The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Solicitation #43310124R00010, Amendment 0001
NEH NDR
Questions & Answers
| Offeror Questions |
| NEH Responses |
| L.4 Proposal Due Date is August 30, 2024 at 12:00 PM EST |
| Please note this solicitation Due Date has been extended to September 4, 2024 12:00 PM EST. |
| In Section L.7, which presents the proposal preparation instructions, there is a reference to Volume II being tabbed, as well as reference to each Volume being marked appropriately. Is the proposal to be delivered in hard copy, or will electronic files (three separate PDFs, one for each volume) be acceptable? |
| Yes, the proposal is to be delivered via electronic files (three separate PDFs, one for each volume). |
Is this opportunity only open to certain entities, i.e., IT services companies? Could we bring in other partners, and if so, would they have to be U.S. based, i.e., UK?
No, opportunity is not limited to only IT services companies. You may bid and partner with a subcontractor. If you elect to partner with a subcontractor, you must list all subcontracting partners and detail what portion(s) of the contract each (Prime/Sub) will be working on in the Technical Proposal.
No, partners do not have to be U.S.-based. As long as partners are based in a non-U.S. sanctioned country.
| Can NEH please allow for Schedule B.1 to include a subscription fee in addition to the labor categories presented? Can we propose a Firm Fixed Price CLIN for each year that bundles the labor hours and a repository software subscription component? |
| Your proposed fee for each option year should be the total cost the contractor is charging the NEH to maintain the system. That figure should include whatever costs the contractor has (e.g. labor, subscriptions, etc.) in order to effectively support the system. |
| Regarding: Evaluation M.2 Factor 2 Past Performance: Past Performance is the information provided by a third party regarding the performance of the contractor on the projects that have been provided as experience. The Past Performance Questionnaire can be used to score this area. (Numbers assigned under performance area Description are directly related to the question number of the past performance reference check survey. - Is the government expecting PPQs? Or just vendor provided writeups for Factor 2? |
| Corrected Version of Past Performance Factor 2, Paragraph 3: |
Past Performance is the information provided by a third party regarding the performance of the contractor on the projects that have been provided as experience. The Past Performance Questionnaire can be used to score this area.
Past Performance and Relevant Experience Rating:
| The Contractor has provided past performance and relevant experience of projects of the same size, scope, and complexity that are current (last 5 years). |
| Good |
| The Contractor has provided past performance and relevant experience of projects of the same size, scope, and complexity but no current. |
| Acceptable |
| The Offeror has satisfactory past performance and relevant experience of current projects of the same size, scope, and complexity of similar work. |
| Marginal |
| The Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available. |
| Neutral |
| In section F.4, two transition out plans are required. Can the government please clarify the transition out plan requirements as Task 8(b) does not request a transition out plan. |
| Corrected Version of F.4 Required Submittals/Deliverables: |
| Description/Title |
| Reference |
| Due Date |
| API Plan |
| Section C.5, Task 1(a) |
| TBD after contract award |
| Contractor system security plan |
| Section C.5, Task 6 (c) |
| Submitted with contract award and provide annual for the entire Period of Performance for this contract. |
| Transition-Out Plan |
| Section C.5, Task 9 (a) |
| Submitted with Offerors proposal |
| Repository marketing plan |
| Section C.5, Task 8 (b) |
| Submitted with Offerors proposal |
| Transition-Out Plan |
| Section C.5, Task 9 (d) |
| No later than 90 days prior to the contract expiration |
Additional clarification regarding the Two-Transition-Out Plans:
1. The Transition Out plan due with the technical proposal (Section C.5, Task 9 (a)) should describe the process under which they would make the deposited articles and metadata available to the NEH at some future date should we need to transition the data to another server.
1. The Transition Out plan due no later than 90 days prior to the contract expiration (Section C.5, Task 9 (d)) is a plan, to be developed after consultation with the NEH, that describes in specific terms (including dates and actions) how and when the data will be transferred to NEH.
| Will NEH consider a partner for this project who possesses extensive experience in designing and developing repository systems that align with all the tasks and requirements specified in the Solicitation, even if this partner does not currently operate a running repository specifically oriented toward the humanities? We are interested in understanding whether NEH is open to engaging with a partner whose expertise and proven track record in repository development can meet the RFP’s needs, despite the absence of running an existing humanities-focused repository. |
| Per C.1 Background Paragraph 6, “NEH is seeking to partner with an existing, established scholarly repository that already has a significant base of humanities journal articles and users with a professional affiliation in the humanities. Having an established partner with experience running a humanities-oriented repository will ensure that the NEH-funded articles can be discovered and used by the widest-possible audience seeking humanities-related content.” |
NEH wants our articles to be on a system that already has a significant number of humanities articles (and users) in order to maximize discoverability within the humanities community.
| Has NEH already identified any partners who currently operate established scholarly repositories that feature a substantial collection of humanities journal articles and have a significant user base with professional affiliations in the humanities field? If so, is NEH now seeking additional assistance to integrate these existing repositories into a NEH-branded portal with additional skills in design, API integration, web security, and outreach activities? |
| No, NEH has not identified any partners. |
The solicitation document refers to collaborating with the NEH Development Team (DevTeam) to develop, test, and refine the API for uploading articles and metadata into the NDR. Is the NEH DevTeam composed of internal staff or an external vendor? If it is an external vendor, are they eligible to participate in this solicitation?
The NEH DevTeam is comprised of internal staff. The NEH DevTeam wrote and operates the NEH’s grants management system known as eGMS.
| We understand that hosting is required for the NDR, the API for uploading articles and metadata into the NDR, and the NEH-branded search portal. Does NEH have any preferences regarding the hosting service provider, as well as any specific hosting standards or specifications? |
| No, NEH has no preference. NEH is hoping that the vendors who respond to this solicitation will make a strong case for their proposed technical solution. |
| On page 9, section F.3(c), it says, “The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 6 months.” It appears in other sections that the base plus option years is over a total of 5 years, so is the 6 months the amount of time that initial project period can be extended, or is that meant to be 6 years total? |
| Corrected version of F.3 (c): |
The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 60 months.
| The NAICS Code identified is 518210, which is defined as “comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing computing infrastructure, data processing services, Web hosting services (except software publishing), and related services, including streaming support services (except streaming distribution services).” If an institution does these activities but it is not the primary activity of the institution, is it eligible for consideration if it meets the criteria outlined within the RFP to do the work? |
| Yes, an institution is eligible for consideration if it meets the criteria outlined within the RFP regardless of the NAICS Code identification 518210. NEH ask that the offeror provide the NAICS code that the Offeror is proposing under if different for the currently listed 51820. |
| Can you please clarify a little more about the cost breakdown template and how costs should be shown, for example, for non-labor costs associated with the statement of work? Should that be shown by unit cost/number of units/total costs? Also, can time be expressed in person months or percentage of time rather than hours? |
| The non-labor costs should be quoted in total costs. |
Offerors may quote (express) time in months or percentage of time on the cost breakdown.
| Please clarify #3 in the scope, "The Contractor shall create an NEH-branded portal page that the public could use for searching the NEH-funded papers within the repository", how would this work with our existing branding? The missing metadata on the current preprint submission to capture funding metadata would allow for searching for NEH-funded papers. Is this what is desired, or is the intent to start a new paper service only for NEH-funded papers? |
| The latter. That is, we are asking you to create a special page just for the NEH. This page would have NEH logos and branding on it and NEH would work with you on the design. And if you perform a search on that page, it just shows you NEH funded papers. (This page could also have an option to search the full archive or take you to the regular search page, but by default it is designed to just show NEH content.) |
Your current general search page should also bring up NEH papers (alongside all your other papers). That is, it should treat NEH papers like any others in your collection.
National Endowment for the Humanities