POLARIS HUBZone Questions and Responses 2.pdf

POLARIS HUBZone GWAC

QUESTION AND RESPONSE DOCUMENT #2

Consistent with the previous Question & Response Document, in addressing questions, it is the Government’s position 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 it 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 a proposal. 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. Only those questions, or portions of questions, that were deemed 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

● Relevant Experience

● Systems, Certifications and Clearances

● Organizational Risk Assessment

● Teaming

● Representations and Certifications

● Responsibility

● Polaris Submission Portal (PSP)

This is the second Question & Response Document (Q&R #2) starting with Q&R #286*.

Interested parties should also review the previously shared Question and Response Document (Q&R #1) containing Q&R # 1-285. It is the responsibility of the Offerors to periodically check the solicitation on SAM.gov for more information.

*This is a combined Q&A encompassing both the HUBZone and SDVOSB Pools. Questions 287-291 and 305 are not applicable to the HUBZone Pool.

General Q&R # Question Response

Please include a maximum quantity or dollar value for the Master Contract, or indicate whether a FAR deviation has been obtained to enable the issuance of this Solicitation without specifying a maximum quantity or dollar value for the Master Contract.

The deviation has been identified per I.6

FAR 52.216-22 INDEFINITE QUANTITY

[(Mar 2022) (DEVIATION)]

For the SDVOSB RFP, is an offeror required to provide proof of CVE approval or will verification of SDVOSB status in SAM.gov be sufficient?

Proof of Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) approval is not requested or required.

SDVOSB Self-certification is required in SAM.gov (See 13 CFR 125.18(a) and 13 CFR 125.18(d)(1)(i)).

For the SDVOSB Pool, has GSA considered giving extra points to SDVOSBs that have an ACTIVE CVE verification for the Polaris SDVOSB track?

No, active SDVOSB CVE certified companies will not be offered extra points.

Does the SDVOSB prime bidder need to submit documentation of their VA Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) approval to verify their SDVOSB status?

No, SDVOSB VA Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) approval is not requested or required.

Must the Offeror have the SDVOSB certification status at the time of submission or at the time of award?

In order for a business concern to submit an offer and be eligible for the award of a specific SDVO contract, the concern must submit the appropriate representations and certifications at the time it submits its initial offer which includes price (or other formal response to a solicitation) to the contracting officer. (See 13 CFR 125.18(a) and 13 CFR 125.18(d)(1)(i)).

Must the Offeror have the HUBZone certification status at the time of submission or at the time of award?

At the time a certified HUBZone SB concern submits its initial offer on a specific contract, it must certify to the contracting officer that it is a HUBZone concern. (For HUBZone See 13 CFR 126.619 (c) and 13 CFR 126.601(b))

Relevant Experience Q&R # Question Response

L.5.2.3.1.1 (1) states that the Project Verification Form, Attachment J.P-6, must be used for verification for the Emerging Technology Relevant Experience.

No, the Project Verification Form (Either from the PSP or Attachment J.P-6) must be used for verification for the Emerging Technology Relevant Experience.

http://sam.gov/

However, if an FPDS-NG exists for the Emerging Technology Relevant Experience Project, can that be used in lieu of the Project Verification Form similar to the Relevant Experience verification requirement?

Form J.P-6 asks for information that could be sensitive for classified contractions, such as the Project Value. How should we address sensitive information in this form?

Classified information must not be submitted through the PSP or through any other means in response to the Polaris RFP.

In order to receive points, claimed relevant experience must be verified in accordance with L.5.2.2.1.1, L.5.2.2.1.2 and/or L.5.2.3.1.1

If there were changes in project values or end dates from prior Small Business Pool submission is the Offeror required to resubmit the most recent FPDS-NG reports?

As noted in L.5.2.2.1.1, when multiple FPDS-NG Reports are available, the most recent report must be submitted as well as any previous reports necessary for verification of claimed scoring elements. The most recent report available at time of submission should be included within the proposal.

Are offerors permitted to to claim Primary Relevant Experience Projects in different pools? E.g., if an offeror is proposing as a prime contractor in the WOSB pool, can they claim the same contracts as subcontractor in the HUBZone pool.

Yes, a small business concern may participate under multiple proposals (e.g., Offeror, proposed subcontractor, joint venture member), however, per L.5.2, Relevant Experience, no project, to include Primary Relevant Experience and Emerging Technology Relevant Experience, may be used in more than one proposal under this Solicitation.

In reference to: L.5.2.2 Primary Relevant Experience Submission -

b. A Primary Relevant Experience Project may not be claimed more than once for this pool.

If two HubZone Businesses (submitting as two different prime Polaris proposals) perform subcontract work for the same Large Business on the same project can only one of the HubZones claim their unique past performance in the HubZone pool?

In this situation, each subcontractor would be able to submit its subcontract as its own Relevant Experience Project. Each subcontract would be considered a separate and unique project.

Please advise if the government will accept the following as proof of relevant experience:

Verification must be provided in accordance with L.5.2.2.1.1 or L.5.2.2.1.2; however, as noted in Section L.3, while some

A. CLINS

L.5.2.2.1.1 Verification of Primary Relevant Experience Submission (Federal Government Contracts), e.

(OPTIONAL) Section B, Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs Contract Line Items - If experience matching the claimed NAICS is specifically and clearly called out in a single or in multiple CLINs, the Offeror may include that section of the contract and should highlight the relevant CLINs B. Job descriptions or LCAT descriptions

C. CDRLS

D. Narrative detailing work contractor performed but which is not contained in a broad PWS or SOW and signed by the contract CO or COR sub-sections of Section L may indicate an Offeror must provide a particular form of documentation for validation purposes, Offerors may provide additional verifiable documentation to validate any claimed scoring elements, e.g., Job descriptions or LCAT descriptions and CDRLS.

Systems, Certifications and Clearances Q&R # Question Response

For Section L.5.4.3 Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Certification, will a copy of our Certificate satisfy the verification of CMMI requirements?

Per L.5.4.3, the Offeror must provide verification of a current CMMIDevelopment (CMMI-DEV) or CMMI-Services (CMMI-SVC) Appraisal at Maturity Level 2 or higher. A copy of the CMMI certificate is acceptable verification.

Will an interim Facility Clearance Level be acceptable in the proposal response?

No, an interim FCL is not acceptable. FCL will be evaluated IAW the solicitation.

For Section L.5.4.4 ISO 9001:2015 Certification, will a copy of our certificate satisfy the verification of CMMI requirements?

Per L.5.4.4, the Offeror must provide verification of a current 9001:2015 Certification. A copy of the certificate is acceptable verification.

Organizational Risk Assessment Q&R # Question Response

Can the government clarify whether contract or order must exist and be ongoing for at least 12 months, or has been completed within five (5) years from the date proposals are due?

The RFP does not include restrictions on length of order or PoP for contracts supporting ORA.

Can a joint venture, or a prime contractor with a proposed subcontractor, submit Organizational Risk Assessment evidence to include Letters of commitment from previous yet to be

No, In accordance with L.5.5.1, scoring for this element is only available for demonstrating that the Offeror has previously performed in the proposed business arrangement.

awarded contracts? Contracts that would be awarded prior to the HUBZone Award?

Teaming Q&R # Question Response

Can a JV subcontractor use the experience from a member of the JV the same way as a JV prime can?

Per L.5.1.3.2, Proposed Subcontractors, if applicable, Relevant Experience Projects may be from the Offeror or any proposed subcontractor. Experience must be directly from the proposed subcontractor (not individual members or affiliates).

Can the Government confirm if the Small Business, Managing Partner, and Protégé, of a SBA approved Mentor Protégé Joint Venture, is also a SBA approved HUBZone and/or SDVOSB, that is sufficient to bid on the Polaris HUBZone and/or SDVOSB Pool solicitations?

Yes, The joint venture may also pursue any type of set-aside contract for which the protégé qualifies including HUBZone and SDVOSB per (13 CFR 125.9 (d)(1)).

For the SDVOSB RFP, if a bid is via an SDVOSB Joint Venture (JV), does the SDVOSB JV need to submit documentation of a VA Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) approval to verify SDVOSB status?

No, VA Center for Verification and Evaluation (CVE) approval is not requested or required to verify SDVOSB status.

Representations and Certifications Q&R # Question Response

The J.P-1 form has no place to sign or write in the company name. Do we have to submit these as-is along with the Sam.Gov online profile?

Refer to L.5.1.2 Submit Attachment J.P-1 Representations and Certifications from Section K, in addition to providing a copy of the annual representations and certifications completed electronically within SAM.gov.

Please submit Attachment J.P-1 from Section K and SAM reps and certs as separate files. The Attachment J.P-1 does not require a signature.

Polaris Submission Portal (PSP) Q&R # Question Response

Is there a way to remove these specific documents (WOSB letters) from the HUBZone bid without impacting the WOSB bid?

In Symphony, documents added through the My Company link are re-useable and the business factors are automatically pulled into your proposal(s). Projects and corresponding documents are only included when you add them to a submission.

Changes to Team Member documents happen in My Company > Team Members > Team Member's Business Factors or Team Member's Documents.

You can remove your Team Member's WOSB documents without the changes impacting your submitted proposal because the deadline occurred and your assets were saved for the submission.

More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

When entering the members of our JV into the “Team Members” tab on the PSP, there are two separate items in the dropdown menu that apply to both the protégé JV member (“Joint Venture Member” and “Protégé in an SBA Mentor Protégé Program”) and the mentor JV member (“Joint Venture Member” and “Mentor in an SBA Mentor Protégé Program”). Which option should take precedence when adding MPP JV members to our team?

The Mentor/Protégé options take precedence in Joint Ventures if they are applicable. More information is available in How Team Members work in Symphony for Polaris at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192986-how-te am-members-work-in-symphony-for-polaris.

In PSP, what is the character limit for the "Location in the file" entry field?

The location in file field is a text box that has no limit. How you use this field is at your discretion. The location can mean a keyword or can include a brief description of where the information can be found in the document: page number, section, paragraph, etc.. More information is available in the Symphony for Polaris FAQ at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192997-sympho ny-for-polaris-faq.

When entering project information on the Projects/Past Performance page under the tab "Complete Your Project Details" is displayed asking Subcontracting/Teaming Partners to check a "yes" or "no" and the number of subcontractors/teaming partners. In PSP, are you asking if the subcontractor/team partners on this project are the same subcontractors as part of the offeror's proposal bid? Or in PSP, are you requesting the number of subcontractor/teaming partners

This question is optional and does not apply to the Polaris Solicitation(s). Other solicitations may require it. If the Subcontractor/Teaming answer is "Yes", the quantity refers to the number of subcontractor/teaming partners that worked on the project regardless of being part of the offeror's team members in Symphony.

More information is available in How Projects work in Symphony for Polaris at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192989-how-pr ojects-work-in-symphony-for-polaris.

regardless if they are subcontractors in the offeror's team for the Polaris bid?

For Item 3. Bullet L.5.1 General - Does the joint venture offeror include the JV Reps & Certs from Sam.gov and section Section K and each JV member's Reps & Certs from Sam.gov and Section K in the same file?

No. In Symphony, business factors that belong to the prime entity belong in My Company > Business Factors > Other Documents > Reps and Certs. Do not include Team Members reps and certs in this section.

Business factors that belong to Team Members go in My Company > Team Members > Team Member's Business Factors > Other Documents > Reps and Certs.

More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

Where does the offeror's Polaris Team subcontractor's J.P-1 from section K and SAM reps and certs files get uploaded in PSP?

Business factors that belong to Team Members go in My Company > Team Members > Team Member's Business Factors > Other Documents > Reps and Certs.

More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

Are the reps and certs information and the J.P-1 from section K uploaded in the "business factor" folder and subfolder "other documents"? Is there any tagging required for the J.P-1 and SAM reps and certs submission?

Symphony does not require tags for Business Factor claims. Business factors that belong to the prime entity belong in My Company > Business Factors > Other Documents > Reps and Certs. Do not include Team Members reps and certs in this section.

Business factors that belong to Team Members go in My Company > Team Members > Team Member's Business Factors > Other Documents > Reps and Certs.

More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works

The signed SF33 and SF30 forms signed by the offeror must be uploaded in what folder in the PSP?

Does the offeror include each SF30 (for each amendment) in the same file as the signed SF33?

Use the SF 33 option in the Submission Documents section of your Pool Submission.

More information is available in the Symphony for Polaris FAQ at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192997-sympho ny-for-polaris-faq.

There are several instances that the PSP layout for Polaris is not clear where supporting documentation requirements for section L are to be uploaded within the PSP.

Use the help links in Symphony to review the articles for each section of the portal. A spreadsheet that lists all the possible documents and where they should be uploaded is attached to the bottom of the article How Symphony for Polaris Works.

Here is a direct link:

https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

Will the government be downloading all the documents for WOSB upon the submission deadline? We just want to make sure that once we start uploading the HUBZone document our WOSB submission documents don't get overwritten?

In Symphony, documents added through the My Company link are re-useable and the business factors are automatically pulled into your proposal(s). Projects and corresponding documents are only included when you add them to a submission. You can add or remove documents without the changes impacting your submitted proposal(s) because the deadline occurred and your assets were saved for the submission.

Use the View Details link for your Pool submission(s) to see your proposal and the included documents. More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

Is it acceptable for an offeror to utilize J.P-4 & J.P-6 documentation already submitted for the SB Pool within PSP for the HUBZone pool?

Yes. Documents added through the My Company link can be re-used. However, Submission Documents must be uploaded for the Pool submission that the proposal is for and are not reusable.

More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

1.Sections L.5.2.3 & L.5.2.2.6 & L.5.2.3.2 Breadth of Emerging Technology Relevant Experience:

Where can you upload the information for these areas?

2.Cannot see score 3.Contracts folder is empty- what goes in that area?

1. In My Company > Projects, documentation and the information requested is considered core project data and when you add the projects to your Pool submission(s) click the Begin button under Functional Factors to claim Primary Relevant Experience, Cybersecurity or Emerging Technology Relevant Experience.

More information is available in How a Proposal works in Symphony for Polaris at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192995-how-a-proposal-works-in-symphony-for-polaris.

2. Go to the Dashboard and the desired Pool to see the Live Score option, or use the Review Tab and open the panels. Bring in assets from My Company to specify what is part of your proposal. More information is available in the article How Symphony for Polaris Works at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/support /solutions/articles/35000193000-how-symph ony-for-polaris-works.

3. In My Company > Contracts, the contracts tab does not apply to the Polaris Symphony Portal at this time. It applies to awarded contract(s) in Symphony. Use the Projects tab if you need to enter Past Performance data. More information is available in How Projects work in Symphony for Polaris at https://offerorsupport.apexlogic.com/en/sup port/solutions/articles/35000192989-how-pr ojects-work-in-symphony-for-polaris.

Our Representations & Certifications in SAM are incorrect.

We have submitted the update in SAM but it is currently pending. As a result, the PSP is showing an error. What can we do to correct this?

Reference FAR 52.204-8(d) within section K.1 of the RFP. If your applicable Representations and Certifications in SAM.gov are not current, accurate and complete, complete the table within FAR 52.204-8(d) with any changes. This will not remove the errors from showing within PSP, but the Representations and Certifications included within the proposal will be reviewed in accordance with the RFP.