimum of two years of criminal justice system experience since 2016 required in Section 8 of the SOW may be accumulated across multiple organizations and positions, provided that each position counted involved participation in criminal analysis/investigations under the accusatory criminal justice system and/or contribution to crime prevention actions.

Overlapping periods of employment will be counted only once. Each evaluator's résumé shall list the start and end dates (month and year) of each position, the employing institution, and the relevant duties performed, so that the Government can verify the cumulative experience. Experience that the résumé does not clearly support will not be counted.

14 Attachment 1 SOW Section 6 The SOW states that evaluations must be conducted within five days after receipt of participant lists from INL. Is this requirement calendar days or business days?

Business Days. The SOW has been updated to specify this.

15 Attachment 1 SOW Section 5 Please clarify the expected frequency and format of coordination meetings between the contractor and INL during contract performance.

These may vary over the course of the contract based on the number and timing of orders, evaluation schedules, locations, and the needs of INL and the participating Government of Mexico institutions.

As stated in Section 6, the Contractor shall hold a kickoff meeting at the start of each order with INL and the Government of Mexico. At that meeting, the parties will agree on a communication process and information exchange mechanism, including the frequency and format of coordination meetings for that order. After that, coordination will take place as needed, in accordance with Section 5. INL expects most coordination meetings to be held virtually. In-person meetings may be requested when necessary.

16 Attachment 1 SOW Section 6 Will participant lists generally be provided by session, by region, or as a consolidated annual schedule?

INL will generally provide participant lists by session. INL will send each list to the Contractor as federal and state institutions confirm their sessions and candidates complete INL's vetting process. INL does not expect to provide a consolidated annual schedule of participants.

17 Attachment 1 SOW Section 9 Are offerors expected to provide their own facilities under any circumstances, or should contractors assume all assessments will occur at facilities identified by INL and Government of Mexico partners?

Government of Mexico through INL provides facilities. Please review Section B.2 of the SF30.

18 Attachment 1 SOW Section 10 Please confirm that the travel CLIN represents one evaluator supporting one complete one-week evaluation session and includes all travel-related expenses required by the SOW.

Confirmed.-- All travel costs for a one week period on an FFP basis consistent with all references in the SF- 1449, SOW, and Pricing Spreadsheets.

19 Attachment 1 SOW Section 10 Will the Government provide historical evaluation locations or regional distribution information to assist offerors in developing realistic nationwide travel pricing assumptions?

No, because historical locations are not predictive of future needs. Therefore the Government will not provide historical evaluation locations or regional distribution information. As stated in Section 9 of the SOW, evaluations may take place in any state of Mexico, depending on need, interest, safety, and health conditions. INL will provide the actual location at least fourteen (14) calendar days before each evaluation start date.

As stated in Section 10, offerors shall propose a single firm-fixed-price travel rate that covers all travel-related costs, including evaluator travel, lodging, meals and incidental expenses, and travel time. The same rate applies to any location in Mexico that INL selects. It is not subject to adjustment based on the actual location or the Contractor's cost experience. Offerors should develop their travel pricing assumptions based on their own experience and their assessment of nationwide travel costs.

20 Attachment 1 SOW Section 6 If INL increases participant volumes and additional evaluators are required, what minimum notice period should contractors expect before additional personnel must be deployed?

Section 7 of the SOW requires the Contractor to maintain at least six (6) CONOCER-certified evaluators, while Section 6 requires no more than three (3) evaluators per evaluation group. This approved pool exists so the Contractor can absorb changes in volume, schedule, or evaluator availability without delay.

The Contractor is responsible for maintaining enough qualified backup evaluators to meet all scheduled evaluations, including any increase in volume up to the maximum quantities described in the response to Question 3. No separate notice period applies to deploying evaluators from the approved pool. The lead times in the responses to Questions 10 and 12 apply: participant lists at least five (5) business days, and locations at least fourteen (14) calendar days, before each evaluation start date.

If INL determines that more evaluators are needed beyond the approved pool, INL will notify the Contractor and give it sufficient time to submit additional evaluators for INL approval, in accordance with Section 6. All additional evaluators must meet the requirements of Sections 7 and 8 and receive INL's written approval before performing under the contract. In the interests of maintaining a pool of viable evaluators, the Government also invites the Contractor to submit additional evaluators for review after award at their own convenience. Additionally, while the solicitation requires a minimum of six key personnel evaluator resumes, responding firms are able to provide more than 6 but no more than 10 resumes of qualified evaluators, should they choose to.

21 Attachment 1 SOW Deliverables Table A Please clarify whether Deliverable D04 (Digital Copy of Approved Candidates' Certificates) is considered accepted upon issuance by CONOCER or upon delivery to INL.

Deliverable D04 will be considered accepted upon delivery to INL and INL's review and acceptance, not upon issuance by CONOCER. CONOCER's issuance of a certificate is required before the Contractor can deliver it, but issuance alone does not mean the deliverable is accepted.

To be accepted, D04 shall include a complete, legible digital copy of each certificate issued by CONOCER to an approved candidate, showing the candidate's name, the competency standard (EC1599), and the certificate folio number. Each certificate must match a candidate reported as approved under Section 6. INL will review each D04 submission and notify the Contractor of acceptance or of any deficiencies. The Contractor shall correct any deficiencies and resubmit.

The forty (40) business-day period in Section 11 begins on the date the Contractor notifies INL of the approved candidates for each evaluation session. If CONOCER's processing delays delivery beyond this period for reasons outside the Contractor's control, the Contractor shall notify INL and the Contracting Officer in writing before the due date. The notice shall include documentation of the submission to CONOCER and the expected issuance date. Payment under CLIN 002 will be made only for certificates delivered to and accepted by INL.

22 Attachment 1 SOW Section 12 / Attachment 2 Attachment 2 references VAT compliance with Section 11 of the SOW, while VAT requirements appear in Section 12 of the SOW. Please confirm the correct controlling section.

Section 12 has been removed from the SOW. Attachment 2 has been updated to reflect that VAT is governed by Section C.2.

23 Attachment 1 SOW Section 12 May offerors propose a VAT amount of $0 if they do not anticipate reimbursable VAT expenses, consistent with Attachment 2 instructions?

Yes

24 Section L-3.3 Relevant Corporate Experience The solicitation requests experience performing work as a prime contractor and/or grantee for the U.S. Government.

Will subcontract experience on U.S. Government projects receive equal consideration when clearly described?

Performance working as a prime contractor is preferred but the Government will also consider experience working as a subcontractor.

25 Section L-3.3 Relevant Corporate Experience May experience from joint-venture members, affiliates, or subcontractors be considered during evaluation if those entities will perform substantive portions of the requirement?

Yes.

26 Section L-3.4 Past Performance The solicitation requires three to five examples of successful past performance. Will the Government consider experience related to certification, competency assessment, adult learning evaluation, law enforcement training, and criminal-analysis support activities if not specifically tied to CONOCER Standard 1599?

The Government will evaluate each example for its relevance to the requirements of the SOW, in accordance with the evaluation criteria in the solicitation. Examples that show performance similar in scope, complexity, and nature to this requirement will generally be considered more relevant. Similar performance includes conducting competency evaluations and certifications under CONOCER procedures, evaluating personnel from security or justice institutions, and performing work across multiple locations in Mexico.

27 Attachment 3 PPIQ If a reference does not return a completed PPIQ before the proposal due date, will the Government rely on the information submitted by the offeror and other available past-performance sources?

Yes

28 Section G.3 Ordering Procedures Please clarify whether future task orders under the IDIQ will generally require additional technical submissions from awardees or whether award decisions will primarily be based on discounted task-order pricing.

As stated in Section G.3 "The government will provide fair opportunity for IDIQ awardees by utilizing a price competition to place orders. A technical evaluation may or may not be required during the fair opportunity process."

29 Section G.3 Ordering Procedures For future competency standards beyond 1599, what process will the Government use to establish new evaluation and certification pricing?

The Government intends to work with all awardees to bilaterally modify the contracts to include additional standards at bilaterally negotiated prices.

30 Section M.1 Price Evaluation Please confirm that VAT CLIN pricing is excluded from the evaluated price for source-selection purposes. Confirmed. See Section M.1 which states "VAT will not be considered in the overall evaluated price."

31 Section M.2 Basis for Award The solicitation states that technical factors are more important than price. Can the Government confirm whether a tradeoff methodology will be used in determining best value?

52.212-2 has been updated to remove the statement that "Technical and Past Performance, when combined, are approximately equal to price." This is not an LPTA procurement, therefore, the Government may utilize tradeoffs rationale when performing the source selection for award.

32 Section H.4 Key Personnel Following award, may additional evaluators be added to the contract after successful vetting and Contracting Officer approval?

Yes.

33 General Does the Government anticipate issuing any amendments, answers to questions, or other solicitation updates before the proposal due date of November 1, 2026?

Yes. Additionally, the due date has been extended to Friday November 6, 2026 17:00 CST.