Amendment 1 Q and A.pdf

Question 1: Would the Government please reconsider the requirements for certain categories to have specific experience auditing financial services processes? For certain labor categories it is required to have federal audit experience and mortgage service processes. Would the government consider revising to include “three years auditing financial services OR mortgage servicing”? Or would it be possible to submit two resumes that fit all those requirements? As currently stated, the requirements are strict and it is hard for small businesses to fill these roles.

Answer 1: The solicitation stands as is. The solicitation reflects the depth this audit will require.

Question 2: Please provide copies of last year’s management letters, if issued, for the entities to help properly evaluate the control environment and the scope of our work.

Answer 2: The management letters will be provided to the awardee after contract award.

Question 3: What was the actual level of effort for the audits of each entity by labor category for 2019? If that is not available, please provide the level of effort estimated in the contract for each audit.

Answer 3: This is the first time this consolidated audit is being outsourced and hence the actual level of effort is estimates only. As the proposed level of effort is part of the evaluation criteria, the Government cannot provide that during solicitation.

Question 4: What is the anticipated/ estimated or budgeted level of effort required for this contract? Are the hours and amount significantly different from what were incurred during the most current audit? If yes, why?

Answer 4: This is the first time this consolidated audit is being outsourced and hence the actual level of effort is estimates only. As the proposed level of effort is part of the evaluation criteria, the Government cannot provide that during solicitation.

Question 5: Because this is an email submission, what is the email file size your email system will allow?

Answer 5: Submissions will be confirmed when received, and 62 MB for individual files.

Question 6: Because there is a page limit for this submission, are the proposal cover, table of contents, cover letter, or other required front matter excluded from the page limit?

Answer 6: The page limit is per volume and will include all aspects of that particular volume, i.e. Technical Approach, Quality Control Plan, Management Plan, etc.

Question 7: Given the increasing cost of cybersecurity and general IT infrastructure costs, will the government allow a technology fee charged as Other Direct Costs?

Answer 7: The proposed contract type is labor hour type. Any labor categories necessary for successful contract performance may be proposed.

Question 8: Section 1.6 Place of Performance on page 29 of the PWS states “The primary place of work shall be the Contractor’s facilities”. Section 52.212-1 Instruction to Offerors, page 50 states, “The cost/price proposal shall include labor rates for both contractor and government sites”. If the primary place of work shall be the Contractor’s facility per the PWS, would the government please clarify if pricing for both contractor and government site is necessary as per the Instruction to Offerors?

Answer 8: Both Government site and contractor site must be proposed as the performance location/site will depend on each situation during different phases of contract performance.

Question 9: Section 52.212-1 Instruction to Offerors, page 48. Will the government confirm that the past performance will not count toward technical page count?

Answer 9: The page limit is per volume and will include all aspects of that particular volume, i.e. Technical Approach, Quality Control Plan, Management Plan, etc.

Question 10: Section 1.2 of the PWS indicates that this award is for one base year and up to three subsequent option years; however, section 1.5 of the PWS states that the contract is for up to two option years. Can the Government confirm the period of performance for this contract?

Answer 10: The Government anticipates the period of performance of this contract will be one base year with 2 optional years. The solicitation will be amended to match this.

Question 11: Section 1.2 of the PWS indicates that this award is for one base year and up to three subsequent option years; however, section 1.5 of the PWS states that the contract is for up to two option years. Can the Government confirm the period of performance for this contract?

Answer 11: The Government anticipates the period of performance of this contract will be one base year with 2 optional years. The solicitation will be amended to match this.

Question 12: For the following, “Offeror shall provide a spreadsheet containing all listed labor categories and descriptions/qualifications similar to Attachment #3 – Labor Categories.” Is the Government requiring the use of the Labor Categories noted in Attachment mapped back to the offerors GSA schedule labor categories?

Answer 12: If the offeror has an awarded GSA Schedule pricing, mapping the proposed pricing to that GSA pricing is acceptable. However, this contract is being solicited on the Governmentwide Point of Entry and is separate from FAR 8.

Question 13: The solicitation letter notes that “Offerors shall also provide 3 past performance references as part of Volume II. However, Past Performance section noted 5 past performances.

Please clarify the requirements.

Answer 13: The Government requires 5 past performance references.

Question 14: This section notes that HUD OIG is committed to awarding HUD OIG contracts to offerors that will perform a majority of the total cost of labor under the contract, while simultaneously focusing on achieving socioeconomic goals for small business participation as well. However, on page 51, it indicates that Socioeconomic Participation would be noted as Excellent if, “The offeror is not a small business and clearly proposes to maximize small business participation by subcontracting a substantial amount of the contract value at least 50%”. These statements seem contradictory if the Government could please provide clarification.

Answer 14: The Government has a responsibility to the taxpayers to ensure successful contract performance but also to protect small business concerns.

Question 15: Please clarify the deadline to submit offers. The offeror letter states that the deadline is 1:00 PM EST, but page 2 (Box 8 of SF 1449) states that the deadline is 10:00 ET.

Answer 15: All submissions will be due at 1:00 p.m. EST to allow extra time for all vendors.

Question 16: Please clarify the page limits for each volume. Specifically, the offeror letter refers to a 20-page limit for Volume II - Technical Proposal, "including the Technical Approach, Quality Control Plan, and Management Plan," but the proposal instructions on pg. 49 of the PDF state that the Technical Approach shall not exceed 20 pages, the Quality Control Plan shall not exceed 5 pages, and the Management Plan shall not exceed 5 pages, which would result in a 30-page limit for Volume II.

Answer 16: This sentence from the solicitation letter will be stricken: “Offerors shall also provide 3 past performance references as part of Volume II, but not be included as part of the 20-page limit, (Government or Commercial) where they have provided a similar service by the due date.”

Question 17: Please provide an attachment or checklist containing the applicable Section 508 standards so that offerors can address these standards in their technical approach and quality control plan, in accordance with the proposal instructions.

Answer 17: 508 compliance for this solicitation is as follows:

• 301.1 Scope (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e301_1) - The requirements of Chapter 3 shall apply to ICT where required by 508 Chapter 2 (Scoping Requirements), 255 Chapter 2 (Scoping Requirements), and where otherwise referenced in any other chapter of the Revised 508 Standards or Revised 255 Guidelines.

• 302.1 Without Vision (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1) - Where a visual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require user vision.

• 302.2 With Limited Vision (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1) - Where a visual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that enables users to make use of limited vision.

• 302.3 Without Perception of Color (https://buyaccessible.gov/ictaccessibility# e302_1) - Where a visual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall

Section508.gov (https://section508.gov) | GSA.gov (https://www.gsa.gov) | USA.gov (https://www.usa.gov) | FOIA.gov (https://www.foia.gov) provide at least one visual mode of operation that does not require user perception of color.

• 302.4 Without Hearing (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1) - Where an audible mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require user hearing.

• 302.5 With Limited Hearing (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1)

- Where an audible mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that enables users to make use of limited hearing.

• 302.6 Without Speech (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1) - Where speech is used for input, control, or operation, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require user speech.

• 302.7 With Limited Manipulation (https://buyaccessible.gov/ictaccessibility# e302_1) - Where a manual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that does not require fine motor control or simultaneous manual operations.

• 302.8 With Limited Reach and Strength (https://buyaccessible.gov/ictaccessibility# e302_1) - Where a manual mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that is operable with limited reach and limited strength.

• 302.9 With Limited Language, Cognitive, and Learning Abilities (https://buyaccessible.gov/ict-accessibility#e302_1) - ICT shall provide features making its use by individuals with limited cognitive, language, and learning abilities simpler and easier.

Question 18: Please confirm that a Department of Defense (DoD)-issued Common Access Card (CAC) denoting a contractor employee as a contractor is an acceptable alternative to a PIV Card.

Answer 18: HUD OIG contracts must undergo a separate PIVing process for HUD OIG access.

Question 19: Please provide the estimated levels of effort (in number of staff hours per labor category) for Task A and Task B either individually or in total for the base year and two option years considered under this contract.

Answer 19: As the proposed level of effort is part of the evaluation criteria, the Government cannot provide that during solicitation.

Question 20: If the Government will not provide an estimated level of effort, please provide information regarding the size of the audit team (in number of Government FTEs) for both the FHA financial statement audit and the HUD consolidated audit, or alternatively, the total number of Government FTE used for these two audits combined.

Answer 20: As the proposed level of effort is part of the evaluation criteria, the Government cannot provide that during solicitation.

Question 21: Please confirm that an IPA firm that discloses a potential immaterial organizational conflict of interest in its independence statement but implements safeguards in its quality control plan to prevent any threat to independence would remain eligible and competitive for award. For example, if the proposed team included a small-business subcontractor with recent past work supporting a HUD program that was not previously audited and is immaterial to the overall HUD financial statements, provided the IPA firm implemented appropriate safeguards.

Answer 21: Confirm.

Question 22: Please confirm that the labor category titles, required certifications, and minimum qualifications were provided as an example, rather than as evaluation requirements, and that the contractor may use similar equivalent categories meeting appropriate minimum standards generally accepted for conducting full-scope federal financial statement audits.

Answer 22: Confirm. For the certifications/CPEs, the issuing body must be subdivisions (States or US territories) of the United States. For experience, equivalencies may be acceptable.

Question 23: Please clarify whether Task C is in scope for this contract. It is not included in the scope paragraph, but it is listed under the requirements on Page 32 of the PDF.

Answer 23: Task C is within scope of the resultant contract.

Question 24: Assuming Task C is in scope, please clarify the nature of services expected under this task. For example, the description of Task C references advisory services. Please also confirm that the nature of all services provided under Task C will be in support of the HUD OIG and will not present any conflicts of interest or independence threats to the contractor in performing the FHA audit and/or HUD consolidated audit.

Answer 24: Task C is designed to be supplemental advisory services as states in the PWS.

Question 25: Assuming Task C is within scope, this paragraph refers to a "section covering Task C" within Attachment #2, Labor Categories. However, Attachment #2 does not include sections.

Please provide the labor category requirements and/or specific labor categories from Attachment #2 that the contractor must have available to perform Task C.

Answer 25: Task C is designed to be supplemental advisory services as states in the PWS.

Question 26: Please confirm the Period of Performance (PoP) will begin November 1, 2020.

Answer 26: The resultant contract’s period of performance will be date of award through one year, with 2 optional years.

Question 27: Assuming a November 1, 2020, PoP start date and an award date of no later than October 31, 2020, given that the Government will be wrapping up the current-year audit during that timeframe and will likely be unavailable to review audit documentation and to respond fully to inquiries to assist in planning the engagement, please also confirm that the due dates for deliverable 5.1.1.5 (Draft Financial Statement Audit Approach Plan - for elements a through d and i) and 5.1.1.6 (Draft IT Audit Plan) should be "within thirty (30) calendar days of award, or as agreed," providing the same flexibility embedded in the due dates of other deliverables.

Answer 27: If date of award is later than expected, the Government and contract may modify the date of deliverable due dates to be commensurate with the level of effort required for each deliverable.

Question 28: If the Government's response to the above request to add flexibility to these deliverable due dates is that the solicitation stands as-is, within how many days of award will the Government make its personnel fully available to respond to inquiries and provide electronic copies of all audit documentation, including documentation of financial statement and IT audit planning, risk assessment procedures, further audit procedures, audit results, and other matters of continuing accounting and auditing significance, such as the schedule of uncorrected misstatements, working paper analysis of balance sheet accounts, and those relating to contingencies?

Answer 28: All Government furnished information will be discussed at the contract kick-off meeting and distributed to Contractor staff as needed.

Question 29: Please provide Attachment 6 from the list of attachments on pg. 45 of the PDF, as well as any proposal instructions related to this attachment. Assuming there is no Attachment 6, please confirm that following the proposal instructions will satisfy the FAR requirement for the offeror to submit a subcontractor plan.

Answer 29: Attachment has been uploaded with this amendment.

Question 30: Please confirm this title should not include "Ginnie Mae Financial Statement Requirement."

Answer 30: On page 32, the title is amended to FHA and Consolidated Financial Statement Requirement as well as the following text ATTACHMENT #3 – DESCRIPTION OF ENTITIES – HUD, FHA and Ginnie Mae for additional background information.

Question 31: Please clarify how detailed offerors should be in identifying Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements to include in the proposal matrix. For example, should offerors limit the requirements identified in the matrix to a relatively high level (e.g., numbered and other bold-font sub-sections within Section 5.0), or should offerors include a detailed listing of all requirements in the solicitation, including multiple requirements imbedded within a single sub-section of PWS Section 5.0?

Answer 31: The intent behind the proposal matrix/ checklist is to ensure all sections of the PWS are addressed.

Question 32: Please clarify whether offerors should include the proposal matrix as part of one of their proposal volumes or as a separate attachment. If the proposal matrix should be included in a proposal volume, would the Government please clarify which volume offerors should include the matrix in and state whether the matrix is included in the page limits for that volume?

Answer 32: The proposal matrix/checklist is separate from the Technical Approach volume, Quality Control Plan volume, Management Plan volume, etc.

Question 33: Please confirm that offerors may submit at least three and no more than five past performance references.

Answer 33: The Government requires 5 past performance references.

Question 34: Assuming the requirement is to provide at least three and no more than five past performance references, please confirm this limit is placed on the offeror and each subcontracting firm that will perform more than 20 percent of the contract value, and that the five-reference limit is not for the proposal in total. For example, the prime contractor must provide three to five past performance references, and each subcontractor performing more than 20 percent of the contract value must also provide three to five past performance references.

Answer 34: The Government requires 5 past performance references. The rest of the solicitation stands as is.

Question 35: Please confirm that a separate past performance chart and narrative is only required from those subcontractors who individually will perform more than 20 percent of the contract value.

Answer 35: As stated in the solicitation,” If the offeror is proposing to subcontract (or use joint ventures/ partners, or other entities other than the prime contractor to perform) more than 20% of the contract value, the offeror shall submit a separate chart and narrative described for past performance above, for the proposed subcontractor(s).”

Question 36: As above, please confirm the past performance survey requirement applies only to those subcontractors that will individually perform at least 20 percent of the contract value.

Answer 36: As stated in the solicitation,” If the offeror is proposing to subcontract (or use joint ventures/ partners, or other entities other than the prime contractor to perform) more than 20% of the contract value, the offeror shall submit a separate chart and narrative described for past performance above, for the proposed subcontractor(s).”

Question 37: Please clarify whether offerors should provide separate price proposal files for off-site and on-site work, or whether offerors may include both sets of rates in the same file.

Answer 37: Both contractor and Government sites are required.

Question 38: Please clarify the apparent contradiction that HUD OIG is committed to awarding this contract to an offeror that will perform the majority of the total cost of labor under this contract (i.e., greater than 50 percent) and to a prime contractor that is responsible for and capable of performing a large part of the labor ("as opposed to firms who subcontract substantial portions"), but that an offeror that is not a small business will receive a socioeconomic participation evaluation rating of "Excellent" if they subcontract at least 50 percent of the contract value.

Answer 38: See answer to question 14 above.

Question 39: Please consider revising the evaluation criteria for the 25 percent small business participation goal. For example, a pass/fail evaluation for the 25 percent goal with an "exceeds" rating for an offeror that also meets the subordinate goals would be more in line with other agency small business participation requirements. In particular, several other recent CFO Act financial statement audit solicitations have used a 10 percent small business participation goal with no subordinate category goals, evaluated as pass/fail. Indicating that offerors will only receive a marginal rating for a proposal that has 25 percent small business participation and an unsatisfactory rating for anything below 25 percent small business participation may reduce competition, especially given the very specific experience requirements listed in the labor category descriptions and the short timeline for submitting a proposal that includes signed commitment letters with teaming partners.

Answer 39: The solicitation stands as is.

Question 40: Please provide Attachment 7.

Answer 40: The reference in Attachment 7 in the pricing proposal instructions is deleted. The offerors may propose progress payments. The Government favors performance based milestone based payment schedules.

Question 41: Please clarify the extent to which, and how soon after contract award, the contractor will have access to and the ability to leverage audit working papers that the HUD OIG prepared during the prior-year audit. Key planning deliverables (e.g., entity profile, audit approach) are due within 30 days of contract award, with the remaining key planning deliverables (e.g., SCEs, cycle memoranda) due within 60 days of contract award. Internal control phase deliverables are due within 90 days of contract award, including updated SCEs to capture the results of nonsampling control tests. Will the contractor have access to the electronic files to enable them to roll forward existing audit documentation?

Answer 41: See answer to question 28.

Question 42: Please confirm the key personnel labor categories should include (h) and (i), rather than (i) and (j). Labor category (h) is the IS/IT Audit Partner or equivalent, (i) is the IS/IT Senior Manager or IS/IT Audit Manager or equivalent, and (j) is the IS/IT Audit Senior or equivalent.

Answer 42: The Labor categories considered key personnel are; (a) Partner/Principal/Director or equivalent title, (b) Senior Manager or equivalent title, (h) IS/IT Audit Partner and (i) IS/IT Senior Manager or equivalent title. The solicitation will be amended to reflect the updated information.

Question 43: Please clarify whether each Partner proposed is required to have both three years' federal government audit experience and three years' experience auditing financial services, or whether the description should read "or" rather than "and," as it does in the Senior Manager labor category. The Partner labor category description includes minimum experience of "three years federal government financial audit experience and three years auditing financial services, mortgage servicing processes." The Senior Manager labor category description includes three years' federal government financial audit experience or three years' experience auditing financial services processes.

Answer 43: The solicitation stands as is.

Question 44: Please reference “ATTACHMENT 2 – LABOR CATEGORIES”. The Government states “Personnel in labor categories or the functional equivalent in labor category (a), (b), and

(i) and (j) are considered key personnel.” LCAT (i) is the IS/IT Senior Manager or IS/IT Audit Manager and LCAT (j) is the IS/IT Audit Senior. Was this intended to state LCATs (h) - Partner/Principal/Director and (i) - IS/IT Senior Manager or IS/IT Audit Manager?

Answer 44: See answer to question 42.

Question 45: May we obtain the Government’s estimated level of effort for the entire engagement?

Answer 45: As the proposed level of effort is part of the evaluation criteria, the Government cannot provide that during solicitation.

Question 46: Is there a pre-proposal meeting?

Answer 46: No.

Question 47: We notice no auditing of Ginnie Mae is included in this effort. Why?

Answer 47: The Ginnie Mae audit was solicited and awarded separately. The contract number is 86612720C00002.