The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Question #
| Question |
| Government Response |
| 1 |
| What is the on-ramp timeframe for small businesses (RFP date, on ramp timeframe, etc.)? |
| The Government currently is projecting the release of a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) in September 2019, and the RFP release in November 2019. |
| 2 |
| Will large businesses be on ramped and what is the timeframe? |
| The On-ramp will be limited to Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE)-verified Service-disabled Veteran-owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns. The Government currently is projecting the release of a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) in September 2019, and the RFP release in November 2019. |
| 3 |
| During the Small Business on-ramp forthcoming, if a All Small Business Mentor Protégé Program / Joint Venture is interested in on-ramping, are there any specific requirements outside of the standard on-ramp requirements. |
| Any Joint Venture (JV) under the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) All Small Mentor-Protégé Program must have the JV approved by SBA and the JV must be CVE-verified as a SDVOSB under the applicable NAICS code at time of proposal submission, as well as at time of award to be eligible. |
| 4 |
| If a current T4NG small company Prime (SD or SDVO) enters into an All Small Business Mentor Protégé Program and Joint Venture with a large business to jointly pursue T4NG SB task orders, will the existing T4NG SB Prime award / contract have to be novated into the Protégé Program / JV? |
| No. |
| 5 |
| Does the VA plan to onboard new vendors on the T4NG IDIQ contract this year? If so can you direct me to where I can find the requirements. |
| The Government currently is projecting the release of a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) in September 2019, and the RFP release in November 2019. Requirements will be made publicly available through the Federal Business Opportunities website. |
| 6 |
| A FedHealthIT article, published 27 February 2019, stated there will be an On-Ramp for T4NG for VOSB and SDVOSBs. If this is true, when do you believe the opportunity will be solicited and how can we obtain additional information. Will there be an On-Ramp for other business types? Is it possible to bid as a Joint Venture with a SDVOSB and the Joint Venture be considered a SDVOSB? |
| An On-ramp for SDVOSBs is contemplated. The Government currently is projecting the release of a draft Request for Proposals (RFP) in September 2019, and the RFP release in November 2019. Requirements will be made publicly available through the Federal Business Opportunities website. An On-ramp for other business types is not currently being contemplated. JVs may submit proposals for the On-ramp. Any JV under the SBA All Small Mentor-Protégé Program must have the JV approved by SBA and the JV must be CVE-verified as a SDVOSB under the applicable NAICS code at time of proposal submission, as well as at time of award to be eligible. |
| 7 |
| Please confirm the Sample Tasks to which bidders will have to respond will be the same as those used in VA118-15-R-0558 (document entitled "VA118-15-R-0558-A00001004" posted on FBO on 11-25-14). |
| Any Sample Task associated with the T4NG On-ramp Solicitation will be not be the same as previously utilized. New Sample Tasks would be included in the Solicitation. |
| 8 |
| Please confirm the VA will accept and evaluate past performance of all member companies in a Joint Venture as past performance for the "Prime Offeror." |
| Yes, the past performance of all member companies in a JV will be evaluated; the specific details regarding the past performance evaluation approach will be provided at a later date. |
| 9 |
| May awardees add team members on a task order by task order basis to meet VA requirements? |
| Yes. |
| 10 |
| Please reconsider the applicability of 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS) to this requirement. SCLS is only applicable to contracts for which the preponderance of services work will be performed by contractor employees who would be classified as non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Generally, positions for which Bachelor or above degrees are required are considered exempt under FLSA and, therefore, SCLS would not apply to that work. Of the 175 positions listed for T4NG, only 31 (just under 18%) do not require Bachelor's degrees or higher. Clearly this indicates that the preponderance of work will not be performed by non-exempt employees and, therefore, SCLS would not be required to be incorporated into this contract. |
| SCLS applicability is determined at the task order level; however, since the scope of T4NG may include tasks under which SCLS applies, the clause shall remain in the contract. Furthermore, it should be noted that the On-ramp requirements/clauses will remain consistent with the current T4NG contract. Since the On-ramp awardees are being added to an existing contract, the terms and conditions of the On-ramp shall be consistent with the current T4NG contracts and any subsequent modifications thereto. |
| 11 |
| 52.222-14 Non-displacement of Qualified Workers applies to all contracts for which 52.222-41 is applicable. If 52.222-41 is not removed, please add 52.222-17 to incorporated clauses. |
| This question contains several factual errors and therefore cannot be responded to. It initially references 52.222-14, Non-displacement of Qualified Workers, and then later cites 52.222-17. 52.222-17 is the correct cite for Non-displacement of Qualified Workers; however, if that was the intended clause it should be noted that the question is incorrect, and FAR does not state that 52.222-17 applies to all contracts for which 52.222-41 is applicable. |
| 12 |
| The referenced paragraph states: "The Offeror shall submit a Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA) IAW FAR subpart 9.6, between the Prime and each subcontractor." Please confirm for an SBA All Small Mentor Protégé Program (ASMPP) JV that the agreement establishing the JV meets the requirement for providing a "CTA." |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 13 |
| The referenced paragraph states: "The Offeror shall provide a total compensation plan IAW 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees." Since SBA ASMPP JVs must be unpopulated and, therefore, have no employees or compensation and thus the "Prime Offeror" (the bidding entity with a specific DUNS and CAGE code) will have no employees and pay no compensation, please clarify what documents a JV should submit to meet this requirement. Will a compensation plan for the Managing Venturer meet the requirement? |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 14 |
| The referenced paragraph states: "Prime Offerors shall submit up to three (3) instances and major subcontractors shall submit up to two (2) instances of Federal, State or Commercial contracts (prime contracts, task/delivery orders, and/or major subcontracts in performance during the past three years from the solicitation date of issuance), which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation." Please confirm for a JV the 3 "Prime Offeror" instances may be past performance of any of the JV member companies. |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 15 |
| The reference paragraph states: "All Offerors, regardless of size status, are required to submit the number of Veterans currently employed by the Prime Offeror only at time of the proposal submission." Since the "Prime Offeror" will be the SBA ASMPP JV and SBA regulations prohibit populated JVs (JVs with employees), please clarify for what entity JVs should submit the requested employee information? |
| The Government anticipates that for the Veterans Employment Factor joint ventures will be evaluated by combining the total number of employees and total number of Veterans employed for all members of the Joint Venture. Therefore, for a mentor-protégé Joint Venture, the totals will include employees for both the mentor and protege. |
| 16 |
| Is Defense Base Act insurance required for OCONUS staff working on US installations included in ODC costs or should it be included in blended labor rates proposed? |
| Specific requirements will be identified at a task order level. There is no requirement for Defense Base Act Insurance at the basic contract level. |
| 17 |
| "Are companies required to include their Veteran employment rate for their entire company, or if they have separate federal contract subsidiaries or federal contract divisions can they use their numbers for those components, as some large companies will interpret requirement as just for their federal practice." A29: "The Government defines Prime Offeror as the bidding entity with a specific DUNS and CAGE code. Offerors shall only count the number of total employees and Veterans employed by the prime offeror/bidding entity." For JVs with no employees (as required in the SBA All Small Mentor Protege program), for what entity should bidders provide veteran employment information? |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 18 |
| Q61: "Volume II - Past Performances Files - Will the Government please confirm that past performance may come from either party in a formal joint venture, such as an SBA 8(a) Mentor Protégé Joint Venture?" A61: "An existing joint venture may provide instances of work performed as the joint venture entity. A new joint venture may provide instances from either party; however both sections 2 and 3 should be submitted." Section 3 of Amendment 00001 of the RFP stated: "(3) Section 3 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contract(s)/task order(s) involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contract(s)/task order(s) cited. Information shall be included in the files described in the sections above." In the case of a JV, the cited work will have been performed by the partner corporate entities, not by individuals now employed by the JV (since JV's are required to be unpopulated under the SBA All Small Mentor Protégé Program). Please clarify the requirement to address Section 3 when submitting JV member corporation past performance citations for a JV. |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 19 |
| "Offerors are permitted to provide ONLY ONE PROPOSAL for consideration" Does this apply to companies and wholly owned subsidiaries? Can a parent company and its wholly owned subsidiary both submit a proposal for T4-NG and be awarded a contract for T4-NG? How does the "one proposal" restriction apply to JVs? May a JV and each of its member companies submit separate proposals? |
| Please note that the paragraph referenced herein is from Section L of the original T4NG competition. The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. However, for clarification under the T4NG On-ramp effort only one (1) proposal per legal entity may be submitted for consideration. A JV is a separate legal entity; therefore, a JV and each of its member companies may submit separate proposals provided that the member companies otherwise meet all eligibility requirements. |
| 20 |
| How many primes are you targeting to on ramp on the SDVOSB track? |
| VA may elect to award up to seven (7) contracts; however, this number may be exceeded if it is determined to be in the VA’s best interest. |
| 21 |
| How many primes are you targeting to on ramp on the Large Business track? |
| None. Award to large business primes is not currently anticipated for the On-ramp. |
| 22 |
| Will joint ventures be allowed to bid in an SDVOSB specific on ramp? |
| Yes. |
| 23 |
| Can a major subcontractor be non exclusive to a single SDVOSB prime and support multiple SDVOSB prime bids? |
| A company may be a subcontractor to more than one prime Offeror. |
| 24 |
| If large businesses may on ramp, can that large business submit a bid on the large business track and be a major subcontractor under an SDVOSB prime bid? |
| Award to large business primes is not currently anticipated for the On-ramp. |
| 25 |
| How many awards does the VA anticipate making for SDVOSBs, VOSBs and large businesses, respectively? |
| VA may elect to award up to seven (7) contracts to SDVOSBs; however, this number may be exceeded if it is determined to be in the VA’s best interest. Award to non-SDVOSBs is not currently anticipated. |
| 26 |
| Given the substantial interest from “Joint Venture” SDVOSBs, which utilize SBA’s Mentor/Protégé program and include large business mentors, to compete for the T4NG On Ramp, will the TAC consider some mechanisms to level the playing field for “stand alone” SDVOSBs? For example, would there be any consideration for reserving some awards exclusively for “stand alone” SDVOSBs? |
| VA does not anticipate reserving any awards for stand alone SDVOSBs. |
| 27 |
| Given that the On Ramp is open exclusively to SDVOSBs, would the TAC consider requesting a VAAR deviation to alter the “Vets Involvement” Factor, so that “stand alone” SDVOSBs can be afforded “Full Credit” while “Joint Venture” SDVOSBs formed by large businesses receive less consideration? |
| The Government reminds Offerors that since the On-ramp will be restricted to SDVOSBs, VAAR 852.21.5-70, and therefore the Veterans Involvement Evaluation Approach, may not necessarily be included in the On-ramp solicitation. |
| 28 |
| Does the TAC anticipate the possibility of there being any Woman-Owned SDVOSB reserve awards for the T4NG On-Ramp? |
| No, that is not anticipated at this time. |
| 29 |
| We are a SDVOSB that has formed a JV with another small business. As the SDVOSB, we are the managing partner of the JV. We will the JV be eligible as an SDVOSB JV for the T4NG on ramp. |
| There is not adequate details to determine eligibility. However, any Joint Venture (JV) under the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) All Small Mentor-Protégé Program must have the JV approved by SBA and the JV must be CVE-verified as a SDVOSB under the applicable NAICS code at time of proposal submission, as well as at time of award to be eligible. |
| 30 |
| Is the Government revising either L - Instructions or M – Evaluation Criteria for the On Ramp Proposal? |
| Yes. |
| 31 |
| Is the Government revising the PWS or Task Areas for the On Ramp Proposal? |
| No. |
| 32 |
| Can Industry expect a draft RFQ and solicitation documents to be released prior to the release of the final solicitation? |
| Yes. Draft documents are anticipated to be released in September 2019. |
| 33 |
| Can Industry expect new sample task orders to be included in the Final Solicitation? |
| Yes. |
| 34 |
| Will the Government confirm the number of Vendors being Off Ramped due to size? |
| At this time the Government does not anticipate off-ramping vendors due to size. |
| 35 |
| Will the Government clarify the process for recertifications of Small Business Status once awarded the T4NG On Ramp? |
| Unless requested as part of any specific task order, or if one of the exceptions within 13 CFR 121.404(g) apply, recertification will not be required for any new awardees of the T4NG On-ramp contracts. |
| 36 |
| Will the Government confirm that the requirements for Set-Aside Business Participation are remaining the same as required in the 2014 solicitation? |
| The Government anticipates that the Small Business Participation Requirements, as currently included in the T4NG contracts will remain unchanged. |
| 37 |
| With the SAC current solicitation on Integrated Healthcare Transformation and the Cerner implementation, what do you anticipate the type of work to be and the dollar amount of procurements during the last five years of the T4NG vehicle? (The significance of this question is the amount of time, money, etc. that a small business might invest to on ramp while the work may be going elsewhere to other vehicles or drying up.) |
| The Government currently anticipates that future T4NG work will remain relatively consistent with current T4NG spend. Further, and as a reminder, T4NG is a multi-Agency contract which means outside Agencies can leverage this vehicle. |
| 38 |
| Will the TAC limit the number of teams that large businesses can support as a major subcontractor for the T4NG On-Ramp? |
| No. |
| 39 |
| Will the TAC be giving any “extra credit” (or other recognition) for the Veteran’s Employment factor for companies that have participated in the Department of Labor’s HIRE Vets Medallion Program? If so, will the TAC also give the same credit to companies who have other types of recognition for their veteran’s employment efforts, for example, state programs like the V3 Program in Virginia? |
| Extra credit for other Veteran's Employment programs is currently not anticipated. |
| 40 |
| What "look back" timeframe will be used to determine the size of a small business, 3 years or 5 years? |
| Calculation of annual average receipts for purposes of small business size standards will be in accordance with the Small Business Administration (SBA) published guidance. Specifically, on June 24, 2019 , SBA published a proposed rule within the Federal Register. As relevant here, SBA stated the following within the proposed rule: "This proposed rule only would affect the application of SBA’s size standard rules after the effective date of a final rule. Thus, until the effective date of a final rule, SBA will continue to apply the 3-year averaging period in the present § 121.104 for calculating annual average receipts for all SBA’s receipts-based size standards. Since size is determined as of the date when a firm certifies its size as part of its initial offer which includes price, the 3-year calculation period will apply to any offer submitted prior to the effective date of a final rule. Thus, even if SBA receives a request for a size determination or size appeal after the effective date of the final rule, SBA will still use a 3-year calculation period if the determination or appeal relates to a certification submitted prior to the final rule’s effective date." Please reference the following regarding the quoted proposed rule: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/06/24/2019-12754/small-business-size-standards-calculation-of-annual-average-receipts |
| 41 |
| If JVs are permitted to bid, will current T4NG Primes that have formed a JV be permitted to bid? |
| Yes. |
| 42 |
| Will a company be permitted to submit a bid as a Prime but also join another team as a subcontractor? |
| Yes. |
| 43 |
| Will you only be considering SDVOSBs for the on-ramp? |
| Yes |
| 44 |
| Will you consider making ISO9001 and CMMI certifications a requirement to bid on T4NG? |
| That is not currently anticipated. |
| 45 |
| Since technology and the VA’s IT needs and priorities have evolved and expanded over the last 5 years, industry recommends adding more LCATs to the T4NG IDIQ. Example of labor categories in high demand are those related to cloud services, data science, and health IT. |
| The On-ramp requirements/clauses will remain consistent with the current T4NG contract. Since the On-ramp awardees are being added to an existing contract, the terms and conditions, to include LCATs, of the On-ramp shall be consistent with the current T4NG contracts and any subsequent modifications thereto. |
| 46 |
| Will the TAC consider revising the current evaluation of Veteran Employment within Past Performance by using numbers vs. percentages of a workforce, giving more credit to primes who put more veterans to work than others? |
| The instructions to Offerors and evaluation factors (Sections L and M, respectively) are likely to be different for the On-ramp than it was for the original competition. Therefore, any questions associated with the content of those sections from the original T4NG competition should be withheld until an updated version is released. |
| 47 |
| To better ensure the Government is receiving the specific requirements and business solutions intended, will the Government consider adding demonstrations and/or oral presentations as an evaluation factor for the on-ramp and subsequent requests for task execution plans (RTEPs)? |
| The evaluation approach is still being defined at this time. |
| 48 |
| Will the draft RFP include the sample tasks? |
| No. |
| 49 |
| Will the VA issue a new draft RFP for the on-ramp? |
| A draft RFP is anticipated and is currently being targeted for release in September 2019. |
| 50 |
| Will the VA use the original RFP for the on-ramp, or will there be changes? |
| There will be changes. |
| 51 |
| Will the VA use the existing T4NG NAICS size standard, or will it be different for the on-ramp ? |
| The NAICS and corresponding size standard will be the same as the existing T4NG contracts. Therefore, the NAICS will be 541512 and the small business size standard will be $30M. Please note that on July 18, 2019, an interim final rule was published by SBA which increased the size standard from $27.5M to $30M (the interim final rule is available at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/07/18/2019-14980/small-business-size-standards-adjustment-of-monetary-based-size-standards-for-inflation) |
| 52 |
| Will there be any restrictions on size status for major subcontractors? |
| No, provided that the composition of the prime and any subcontractors complies with all solicitation requirements. |
| 53 |
| Will there be any CMMI or ISO requirements at the IDIQ level? |
| CMMI and/or ISO requirements would be at the Task Order level. |
| 54 |
| Will there be any CAS / DCAA requirements at the IDIQ level? |
| Yes; for example, FAR 52.230-2 will be included. |
| 55 |
| Will there be any security clearance requirements at the IDIQ level? |
| The IDIQ identifies security and privacy requirements within the PWS; however, specific requirements will be further defined at the task order level. Further, work acquired on this contract for the Department of Defense or other Federal Agencies may involve secure networks, facilities and sensitive information. Specific security requirements and a suitability determination will be identified in the individual Task Order. The Contractor should anticipate potentially providing personnel with the security clearances up to the Top Secret level or Position Sensitivity of High/Tier 4 as required by the Task Order. Contractors must have the appropriate clearances for proposal purposes at the Task Order level. |
| 56 |
| Can you please confirm that a CVE-certified JV formed of multiple small businesses is permitted to submit a proposal (i.e. the JV does not have to be part of the SBA All-Small Mentor-Protege Program (ASMPP)). |
| Yes, a CVE-certified JV that is not part of the mentor-protégé program may submit a proposal. |
| 57 |
| To qualify a point on the industry day slides, the statement was: |
"Current T4NG prime contractors will be permitted to submit a proposal as part of an approved JV"
Does this mean that current T4NG primes are allowed to be an actual member of the JV entity itself or just a subcontractor teammate like any other bid? If they were to be an actual JV member than that company would technically have 2 different prime contractor roles on the contract and would limit/monopolize opportunities for other companies.
A current T4NG prime may be either a member of the JV itself, or a subcontractor. Since a JV is its own legal entity, that company technically would not have two different prime contractor roles.
| 58 |
| We understand that during the Industry Day, the TAC announced that it does not, at the present time, anticipate having any reserve awards for Woman-Owned SDVOSBs. Nevertheless, in light of the TAC’s initial approach on T4NG of having reserve awards for Woman-Owned (non-SDVOSB) Small Businesses as a vehicle to facilitate the VA’s/TAC’s ability to meet its Woman-Owned Small Business goal - a goal that we understand the VA is still not meeting - it is respectfully requested that the TAC reconsider its preliminary decision to not reserve any awards for Woman-Owned SDVOSBs. |
| The preliminary decision remains unchanged at this time. |
| 59 |
| We understand that during the Industry Day, the TAC announced that it is not, at the present time, considering seeking a VAAR deviation to the Veterans Involvement Factor so that “stand-alone” SDVOSBs would receive “full credit” while Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture SDVOSBs would receive “partial credit”/“some consideration”. If the TAC does not seek such a VAAR deviation to the Veterans Involvement Factor, every offeror will receive exactly the same rating. That approach appears to be the antithesis of having a Basis for Award in which each of the Factors and Subfactors are discriminators in the source selection process. In fact, such a deviation would appear to be further warranted by the fact that the Veterans Involvement Factor was specifically designed to distinguish among SDVOSBs, VOSBs, and other Large and Small Businesses employing designated percentages of SDVOSBs and VOSBs as subcontractors. Accordingly, distinguishing between “stand-alone” SDVOSBs and Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture SDVOSBs that are owned, in large part, by other than SDVOSBs, would appear to be entirely consistent with that concept. It is, therefore, respectfully requested that the TAC reconsider its preliminary decision to not seek a VAAR deviation to the Veterans Involvement Factor. |
| The preliminary decision remains unchanged at this time. Furthermore, the Government reminds Offerors that since the On-ramp will be restricted to SDVOSBs, VAAR 852.21.5-70, and therefore the Veterans Involvement Evaluation Approach, may not necessarily be included in the On-ramp solicitation. |
| 60 |
| In the evaluation of the Small Business Participation Plan Commitment Factor, it is recommended that the TAC give additional evaluation credit to SDVOSBs that also meet multiple additional Small Business socio-economic category designations (i.e., WOSB, SDB, and/or HubZone). |
| Consistent with the original T4NG solicitation, the Government anticipates that the Small Business Participation Plan Commitment Factor will include requirements for other socio-economic categories. |
| 61 |
| Please confirm whether, consistent with the TAC’s currently articulated position regarding Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture SDVOSBs, that in the evaluation of the Veterans Employment Factor, Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture SDVOSBs, which must, in accordance with SBA Regulations, be unpopulated, will be evaluated as having no employees and no Veteran employees. |
| The Government anticipates that for the Veterans Employment Factor joint ventures will be evaluated by combining the total number of employees and total number of Veterans employed for all members of the Joint Venture. Therefore, for a mentor-protégé Joint Venture, the totals will include employees for both the mentor and protege. |
| 62 |
| Do you have a time-frame and URL location for uploading the video stream from T4NG industry day? |
| The briefing slides and video are available at: voa.va.gov. |
| 63 |
| As a follow up, we are encouraged to pursue our intent to bid as a Prime applicant on the upcoming T4NG onramp. We are also in process to become a VIP certified SDVOSB. We would like to suggest VA to consider Past Performance for New Corporate Entities. As an example, in a recent VA solicitation # 36C77619R0006 on FBO, VA allowed New Corporate Entities to submit past performance data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. The language from this solicitation Page 59 is as follows: d. Section 3 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. It would be of great value to new SDVOSB corporations like ours to leverage at least one past performance of its officers that have 10+ years experience as lead contractors and Key Personnel at VA. |
| The Government anticipates that the Past Performance Factor will include the ability for new corporate entities to submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. |
| 64 |
| How will options on existing T4NG orders be handled for SDVOSBs that are not able to recertify as SDVOSBs? |
| In accordance with 13 CFR 121.404, VA will retain the ability to exercise options on existing T4NG orders even if a SDVOSB is unable to recertify as a small business; however, it should be noted that in the event an option is exercised in this scenario, then all requirements in effect at the time of task order award remain in effect throughout the life of the order. Therefore, in this scenario, the contractor will still be required to comply with the Limitations on Subcontracting and SDVSOB set-aside clauses for that order. |