OASIS Plus Questions and Answers - Group One.pdf

OASIS+ MAC

QUESTION AND RESPONSE DOCUMENT #1

Thank you for your interest in OASIS+.

In addressing questions, it is the Government's opinion that if the solicitation's position is self-evident, the response to a question may simply be that the solicitation already addresses the matter in the manner the Government intended for the subject of the question to be addressed. While the Government may include one or more specific solicitation passages in a response to a question, interested parties are reminded that section L.3 of the solicitation states, "Offerors are instructed to read the entire solicitation document, including all attachments in Section J, prior to submitting questions and/or preparing an offer. Omission of any information from the proposal submission requirements may result in rejection of the offer."

Questions were not extensively edited for grammar, punctuation or spelling. Not every question is shown. Due to the significant interest in OASIS+, many duplicate or similar questions were submitted. Only those questions, or portions of questions, that were frequently asked and/or those that were deemed to benefit the procurement process are shown.

Questions and responses are organized into topic areas shown below. Interested parties stand to benefit from reviewing all statements, questions, and responses.

• General

• Qualifying Project Experience

• Systems, Rates, and Clearances

• Past Performance

• Cost/Price

• Responsibility

• Section G

• Attachments

• Section K

• Section L.1 through L.4

• Section M.1 through M.4

• Symphony

This is the first Question and Response Document. Additional Question and Response Documents will be posted to SAM.gov as appropriate. It is the responsibility of the Offerers to periodically check the solicitation on SAM.gov for more information.

Q&R# Question Response General

Can GSA confirm the RFP is final and not a draft? The final RFPs for all six OASIS+ solicitations were published on June 15, 2023 and are available for download on SAM.gov. The cover page for the RFPs will be amended to remove the word "Draft".

2 Is the OASIS+ portal the same as the current OASIS portal in Symphony? It appears to be.

Yes, it is accessed through the same link.

3 The government states that, "...To the maximum extent practicable, all proposal documents should be in Adobe (pdf) format, with the exception of Attachment J.P-9."

Can the government confirm what, if any, individual or aggregate file size restrictions exist within Symphony for OASIS+ submissions?

The maximum file size is 20 MB, and compressed files are not allowed.

If a file is too large, it may be broken up into smaller files and properly identified.

4 Within the "Projects / Past Performance" proposal asset section of Symphony, there is a field for "What is the Total Value of Other Direct and Indirect Costs", is this a required field? There is no discussion of what the validation requirements are for this data or how Offeror's responses to this item would impact credits scoring. Please clarify.

This is an optional field. This is being clarified with a forthcoming update to the OSP.

5 Attachment A, Industry FAQ states that a Pre-Award Survey (SF1408) completed by Government Officials would be acceptable supporting documentation to demonstrate an acceptable accounting system. It is a concern to find a government official who is both willing to complete the form in a timely manner and one who has the knowledge in order to accurately access our accounting system.

Would the government consider a certified 3rd party to complete the form in lieu of a government official? If it must be a government official and since contractors are unable to request audits, please provide guidance on how to meet the requirement for it to be a government official.

The SF1408 is typically completed by another contracting officer/surveying activity in association with an earlier procurement.

GSA will not sponsor a Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System or an adequacy determination on behalf of any Offerors for evaluation purposes. In addition, third party audits will not be accepted.

6 Does Amendment 1 include the Small Business Set Aside Competition Type? Do the updated attachments, J.P-1 OASIS Plus Domain Qualifications Matrix and Scorecards (Amd 0001) and J.P-3 Project Verification Form (Amd 0001) apply to Small Business Set-Aside?

Yes, an amendment was issued for each RFP at Amendment 0001, which included revisions to Attachment J.P-1 and Attachment J.P-3.

7 If an offeror submits their proposal prior to the September 13 final deadline and there is an amendment after our submittal date, please confirm that our proposal only needs to reflect information provided up to our submittal date, not September 13. This is supported by the OASIS Plus Final RFP Cover Letter, which states on page 3 that as of July 15, offers can be submitted.

Offerors are allowed to make changes to their offer, even after submission, until the due date for proposals. All amendments issued under this RFP must be acknowledged by the offeror, even if the Offeror has already submitted their proposal.

8 Can the Government please identify what Offeror's should put in the "CODE" and "FACILITY" boxes in 15a? The "CODE" box does not allow for the number of characters in a UEID.

In box 15a of the SF33 the "CODE" is referring to the Offeror's Cage Code. The "FACILITY" code is not required.

9 In Section L.5.8 Responsibility, the guidance for unpopulated Joint Ventures is that Section 5.7 submissions must be submitted for each member of the Joint Venture. Please confirm that this should say all Section 5.8 submissions must be submitted for each member of the Joint Venture.

Correct, this has been corrected to reference Section L.5.8. For populated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for the joint venture itself. For unpopulated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for each member of the joint venture.

10 RFP states: If the cognizant CO's signature is unattainable, the Government will accept the signature of the COR or other Government Employee with cognizance over the submitted QP. The Project Verification Form must include both cognizant CO's and verifying Government employee's direct telephone numbers and email addresses.

Question: The J.P-3 form has spaces for only one government signatory. If two are required, where should we put the second one?

Thank you for pointing this out. This language will be updated in the RFP, and Attachment J.P-3 will be corrected and issued with Amendment 2.

11 If the cognizant contracting officer has retired from the government, may the government task manager or contracting officer's representative sign a completed Project Verification Form? What information should we provide under the Contracting Officer's contact information if they are no longer working for the government?

If the cognizant CO's signature is unattainable, the Government will accept the signature of the COR or other Government employee with cognizance over the submitted project. However, the project verification form must include both cognizant CO's and verifying government employee's direct telephone numbers and email addresses. Attachment J.P-3 will be updated in Amendment 2 with the appropriate format.

12 In the 8(a) and UR RFPs, Section L.5.1.3.1, in the bullet on Section L.5.8 - Responsibility, the RFP states, "For populated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for the joint venture itself. For unpopulated joint ventures, all Section L.5.7 submissions must be submitted for each member of the joint venture." Please confirm that the second sentence should state, "For unpopulated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for each member of the joint venture."

Thank you for your feedback, Unrestricted and 8(a) RFP Section L.5.1.3.1 Joint Venture ,#5 bulleted Section L.5.8 _ Responsibility, incorrectly references section L.5.7 instead of Section L.5.8.

This will be updated in a future amendment to read: "Section L.5.8 - Responsibility : For populated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for the joint venture itself. For unpopulated joint ventures, all Section L.5.8 submissions must be submitted for each member of the joint venture."

Qualifying Project Experience 13 L.5.2.3.4 states, "If the contract documentation does not unequivocally demonstrate surge capability, offerors may, in addition to the aforementioned contract documentation, leverage customer verification through the use of completed Project Verification Form (either from the OSP or Attachment J.P-3) signed by a CO with cognizance over the submitted project verifying surge capability."

Please confirm that if the Offeror performed as a subcontractor on a federal project, then in lieu of the CO's signature, the completed Project Verification Form may be signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the prime contractor with cognizance over the submitted project.

If the Offeror is submitting a QP for which they were the Subcontractor, then the Prime Contractor for that Federal contract would be the customer, and would therefore sign as the Corporate Officer/Official of the commercial entity with cognizance over the submitted project.

Reference Section L.5.1.7.2.

14 Qualifying Project Experience FTE Calculation: Juneteenth was added as the 11th Federal holiday in June of 2021 and the maximum number of hours for FTEs was immediately reduced from 1920 to 1912. Contracts awarded since then have been at 1912 hours per FTE. QUESTION: Will the Government allow vendors to use 1912 for FTE calculations since that's the maximum number of working hours in a year now that there are 11 Federal holidays (if not for all projects, then at least for those with work done in 2021-2023)?

With the addition of Juneteenth as a Federal Holiday in June 2021, for estimating purposes under the OASIS+ RFP, 1 FTE will be considered 1,912 annual hours.

15 The RFP states "Ongoing projects with a period of performance of less than one year will not be annualized." Can the Government confirm that projects with a period of performance of under one year should use the non-annualized TCV for the Annual Value scoring element?

Correct, the Government will evaluate the total contract value for that project since ongoing projects less than 12 months will not be annualized.

16 For the "Managing first-tier subcontractors/teaming partners" scoring element, please confirm that the offeror can provide only the pages of the subcontractor/consultant agreement with the company names, contract number, and signatures, and does not need to include all the subsequent pages with contract clauses, etc.

Yes, this would be acceptable as long as it provides the information required to meet the qualification.

17 Qualifying Project Experience FTE Calculation: Juneteenth was added as the 11th Federal holiday in June of 2021 and the maximum number of hours for FTEs was immediately reduced from 1920 to 1912. Contracts awarded since then have been at 1912 hours per FTE. QUESTION: Will the Government allow vendors to use 1912 for FTE calculations since that's the maximum number of working hours in a year now that there are 11 Federal holidays (if not for all projects, then at least for those with work done in 2021-2023)?

Thank you for your feedback. The OASIS+ Acquisition Team conducted extensive research from industry surveys and customer focus groups to prepare the solicitation requirements. With the addition of Juneteenth as a Federal Holiday in June 2021, for estimating purposes under the OASIS+ RFP, 1 FTE will be considered 1,912 annual hours.

Systems, Rates, and Clearances 18 Please confirm that third party auditor signatures certifying the adequacy of an Offeror's Cost Accounting System will be accepted.

Other recent, similar solicitations (e.g., NIH CIO-SP4, GSA Polaris) expanded the current list (DCAA, DCMA and CFA) so that offerors with significant investments in their accounting systems including third party verifications are also able to claim credit for this element.

OASIS+ intends to provide highly qualified, mission-ready vendors with systems and certifications that are applicable to task order requirements. A majority of Ordering Contracting Officers will not accept third party audits. Therefore, third party audits will not be considered for evaluation credit under the Systems, Rates, and Clearances criteria.

19 1. If a company does not have a DCAA approved accounting system, will they be eliminated from consideration?

2. If a company does not have a DCAA approved accounting system, will you dispatch DCAA to audit their accounting system?

1. No, an offeror will not be eliminated from consideration, but they will not receive evaluation credit under the Systems, Rates, and Clearances capability.

2. GSA's PSHC Program Office will not sponsor a "Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System" or an adequacy determination on behalf of any Offerors for evaluation purposes.

Please refer to section L.5.4.1 of the RFP.

20 The copy of our approved billing rate agreement from DCAA is marked as CUI. How do we submit items marked as CUI in the Symphony system?

Symphony (OSP) allows upload of documents marked as CUI.

21 If a vendor's accounting system is not DCAA, DCMA or CFA audited during the time of submission; however, ii is audited through an independent CPA review and determined to be adequate for accumulating costs applicable to each contract or order in accordance with FAR 53.209-1(f) and Standard Form 1408 (SF 1408), would the government accept a letter of verification and signature on SF1408 from a 3rd party/independent CPA?

Third-party approved accounting systems will not be considered for credit under the Systems, Rates, and Clearances criteria.

22 Would the government approve the 3rd party/independent CPA letter and completion of SF1408 without signature that can be valid at the time of submission?

Once the finalists are notified of the award, would it be satisfactory for the winners to then complete the Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System (SF 1408) and signed by a government official prior to starting work?

Third-party approved accounting systems will not be considered for credit under the Systems, Rates, and Clearances criteria. Additionally, GSA's PSHC Program Office will not sponsor a "Pre-Award Survey of Prospective Contractor Accounting System" or an adequacy determination on behalf of any Offerors for evaluation purposes.

Please refer to section L.5.4.1 of the RFP.

Past Performance 23 Can a new SDVOSB bid on the OASIS+ contract with no past performance?

Yes, as long as the Offeror meets the qualification threshold and other requirements for award. Please review RFP Section M.6.6.1 Evaluation Ratings for Past Performance Submissions; 3. A "Neutral" rating will be given for a project without an associated record of relevant past performance or for which information on past performance is not available.

24 For the Past Performance scoring (L.5.6) - if you have multiple CPARs on a qualifying project how are they evaluated/scored? For example, if you have a CPAR for the qualifying project's base period and option period 1 would each period's scores be combined and evaluated or would only the most recent CPAR period count?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists).For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of Qualifying Projects (QPs). If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current CPARS rating will be used.

25 If one of our selected projects had a duration of 5 years (Base Year Award + 4 Option Years) but the government only gave us a CPARS for the Award and 2 option years, can we use that latest CPARS to prove a positive rating or must we fill out a J.P-6 if the last or final year CPARS did not exist?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists); If the Government has interim or final ratings in CPARS for the QPs being utilized, the Offeror shall provide a copy of this rating(s) report with its proposal. For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current (interim) finalized CPARS rating will be used. Offerors are responsible for verifying whether finalized past performance ratings exist in the CPARS database prior to using the Past Performance Rating Form.

26 For the Past Performance scoring (L.5.6) - do you have to submit the most recent CPAR on a qualifying project or can you submit a CPAR for a previous period on the qualifying project? For example, if a CPAR was issued for the qualifying project's base period and Option Period 1 - can you submit the CPAR for only the Base Period?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists); If the Government has finalized (interim or final) ratings in CPARS for the QPs being utilized, the Offeror shall provide a copy of this rating(s) report with its proposal. For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current (interim) finalized CPARS rating will be used.

27 If you are using a collection of task orders as a qualifying project, how will this be assessed for Past Performance (L.5.6)? For example, if Project A within the collection of task orders has a CPAR and/or completed a Past Performance Rating Form - is that sufficient to get credit for L.5.6 or do all projects within the collection need to have a CPAR and/or a completed Past Performance Rating form?

Changes have been made to Section L & M with Amendment 0002 regarding Collections of Task Orders.

Please review RFP Section M.6.6.1 Evaluation Ratings for Past Performance Submissions. To calculate the Past Performance rating of a "Collection of Task Orders," the past performance ratings of each project within the collection are averaged into a single project. If using a CPARS Report from the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level or a consolidated past performance assessment using Attachment J.P-6 for a collection of task orders IAW Section L.5.6.2, the past performance rating will be calculated based on Examples 1 and 2 in Section L.6.6.1, with only the single report factored into the calculated score for the collection.

28 We intend to use three task orders (from one IDIQ task order contract) as our three relevant Qualifying Projects. The IDIQ contract provides only one CPAR that applies to ALL task orders under the IDIQ contract. Do we submit the same CPAR three times to claim credits for Past Performance?

Or does the Government want a completed J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form, for EACH task order?

Please review the RFP Amendment 0002; specifically Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists), which has been revised to state Offerors may use IDIQ/BPA/BOA level CPARS that covers the individual task order(s) in the report.

Offerors shall provide Past Performance documentation with each Qualifying Project submission.

29 Offeror was validating that our intended Qualification Projects (QP) associated CPARS were present in the CPARS Data Base (DB). In one case, our Contracting Director was unable to access it, and submitted a trouble ticket to the CPARS DB Help Desk. We received a response that "Help Desk is unable to unarchive at the request of a contractor".

Question: Will the Government confirm it will be able to unarchive a CPAR in the CPARS BO; or should offeror obtain a J.P-6?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6 Past Performance; Only in the event CPARS information is not available for a submitted project will an Offeror be allowed to submit the Past Performance Rating Form as a substitute for the Past Performance Assessment. If CPARS information is available for any selected past performance qualifying project, it must be used/submitted in support of the Past Performance evaluation.

The CPARS Help Desk can be contacted and asked to unarchive older CPARS. Send the contract number(s) (multiple can be requested in one email) to webptsmh@navy.mil. The process to receive the reports from the CPARS team will take anywhere from one hour to three days.

If further assistance is needed, contact the CPARS help desk for assistance at (207) 438-1690.

If CPARS Help Desk is still unable to unarchive the CPARS Report, recommend completing the J.P-6 Form for the contract/task orders with the archive issue (CPARS information is not available) and providing the copy of the CPARS Data Base Help Desk email that states "Help Desk is unable to unarchive at the request of a contractor" with the contract/task order information that was attempted to be unarchived.

30 Where applicable, can an offeror use Intelligence Community Contract Review Information (IC CRI) evaluations in place of CPARs? *As background, many of our intelligence community contracts have IC CRls in place of CPARS and are considered a CPAR equivalent per the contracts. These evaluations are not captured in the CPARs database, however they are not classified and can be used as part of a proposal submission such as this. The IC CRls utilize the same grading scale as CPARs making them applicable for the evaluation factor. Please confirm this is acceptable where applicable for Project Experience references.

IC CRI evaluations will not be considered in place of CPARs. Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist);lf the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.

31 Based on the fact that our customers consider a "Satisfactory" rating to be a positive rating in CPARS, would the Government consider allowing CPARS reports with a "satisfactory" or higher rating to earn Past Performance points?

No changes to the past performance evaluation rating/criteria are anticipated at this time. The goal of the evaluation criteria is to encourage and provide additional weight to above "satisfactory" levels of past performance. Projects that are rated "Satisfactory" IAW Section M.6.6 are still eligible to receive credits as qualifying projects and all credits within that section (L.5.2).

32 If an offeror submits a Collection of Task Orders as one QP, would the government accept a CPAR issued against the IDIQ contract number, and not specifically one of the task order numbers included in the collection?

Please review RFP Amendment 0002; specifically Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists) which clarifies instances where Master Contract (i.e. IDIQ/BPA/BOA) level CPARS may be used for task orders.

See relevant excerpt below:

If a task order under an IDIQ/BPA/BOA has an interim or final CPARS report at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level that covers the individual task order(s) in the report, then CPARS at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level may be used as the record of Past Performance. CPARS reports that do not cover the individual task order(s) and/or document any performance rating beyond subcontract reporting, will not be considered. In a scenario such as this or other scenarios where CPARS do not exist, see Section L.5.6.2 below and follow the instructions for obtaining and submitting Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

33 It is very common for an agency to issue an annual CPAR against an IDIQ contract number, covering the performance of all applicable task orders for that year. This is especially common for base operating support (BOS) contracts where performance may be accomplished by hundreds of small task orders per year and issuing a CPAR for each task order is not feasible. L.5.2.1 does not allow IDIQ contracts to be used as QP. Only a task order under the IDIQ may be used as a QP. In this situation where an offeror uses a task order under an IDIQ as a QP, but the corresponding CPAR for that task order is issued against the IDIQ contract number (and not the task order number specifically), will the government accept this CPAR as documentation for claiming points under L.5.6?

Amendment 0002 revises Section L.5.6.1 and provides clarity in this type of situation. If the CPARS report at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level covers the individual task order(s) in the report, then CPARS at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level may be used as the record of Past Performance.

See this section for more details.

34 Under L.5.6, why does the scoring matrix only allow a total of 3 points? If submitting 5 QPs with positive past performance, an applicant should be allowed to receive 5 points.

Please review RFP Section M.6.6.2 Credits Assigned to Past Performance Assessments; this section will explain how credits are assigned to QPs.

mailto:webptsmh@navy.mil

35 If an Offeror is using a collection of task orders as one of its QPs, are we required to submit CPARS or Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form for each task order?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6 Past Performance; Acceptable forms of past performance assessments are detailed below in Sections L.5.6.1 and L.5.6.2. Only in the event CPARS information is not available for a submitted project will an Offeror be allowed to submit the Past Performance Rating Form, as a substitute for the Past Performance Assessment. If CPARS information is available for any selected past performance qualifying project, it must be used/submitted in support of the Past Performance evaluation.

Please review RFP Amendment 0002 changes at Sections L.5.6.1, L.5.6.2, and M.6.6 which provide clarity on Task Order Contracts and Collections of Task Orders.

36 The solicitation states that "if CPARS information is available for any selected past performance qualifying project, it must be used/submitted in support of the Past Performance evaluation."

Should Offerors submit CPARS evaluations that they have previously downloaded but are no longer available in the system?

Yes, there are no restrictions to offerors providing CPARS evaluations that were previously downloaded but are no longer available in the system. The CPARS must be final, and not labled incomplete.

37 Once an Offeror calculates the Past Performance rating of a "Collection of Task Orders" by averaging the performance ratings of each project within the collection, where will an Offeror document the final Past Performance rating?

The Past Performance Rating must be added by the Offeror in the core project details within the OSP/Symphony. My Company -> Projects/Past Performance -> Select the Project -> Edit Project -> Complete your Project Details -> On this screen, there is a location to input Past Performance Rating.

38 Can GSA clarify if the SB Utilization scoring should be rounded to the nearest whole number?

Please review RFP Section M.6.6.3 Credits Assigned to SB Utilization (SB Subcontracting) for Prime Contract Qualifying Projects; there is no requirement to round the SB Utilization scoring.

39 Can the government confirm that amended CPARS are to be submitted as fully satisfying the government's requirements without any pre-amended versions required?

There is no distinction between an amended CPARS, only that the CPARS must be in a finalized state (L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist) If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form. No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.)

40 We have a QP that is a collection of task orders, with a quantity of 64 task orders to date. There is one Contracting Officer that has been involved in all of these tasks. It is not reasonable for this individual to have to complete 64 past performance forms for each task order.

Would it be possible to have the CO fill out one "Overall Past Performance Rating" for the tasks rather than have to fill out individual ratings for each of the 64 tasks?

Please review RFP Amendment 0002; specifically Section L.5.6.1 and L.5.6.2 which clarifies instances where Master Contract (i.e.

IDIQ/BPA/BOA) level CPARS or Attachment J.P-6 may be used for task orders.

See relevant excerpt below:

If a task order under an IDIQ/BPA/BOA has an interim or final CPARS report at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level that covers the individual task order(s) in the report, then CPARS at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level may be used as the record of Past Performance. CPARS reports that do not cover the individual task order(s) and/or document any performance rating beyond subcontract reporting, will not be considered. In a scenario such as this or other scenarios where CPARS do not exist, see Section L.5.6.2 below and follow the instructions for obtaining and submitting Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

For Collections of Task Orders without records of past performance in CPARS (either at the IDIQ/BPA/BOA level or for each project), the Offeror may use Attachment J.P-6 to obtain a consolidated past performance assessment of all submitted task orders in the collection.

If using this method, each task order within the submitted collection must be listed in Attachment J.P-6. Otherwise, the Offeror must complete and submit Attachment J.P-6 for each submitted task order within the collection, except for those with completed CPARS assessments. Task orders within a Collection of Task Orders without a record of past performance will not factor into the evaluation rating for past performance submissions at Section L.6.6.1.

41 Will the government access Past Performance Questionnaire forms for non-QP past performance?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6 Past Performance; Past performance will be evaluated for Relevant QPs submitted under Section L.5.2.2;

non-Relevant QPs will not be considered for past performance evaluation under this section.

Past performance assessments are not required or requested for any projects submitted under Section L.5.3 Federal Prime Contractor Experience.

42 Are the Past Performances exclusive for each domain? Please review RFP Section L.5.6 Past Performance; Past performance will be evaluated for Relevant QPs submitted under Section L.5.2.2.

Past Performance Rating Forms are not exclusive for each Domain.

43 For a federal subcontract, can a COR sign the Past Performance Rating Form?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); For a non-Federal project or Federal Subcontract, the Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the customer with cognizance over the submitted project.

44 The RFP states that "If CPARS information is available for any selected past performance qualifying project, it must be used/submitted in support of the Past Performance evaluation." Will the Government confirm if the most recent CPAR ratings are to be utilized?

Confirmed, as long as the CPARS Report is finalized (completed). This has been clarified with Amendment 0002. See Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists); For the purposes of this solicitation, the finalized final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current (interim) finalized CPARS rating will be used.

45 Please confirm that this statement in the RFP "If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-Federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form." only pertains to projects that are completed but do not have a final CPARS evaluation and does not pertain to ongoing projects where the Government has submitted an Interim CPARS?

Correct. RFP Section L.5.6.1 states: For the purposes of this solicitation, the finalized final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current (interim) finalized CPARS rating will be used.

The CPARS submitted must be finalized (completed) and not just identified as an interim or a final CPARS. This means that the CPARS must have the final signature from the cognizant Government official.

46 Section L.5.6.2 says "If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form. The form must be completed and signed by either a CO, COR, COTR or other Government employee with cognizance over the submitted project." Page 157, says, "work performed as a "Subcontractor" means the Contractor does not have privily-of-contract with the Government, but has privily-of-contract with the Prime Contractor or another subcontractor." Given these two statements, can you please clarify what form should Offerors that have been subcontractors use to submit their past performance rating and who should sign it?

Should it be the Past Performance Rating Form completed and signed by the Prime's representative (as it cannot be the CO, COTR or a government employee)?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist) in entirety; For a non-Federal project or Federal Subcontract, the Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the customer with cognizance over the submitted project.

47 Can offerors submit the same qualifying projects for the OASIS+ WOSB and SB solicitations?

Yes, however, see project restrictions at Seciton L.4 which states: QPs and/or FEPs submitted under Sections L.5.2 and L.5.3, respectively, may not be used in more than one proposal within a single Domain and solicitation. However, Offerors may submit the same QP and/or FEP across OASIS+ solicitations (e.g., HUBZone and small business) and OASIS+ Domains (e.g., Technical and Engineering Domain and Intelligence Domain) without penalty. QPs and FEPs used in more than one proposal in a given Domain and OASIS+ solicitation will be removed from all proposals and will not be evaluated as part of any Offeror's proposal. It is the Offeror's sole responsibility to ensure that the projects submitted as part of its proposal are not submitted in any other proposals for the same Domain and solicitation. Exception: Prime contracts and subcontracts are considered unique projects, and both the prime and subcontractor may claim credit for their portion of performance under the submitted project. However, a Prime Contractor and subcontractor may not claim credit for their performance under the same project as two separate QPs and/or FEPs within the same proposal when submitting an offer as a CTA IAW Section L.5.1.3. In situations where a company submits a project they are not entitled to claim (e.g., Company A submits Company B's project), only the unauthorized company would be penalized by having the project removed from their proposal.

48 In order to claim the Past Performance rating points, do all five past performances need to be from the QPs?

Please review RFP Section M.6.6.2 Credits Assigned to Past Performance Assessments; The Offeror receives credit as follows:

Three Relevant QPs with a "Positive" past performance rating receive one credit. Four Relevant QPs with a "Positive" past performance rating receive two credits. Five Relevant QPs with a "Positive" past performance rating receive three credits. A total of three credits are designated to this Past Performance evaluation factor.

Offerors will only receive credit for qualifying projects with a "Positive" past performance rating.

49 This section states that past performance assessments are not required or requested for any projects submitted under Section L.5.3 Federal Prime Contractor Experience. However, this section also makes reference to CPARS, which would only exist for a Federal Prime contract. Please clarify.

Please review RFP Section L.5.6 Past Performance in entirety; Past performance will be evaluated for Relevant QPs submitted under Section L.5.2.2; non-Relevant QPs will not be considered for past performance evaluation under this section.

Past performance assessments are not required or requested for any projects submitted under Section L.5.3 Federal Prime Contractor Experience.

The RFP Section L.5.6 is stating the requirements for the relevant QPs submitted under Section L.5.2.2.

50 Many US Government organizations, including most US Intelligence Community agencies, do not use the CPAR System for assessing contractor past performance. However, they use Contractor Performance Evaluations (CPE), Past Performance Evaluations (PPE), and Performance Assessment Reports (PAR) that provide the same performance ratings and information. For QP's with USG agencies that do not use the CPAR System, please confirm that providing a copy of the government-issued CPE, PPE, or PAR form used by that Agency is an acceptable alternative for claiming Past Performance credit.

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.

51 Certain Federal agencies have their own past performance rating databases, such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE). Will the government accept these agency specific rating reports as well?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.

52 For OASIS+ offerors performing classified work with Intelligence Community agencies, it is not uncommon for contractor past performance to be assessed through a Contractor Performance Evaluation (CPE), which is not transmitted through the "Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)". This is due to the nature of this highly sensitive work. Would GSA allow offerors to use a government-issued CPE form as an alternative to a CPAR report as evidence of a past performance rating for relevant QPs (meeting the solicitation criteria under Section L.5.6)?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.

53 Will the government please confirm that unsigned interim CPARS will not be used for scoring in accordance with Section M due to the fact that Offeror's may be contesting these scores and unable to come to a resolution before the proposal due date?

Correct, unsigned, incomplete CPARS will not be evaluated for scoring.

54 Can the government confirm that for a federal subcontract, that the subcontractor should have the prime's corporate official fill out and sign the past performance rating form?

Confirmed. Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); For a non-Federal project or Federal Subcontract, the Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the customer with cognizance over the submitted project.

55 Will the government please confirm that on page 173 the phrase 'final CPARS' refers to those given upon contract completion?

Confirmed. The term "Final" in this context is a CPARS Report at the end of a Period of Performance for a requirement.

See definition of Final Evaluation in the CPARS Guide: A final evaluation, in accordance with FAR 42.15, should be completed upon contract/order completion or delivery of the final major end item on the contract/order. For contracts/orders containing option periods where not all options will be exercised, a final report should be prepared following completion of performance under the last option period which was exercised.

56 For a relevant collection of task orders, will GSA please confirm that task orders with a "Satisfactory" rating will receive 3 points and task orders with a "Neutral" rating will receive O points in the average calculation of the task order collection past performance rating? For example, a collection of 5 task orders that includes 1 Exceptional, 2 Very Good, 1 Satisfactory, and 1 Neutral assessment would average to a 3.2 past performance rating. (5+4+4+3+0 = 16 / 5 = 3.2), and therefore would be considered to have a Positive Past Performance Rating in claiming credits for L.5.6.

Please review the RFP Section M.6.6.1 Evaluation Ratings for Past Performance Submissions, specifically the example for Collection of Task Orders as neutral is not adjectival rating option (Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory), and in the example an order without an assessment would not be included in the calculation.

If you are referring to a specific area within a CPARS or Past performance Rating Form that was not evaluated (i.e. SB Subcontracting) and given an "N/A", those also do not factor into the calculation. This has been clarified with Amendment 0002 in Section M.6.6.

57 Past Performance: Page 172 of 192 states, "Acceptable CPARS Period of Performance is driven by the period of performance of the QP that it corresponds to, and not when the CPARS was completed.

Please confirm CPARS for the entire contract period of performance must be uploaded vs just the most recently completed CPAR (which is typically the norm).

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists); For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current CPARS rating will be used.

58 If a project is being submitted as a QP as an OTA project that was awarded from a Consortium Management Group, is it possible to have the AOR sign the J.P-3 and also complete/sign the J.P-6 as the OTA project does not receive CPARS?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); The Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by either a CO,COR, COTR, or other Government employee with cognizance over the submitted project. For a non-federal project or Federal Subcontract, the Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the customer with cognizance over the submitted project.

59 Will CPARS with a "MODIFIED EVALUATION" header have any impact on the viability of Offeror's CPARS submission? If so, can the Government advise the appropriate action for Offeror's to take in order to submit appropriate Past Performance validated documentation?

There is no distinction between an amended/modified CPARS, only that the CPARS must be in a finalized state.

60 If the Offeror was a subcontractor in the relevant QP, do we have the prime contractor complete a JP-6 Past Performance Rating Form even if the prime has CPARS (which they will not share)?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); for a non-federal project or Federal Subcontract, the Past Performance Rating Form must be completed and signed by a Corporate Officer/Official of the customer with cognizance over the submitted project.

61 If a slightly older CPARS is submitted and then a new is CPARS is released prior to the proposal deadline, it has the potential to negatively impact scoring of the submission. Please establish that proposal submission is the cutoff date where we can assume GSA will use submitted CPARS even if a newer CPARS is subsequently released.

The Government Team acknowledges that a CPARS report could be filed after the proposal receipt and intends on using the proposal submission date as the cut off in determining whether the J.P-6 Form or finalized CPARS was available at proposal submission. If the J.P-6 was used to circumvent a CPARS, then the Government reserves the right to consider the CPARS information. COs can use any and all past performance that fits within the solicitation terms to evaluate past performance. (Reference FAR 15.305)

62 We have a QP with more than six months of completed performance, but the current completed CPARS in the database only covers four months of performance. Please confirm that this is an acceptable CPARS to use. (We believe this is the point of the last sentence on page 171 but would like confirmation.)

Confirmed, this is acceptable.

63 Will the Government please confirm that any Offeror's QP where the small business subcontracting criteria is rated as "not applicable" (in either the CPAR or J.P-6) does not factor into the overall average rating for L.5.6, since the J.P-6 Rater will not rate the SB Goal performance because it is not applicable.

Please review RFP Section M.6.6.2 Credits Assigned to Past Performance Assessments; Per the visual examples, elements that are rated are averaged based on the rated elements, elements that are N/A or not applicable are not factored into the average.

64 Please advise that offerors may seek Past Performance Questionnaire reviews when only an interim CPARS exists for a completed project - due to the customer not completing a final CPARS? For example, if an offeror has an interim CPARS with a "Satisfactory" rating, will the Government accept a customer signed PPQ form in lieu of providing the interim CPARS, if the offeror can obtain a higher rating on a PPQ form than "Satisfactory", in the event that only an interim CPARS exists?

Please review RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists) ... "For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current CPARS rating will be used." ...

With the example provided if a finalized Interim CPARS exists, then the finalized Interim CPARS would be submitted since the Final CPARS is incomplete. Only in the event the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey.

65 Will the Government please confirm that the term "not finalized" is referencing the state of the CPAR and is equivalent to the formal "INCOMPLETE" CPAR state, since a "FINAL" CPAR refers to the last CPAR after contract close out and can be in a "COMPLETED" or "INCOMPLETE" state?

Not finalized/Incomplete is referencing the status of the CPARS as in the CPARS System. A Final CPARS is the last CPARS at contract closeout-end of period of performance, while an Interim CPARS is any CPARS that is not the Final CPARS at contract closeout-end of period of performance; both an Interim CPARS and Final CPARS can have a complete/finalized or incomplete, but for the purpose of the RFP the most current, finalized/completed (interim or final) CPARS are requested in accordance with RFP Section L.5.6.1 otherwise RFP Section L.5.6.2 applies

66 The RFP states that "If CPARS information is available for any selected past performance qualifying project, it must be used/submitted in support of the Past Performance evaluation." Will the Government confirm if the most recent CPAR ratings are to be utilized?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.1 Past Performance (when CPARS information exists); For the purposes of this solicitation, the final CPARS rating will be used for evaluation of QPs. If a final CPARS rating is not available, the most current finalized CPARS rating will be used. In the instance of the CPARS not being finalized in system (Incomplete), the next current finalized interim CPARS would be submitted in accordance with RFP L.5.6.1.

67 For the past performance surveys - can we use past performance surveys collected from Polaris?

Please review the RFP Section L.5.6.2 Past Performance (when CPARS information does not exist); If the Government has not finalized (either interim or final) past performance ratings in the CPARS database; or, if the project(s) is non-federal, the Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Survey using the template in Attachment J.P-6, Past Performance Rating Form.

No other format or additional proposal documentation will be considered.

68 Does a company qualify for Past Performance credit as a subcontract with a Relevant Qualified Project?

Example: Company A has a prime contract with the Government.

Company A awards Company B a subcontract and PWS stating what work is to be accomplished by Company B in supporting Company's A work to the Government. The work Company B performs is consistent with the Technical and Engineering Domain and the work meets qualifications as a Relevant Qualified Project.

Company A provides Company B with a completed J.P-6 with an average past performance evaluation greater than 3 (Positive Assessment).