47QFSA23K0051 RTAS RFI Mkt Rsch Questionnaire 2023-05-04.docx
DOCX document 53 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Rapid Technology Augmentation Support (RTAS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 47QFSA23K0051
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 47QFSA23K0051 RTAS RFI Mkt Rsch Questionnaire 2023-05-08.docx | DOCX document | |
| 47QFSA23K0051RTAS PWS 2023-05-04 draft.docx | DOCX document | |
| 47QFSA23K0051 RTAS Eval Methodology and sample LCATS 2023-05-04 draft.docx | DOCX document | |
| 47QFSA23K0051 RTAS RFI Information 2023-05-04.docx | DOCX document | |
| 47QFSA23K0051_IDIQ_CLIN_descriptions 2023-05-04 draft.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
GENERAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATION (GSA)
Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) Assisted Acquisition Services Division (AASD) Region 4 (R4)
Request for Information (RFI) /Market Research Questionnaire For Acquisition ID #47QFSA23K0051 Rapid Technology Augmentation Support (RTAS) PLEASE NOTE: Information obtained in response to this RFI will be used to assist the Government in further developing its acquisition strategy and/or finalizing the requirements & elements of the solicitation.
This Market Research Questionnaire is available as an electronic Google Form at GSA RTAS RFI / Market Research Questionnaire. Respondents may complete the google form (preferred method) or email the completed Market Research Questionnaire (limited to 20 pages, including the questions) to rusty.singleton@gsa.gov with courtesy copies to randi.williams@gsa.gov and dorothy.monroe@gsa.gov. The closing time for this RFI is 11:00am ET on Monday, May 22, 2023.
If using the electronic form, please hit << SUBMIT >> when you are finished to ensure the responses are transmitted to the government.
Part I. Company Information Please provide the following business information for your company:
· Company Name:
· Point of Contact (POC) Name:
· POC Email Address:
· If given the opportunity, would your company be interested in submitting a proposal in response to an RFP issued for this requirement? select Yes, No, or Maybe below ☐ Yes ☐ No ☐ Maybe Part II. Feedback Questions Please review the draft attachments and provide a response to the questions below accordingly:
Performance Work Statement (PWS)
| 1. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the types of requirements anticipated within the contemplated draft PWS ambiguous or unclear (PWS 3.0)? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 2. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the requirement for the Location / Place of Performance (PWS 2.5) ambiguous, unclear, or unreasonable? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 3. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the selected NAICS 541715 the most appropriate NAICS for this requirement? If no, please recommend a more appropriate NAICS along with the rationale. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 4. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is PSC AC33 the most appropriate PCS for this requirement? If no, please recommend a more appropriate PSC from this list or include an alternate in the comments along with rationale for the PSC recommended. | ||||
| ☐ AC11 | ☐ AC12 | ☐ AC13 | ☐ AC32 | ☐ AJ11 | ☐ AJ12 | ☐ AJ13 |
| Comments: | ||||||
| 5. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the timeline to begin task order execution reasonable (PWS 2.11)? If not, what would be a reasonable timeline? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 6. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity reasonable and executable based upon the CLIN descriptions and examples in PWS 3.0 Requirements? Factors of complexity increase the number of units based upon task order requirements. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 7. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the Analysis and Assessment (A&A) requirements in PWS 3.1 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 8. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the A&A examples in PWS 3.1.1 – 3.1.10 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 9. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X001? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 10. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the A&A CLIN X001 examples in PWS 3.1.1 – 3.1.10? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 11. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for A&A CLIN X001 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.1? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 12. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the Development and Deployment (D&D) requirements for Development and Test in PWS 3.2.1 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 13. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the D&D Development and Test CLIN X002 examples in PWS 3.2.1 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 14. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X002? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 15. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the D&D CLIN X002 examples in PWS 3.2.1? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 16. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for D&D CLIN X002 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.2.1? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 17. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the D&D requirements for Prototyping and Production in PWS 3.2.2 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 18. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the D&D Prototyping and Production CLIN X003 examples in PWS 3.2.2 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 19. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X003? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 20. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the D&D CLIN X003 examples in PWS 3.2.2? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 21. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for D&D CLIN X003 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.2.2? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 22. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the D&D requirements for Deployment Support in PWS 3.2.3 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 23. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the D&D Deployment Support CLIN X004 examples in PWS 3.2.3 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 24. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X004? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 25. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the D&D CLIN X004 examples in PWS 3.2.3? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 26. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for D&D CLIN X004 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.2.3? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 27. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the Support and Sustainment (S&S) requirements for Passive Support and Sustainment of Fielded Mission Systems in PWS 3.3.1 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 28. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the S&S Passive Support and Sustainment of Fielded Mission Systems CLIN X005 examples in PWS 3.3.1 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 29. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X005? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 30. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the S&s CLIN X005 examples in PWS 3.3.1? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 31. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for S&S CLIN X005 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.3.1? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 32. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the S&S requirements for Active Operational Support and Sustainment in PWS 3.3.2 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 33. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the S&S Active Operational Support and Sustainment CLIN X006 examples in PWS 3.3.2 ambiguous or unclear? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 34. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the representative base unit for CLIN X006? Please describe your understanding. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 35. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be able to propose a representative unit price based upon the S&S CLIN X006 examples in PWS 3.3.2? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 36. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the concept of a representative unit price with factors of complexity for S&S CLIN X006 reasonable and executable based upon the description and examples in PWS 3.3.2? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 37. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Is the sample list of skills/capabilities/knowledge appear to be applicable to the types of work described in PWS 2.8? If not, please identify those that appear inapplicable and describe/define more applicable skills/ capabilities/knowledge that should be included. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 38. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the any issues / concerns with the Key Personnel requirements in PWS 2.9? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 39. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the how supplies CLIN X007 (when needed) can be proposed as described in PWS 3.4 and how supplies impact the contract ceiling in PWS 8.10? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 40. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you understand the how travel CLIN X008 (when needed) can be proposed as described in PWS 3.5 and how travel impacts the contract ceiling in PWS 8.10? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 41. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the requirements of PWS 8.9 Rights in Data reasonable and executable and consistent with FAR 52.227-14 (May 2014) and Alternate II (Dec 2007) and Alternate III (Dec 2007)? If there are other applicable clauses, please identify the clause(s) and how/why the clause(s) is (are) applicable. Such clauses may include the following: FAR 52.227-10, FAR 52.227-16, FAR 52.227-17, DFARS 252.227-7013, DFARS 252.227-7030, and DFARS 252.227-7037. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 42. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the requirements of and descriptions of contractual meetings in PWS 3.6 comprehensive and/or complete at both the IDIQ and/or Task Order levels? If there are other meetings that should be included, please identify and describe. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 43. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are there any inconsistencies between the deliverables described in PWS Section 4, deliverables described in other PWS sections (such as 3.6 and 8.8, 8.10, and 8.18), and those described in the Deliverables Table in PWS 4.9? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 44. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the any inconsistencies between the requirements of the PWS and the Services Summary in PWS 5.5? If updates are needed, please describe any misstatements or omissions. Please include any recommended changes in the areas of performance standards, the acceptable quality level (AQL), and the methods of surveillance along with the rationale. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 45. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the differences between the Deliverables Table in PWS 4.9 and the Services Summary in PWS 5.5 clear? If updates are needed to either table, please provide recommended changes. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 46. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the contract timelines for IDIQ and individual task order closeout reasonable? Are there any issues with the closeout and Release of Claims requirements in PWS 8.16? | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 47. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the FAR clauses incorporated by reference appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? Are there any listed that should be omitted? Are there any clauses not included that should be included? Please identify clauses to include or exclude (along with rationale) in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 48. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the DFARS clauses incorporated by reference appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? Are there any listed that should be omitted? Are there any clauses not included that should be included? Please identify clauses to include or exclude (along with rationale) in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 49. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the AFFARS clauses incorporated by reference appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? Are there any listed that should be omitted? Are there any clauses not included that should be included? Please identify clauses to include or exclude (along with rationale) in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 50. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the GSAM clauses incorporated by reference appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? Are there any listed that should be omitted? Are there any clauses not included that should be included? Please identify clauses to include or exclude (along with rationale) in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 51. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the Full Text clauses appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? Are there any clauses included that should be omitted? Are there any clauses not included that should be included? Please identify clauses to include or exclude (along with rationale) in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 52. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the fill-ins (timelines and amounts) included in clauses FAR 52.216-18, 52.216-19, and 52.216-22 appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? If the fill-in information should be revised, include the clause, fill-in requirement, suggested revision, and rationale in the comments. | ||||
| Comments: | ||||||
| 53. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the fill-ins (timelines and amounts) included in clauses FAR 52.217-7, 52.217-8, and 52.217-9 appropriate to this IDIQ and issued task orders? If the fill-in information should be revised, include the clause, fill-in requirement, suggested revision, and rationale in the comments? | ||||
| Comments: |
54. Provide any additional information regarding the draft PWS that you think may be relevant for consideration.
Evaluation Methodology (EM)
| 1. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the Evaluation Criteria understandable? Are there any criteria that should be used that aren’t, if so please describe / explain along with rationale? Are there any that are being used that shouldn’t, if so please describe / explain along with rationale? | |
| Comments: | |||
| 2. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Should the Government request and evaluate more than three examples of recent, relevant, and verifiable work? If so, how many should the government consider? Please include rationale in the response. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 3. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you think the Government should more heavily weight individual past performance examples that demonstrate recent, relevant, and verifiable work that includes more (than one) of the technical CLINS? If so, what is your rationale, and how would you suggest it be weighted? | |
| Comments: | |||
| 4. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Should the government use email or a Reading Room to release Phase II and Phase III documents to offerors? A reading room would require offerors to have one POC with a GSA Affiliated Customer Account (GACA) email account, and all offerors will have access to the information at the same time. Please include the rationale for your response. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 5. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Should the government use the examples for a single representative base unit for each technical CLIN (or SUBCLIN, as described in the PWS) for the evaluation of Factor 6A? If not, what methodology should the government use to evaluate the representative base cost for Factor 6A? Include specific information and your rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 6. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Should pricing for TO#1 (Factor 6B) be included in Phase II of Option 1 or Phase I of Option II? If so, how should the pricing be presented and evaluated? How important should this pricing be weighted and how should the feedback be included with the Advisory Notices? Please describe your methodology and rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 7. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Do you think pricing for 6A (and 6B if included before the final phase) should be a reason for the Government to advise an offeror to NOT proceed to the final phase of the RFP? Please describe why or why not along with rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 8. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company prefer the evaluation be structured based upon the description of Option I (three phases with advisory notices after phases I and II)? Please describe why or why not. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 9. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company prefer the evaluation be structured based upon the description of Option II (two phases with an advisory notice after phase I)? Please describe why or why not. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 10. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company prefer the evaluation be structured based upon the description of Option III (tradition submission and evaluation)? Please describe why or why not. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 11. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Would your company be more or less likely submit a proposal based upon the evaluation methodology included in the RFP? Please describe why or why not and rationale. | |
| Comments: |
12. Which of the Evaluation Methodology alternatives would your company prefer?
☐ Option 1 (three phases) ☐ Option 2 (two phases) ☐ Option 3 (single phase)
13. Provide any additional information regarding the Evaluation Methodology alternatives that you think may be relevant for consideration.
LCATs
| 1. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are the anticipated Labor Categories (LCATs) identified in this RFI consistent with the work necessary to perform the requirements of the PWS? Please describe why or why not along with your rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 2. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are any of the identified LCATs inappropriate for the requirements of the PWS? Please describe why or why not along with your rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 3. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are there LCATs that are more appropriate for the requirements of the PWS? Please describe why or why not along with your rationale. | |
| Comments: | |||
| 4. ☐ Yes | ☐ No | Are there additional LCATs that should be included for performance of the requirements in the PWS? Please describe why or why not along with your rationale. | |
| Comments: |
This questionnaire is available electronically at GSA RTAS RFI / Market Research Questionnaire.
If using the electronic form, please hit << SUBMIT >> when you are finished to ensure the responses are transmitted to the government.
| Request for Information | Rapid Technology Augmentation Support |
| Market Research Questionnaire | Acquisition ID# 47QFSA23K0051 |
image1.png
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .