Consolidated Questions 23R00015 Amendment 002.docx

Consolidated Question – Financial Management Support Requirement 23R0015 1 SOW (and Solicitation) V. "Transition Services” The contractor shall detail and execute a transition process that ensures and involves the orderly transfer of management from an existing contractor to a newly awarded contractor and provide guidance for establishing expectations related to transition activities. The contractor shall develop and submit a Phase-Out Plan at least (45) days prior to the expiration of the Task Order’s period of performance. The plan shall include a detailed approach for ensuring a seamless and smooth transition to the successful contractor and describes the contractor’s approach to ensure services delivered and required under this Task Order are continued uninterrupted. The contractor shall provide the COR a project plan that includes a milestone schedule for accomplishing transition activities under this Task Order at least 45 days prior to expiration."

Neither the SOW nor the Solicitation mention Transition-In activities for the awarded vendor. Does the government anticipate Transition-In activities for the incoming vendor as a separate task area?

The incumbent contractor has a similar transition services clause in their current contract. As the new contract is awarded and the successful offeror begins work as outlined in the SOW, the exiting contractor will assist with knowledge transfer for a limited period. This transition in does not represent a separate task for the incoming vendor, but rather part of the activities and responsibilities detailed in the SOW.

2 Solicitation (2).d. E-25 For Past Performance, this section states: "Offerors may utilize the attached Past Performance Questionnaire sheet to request information be submitted on relevant past performance. Offerors should submit a list of contacts to whom the Questionnaires were submitted, should the Offeror choose to solicit Past Performance Questionnaires." However, section Part IV - Past Performance on page E-27 states "The Offeror shall submit a list of no more than four (4) contracts and points of contact for requested Past Performance Questionnaires, as well as basic identifying information for the requested Questionnaire submission. Offerors should direct the points of contact to submit the Past Performance Questionnaire to the Contracting Officer.

As written, it is unclear if Past Performance Questionnaires are mandatory for submission. Can the Government please clarify? The Past Performance Questionnaire attachment also appears to follow the structure of the CPARS reporting system. Can CPARS for the subject past performance be submitted in lieu of questionnaires since they convey the same information?

Offerors are not required to submit past performance information. Lack of applicable past performance must be rated as neutral. The PPQ structure is intentionally designed to replicate the CPARS reporting structure, however it is not required to submit CPARS past performance, as any past performance can be incorporated into the PPQ. CPARS past performance may be submitted, and the Contracting Officer is able to view and pull CPARS reports from the repository as well.

Per the FAR and related controlling statues and regulations, the Government is permitted to utilize relevant past performance information from any reputable source. The submitted PPQs are merely one aspect of gathering relevant past performance information. Lack of relevant past performance information must always be rated as neutral, neither positive nor negative. Offerors must be provided with the opportunity to respond to negative past performance information, and in the instance that such information is obtained, they will be provided the opportunity to respond, per FAR 15.305(a)(2).

Offerors should note that past performance information is distinct from the Corporate Experience evaluation factor.

3 Solicitation Part IV E-27 The section states: "Offerors do not need to separately submit Past Performance information, however Offerors are permitted to provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the Offeror’s corrective actions taken."

Is this the ONLY information the Government is requesting for Past Performance beyond the information in the Past Performance Questionnaire? Can the offeror provide additional information to clarify scope and highlight accomplishments?

The requirements are only to submit relevant and applicable past performance as available, preferentially through the PPQs to ensure uniformity and consistency. Further clarification should be left to the reviewer/reviewing activity completing the PPQ, not the offeror. The opportunity to provide information on negative past performance is a requirement of FAR Part 15.305(a)(2) and is distinct from providing the PPQs. Lack of relevant past performance information must be rated Neutral.

4 SLA Technical Requirements SLA-01-01-08 2 "The contractor shall conduct an analysis of the year end accounts payable accrual, and other accruals, and provide suggestions for potential improvements." Time frame is 10 business days.

Are the suggestions for potential improvements for next quarter or for next fiscal year or are they for the immediate requirement? If for the immediate requirement, “10 business days” may jeopardize reporting deadline The improvements relate to the next fiscal year. The accruals are completed in a short time frame at year end based on analysis and improvements identified from the prior year's process.

5 Solicitation (2).d. E-25 Note that only the Past Performance of the Prime Contractor will be considered.

In addition to Prime Contractor Past Performances can the Government consider one Past Performance from the subcontractor?

Past Performance submissions should only be related to the Prime Contractor, in order for the Government to assess what, if any, relevant Past Performance the Prime Contractor has. The performance of the subcontractors is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. The Government may consider information on Past Performance derived from other sources aside from submitted PPQs, and in the event that negative Past Performance is discovered from other sources, offerors will be provided the opportunity to respond to that information, per FAR 15.305(a)(2).

6 Solicitation "E.2 52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (OCT 2018) (2) The total value of all current, active orders including all priced options under indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity, 8(a), or requirements contracts (including task and delivery and multiple-award Schedules)."

Will the government issue T&M task orders for subsets of the scope of work, or is it anticipated that the offeror will need to staff up for the entire scope at or near contract award?

The agency does not intend to issue separate task orders for subsets of work under the contract. The successful offeror should be prepared to begin work on all aspects of the SOW upon award.

Please note that 52.209-7 relates to representations and certifications for proposing and does not describe the planned structure of the award contract.

7 Is the Government anticipating a similar or increased or decreased level of effort for this contract in comparison to the incumbent contract(s)?

The agency expects the scope and level of effort under this award to be similar to that of the incumbent contract, 49100418F1045.

8 Can the Government please share what tasks and major sub-task areas within this PWS are net new scope of work or not previously performed by contracted services?

The following tasks are new and not currently performed by the contracted services:

1. Provide acquisition support for next generation core financial system products and services.

2. Provide Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) of a new COTS Oracle Federal Financial system. Activities include the review of design, build, configurations of the system; review of test scripts for completeness and test results for effectiveness of system functionality; review of cutover and implementation plan strategies.

9 SOW Task C 5 Develop financial systems business case and alternative analysis, acquisition planning documents and artifacts for the next generation financial system; develop RFI and/or RFQ and support the development of evaluation criteria for vendor selection. Develop all Treasury Quality Service Management Office (QSMO) process documents and reporting requirements.

Can the Government consider adjusting this language to remove any direct language for supporting acquisition planning, developing RFI/RFQ or evaluation criteria? It would benefit NSF to minimize any future Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) concerns and enable the contractor to provide future support. Language could be adjusted to reflect updates such as providing advisory support to support NSF in understanding capabilities and options.

The Government respectfully declines to update the language. The expectation is that the awardee would not bid as a system integrator and hosting provider for NSF’s new financial system as a prime or sub; therefore a conflict of interest would not exist.

10 Solicitation Volume III Price Proposal E-27 The price volume shall be submitted as a Microsoft Excel document.

Can the Government please confirm offerors in addition to an Excel document are able to submit a Microsoft Word Volume III Price Proposal?

Offerors may submit other documents in addition to the Excel price documents in Volume III, however information provided in the Volume III submission will not be considered during the technical evaluation of Volume II.

11 Attachment 2- SLAs Mandatory or Situational 1-8 "Mandatory or Situational" designation in table Can the Government provide clarity on what is meant by Mandatory or Situational in the SLAs?

The “mandatory” designations convey that the contractor will be responsible for performing the activity. The “situational” designations convey that the contractor may be responsible for performing the activity depending on the agency’s needs at the time.

12 Attachment 2- SLAs Attachment 2 8-10 SLA-03-01: Financial Systems Support and Analysis Are the tasks within this section Mandatory or Situational?

All SLA’s listed in Attachment 2 under SLA-03-01: Financial Systems Support and Analysis are Mandatory.

13 SOW SOW II Tasks 3 Task A bullet 4 Can the Government provide the list of databases, software, reports, etc. used for financial reporting and analysis?

A variety of tools are used to retrieve, analyze, and visualize financial data. The following is a sample of the databases, software, reports, etc. currently used for financial reporting and analysis:

· Oracle Federal Financials

· Oracle Business Intelligence (OBI) (Analysis and Reports)

· MS 365 (Excel, PowerBI, SharePoint)

· SQL

· Tableau

· Alteryx

· Python

· UiPath

14 Solicitation C-1 3 Would the Government consider the inclusion of FAR Clause 52.245-1 Per the reference to property throughout the solicitation, we would request the addition of FAR 52.245-1.

This contract will not be responsible for Government Property under the contract aside from ancillary property such as certain office supplies. References to property in the Statement of Work relate to conducting Financial Management activities for the Government’s processes for controlling property in general. Therefore FAR 52.245-1 would not be appropriate for inclusion on this soliciation or resulting contract.

15 Solicitation Volume III Price Proposal E-28 The government has specified that this is a Time & Materials (T&M) contract, and the Section B.1 Price/Cost Schedule requests labor rates by base and option period. Section E-28 states that the offeror should provide a total estimated price.

Is the government requesting just labor rates or a total price for all option periods? If the government is requesting a total price, can the goverment provide more metrics that would allow the offeror to estimate the total price (e.g., the number of FTEs on the current contract; estimated hours by task/subtask area, number of ServiceNow tickets, etc.)?

Offerors need to define their labor rates for proposed labor categories, as well as propose hours for each labor category, resulting in a total price. Determining the level of effort required for the Financial Management activities solicited for is the responsibility of the Offerors. The Government expects that the services being solicited are broadly commercially available, and that different offerors may have unique methods of proposing to fulfill the Statement of Work.

1 RFP - B.1 Price/Cost Schedule Is the Government requesting that offerors complete this schedule in addition to providing a price proposal in Excel?

Offerors do not need to complete the sample Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure. This is provided as an example of how the CLINs will be structure under the resulting contract.

2 RFP - Section C - Contract Clauses Ceiling Price Does the Government have an actual or planned contract ceiling for this procurement?

The final awarded Contract Ceiling will be determined by the successful offeror’s proposal. The government will not provide its internal Independent Government Cost Estimate to offerors at this time.

3 SOW Based on the awarded contractor's proposal and contract performance does the Government have any interest in possibly expanding the scope of this procurement?

Further scope increases are not currently planned, however that does not preclude a later determination that additional work within the scope, or a change to the scope of the contract, may be necessary.

4 RFP How many awards does the Government intend to make?

The agency intends to make one award.

5 RFP What equipment and or property should offerors expect to be provided by the Government?

The agency does not expect to provide equipment or property to the successful offeror. The agency will provide user access to systems and data as required to perform contracted duties.

6 SOW - Security Requirements Does the Government expect to require any cleared work or personnel on this requirement?

The Government does not expect any cleared work nor does the scope of work require cleared personnel. This does not preclude modifications to the scope of the contract during performance, should the need to conduct cleared work or provide cleared personnel arise.

7 RFP What is the expected place of performance? Contractor Site? Remote work? Government Facility?

The work is expected to be performed off-site. There may be limited instances where on-site attendance is required in Alexandria, VA for a meeting or presentation, but that is expected to be rare, if at all.

8 RFP - Proposal Content and Configuration Is the Government married to the Key Personnel titles provided? If not, would simply an explanation be required to establish the offerors proposed equivalents? Or would the Government require a capability matrix to establish a functional crosswalk?

Per the Instructions to Offerors on Page E-26, Offerors should identify “a Project Lead, Financial Task Manager, and IT Task Manager, or equivalent positions, at a minimum.” If Offerors choose to use other titles, the Offeror should ensure that the information provided regarding the Key positions is sufficient for the Government to understand the responsibilities and capabilities. How best to present sufficient information is a business decision left to the Offerors.

9 RFP - Section E - Solicitation Provisions Is the Government requesting that offerors complete E. 1 through 11 of this section? If so, does this requirement apply to offerors with active and up to date SAM registrations?

Offerors are required to respond to Representations and Certifications as applicable. An up-to-date registration with SAM.gov suffices for some, but not all, of the required representations and certifications. Please see the instructions in each Clause regarding the applicability of each representation and certification.

10 RFP - Proposal Content and Configuration Would the Government be opposed to offerors submitting proposal Volume II Parts I through IV as separate files? Or must they be condensed into a single (Volume II) file?

Offerors may divide document files as deemed necessary; however each document should be clearly labelled so that the Government can clearly determine which Volume the document file resides in.

11 RFP - Proposal Content and Configuration Is the Government willing to increase the Volume II Part I - Technical Approach and Management Plan page limit to 25 pages? If not, would the Government be willing to make Technical Approach and Management Plan two separate parts with their own individual page limits?

The Government is not considering changes that increase the page limits for submissions. The Government is not specifying the individual page limits for the Technical Approach and Management Plan so offerors have flexibility to best present their proposed solutions.

12 RFP - Proposal Content and Configuration Is the Government open to removing the Management Plan from Part I of Volume II and instead including it in Part III of Volume II and increasing the page limit for Part III of Volume II to 15 pages?

The Government is not considering changes that increase the page limits for submissions.

13 SOW - Task F How much travel does the Government anticipated in the performance of this contract? Does the Government have a list of potential travel locations?

In the past, contractors have supported NSF's internal controls and auditability assessments over US Antarctic Program property. This support has included trips to the Antarctic Support Contract's HQ (currently in Denver, CO) and NSF's Antarctic base. The need for these trips has reduced in frequency, and site visits during the last ten years have not included contractor support. The possibility of travel is included in the solicitation should the need arise in the future for trips to perform duties under the SOW but there are no trips currently planned.

14 RFP - Factors for Determining Best Value Based on the precise nature of the requirements outlined in the SOW and the potential ramifications of errors, would the Government be open to adding a requirement for a Quality Control Plan (Part V of Volume II) with a 5-to-10-page limit potentially?

The Government is not considering changes that increase the page limits submissions. The Government agrees that quality control is an important factor in executing the SOW activities and would expect offerors to address this aspect of providing support under the contract.

15 SOW - Task F Based on the Governments language it could be assumed that the Government expects travel to consist of 1 FTE 3 times annually with an expected duration of 3-5 days. Would this assumption be accurate?

In the past, contractors have supported NSF's internal controls and auditability assessments over US Antarctic Program property. This support has included trips to the Antarctic Support Contract's HQ (currently in Denver, CO) and NSF's Antarctic base. The need for these trips has reduced in frequency, and site visits during the last ten years have not included contractor support. The possibility of travel is included in the solicitation should the need arise in the future for trips to perform duties under the SOW but there are no trips currently planned.

16 RFP Can the Government provide historical data regarding the current contract? And or the incumbent contractor?

The incumbent contract is 49100418F1045. No further historical data will be provided here. Offerors are encouraged to use their best business judgement and understanding of the requirement in developing proposals.

17 RFP - Instructions to Offerors For clarification purposes only. Is the Government requesting fully burdened ceiling rates or firm rates within proposal Volume III? There has been some industry disagreement regarding this.

The Government is requiring fully burdened rates, similar to rates established on a GSA Multiple Award Schedules contract. Note that this is not being issued against the GSA Schedules. The rates will not be later adjusted to address cost elements (e.g. G&A or Profit), and offerors should propose rates that will be invoiced at during performance. This will be awarded as a Time and Materials contract, not a Cost Reimbursement or other Cost-Type contract.

A ceiling price for each Contract Line Item will flow directly from the proposed rates and hours to perform the scope of work. A ceiling price on the resulting contract and total estimated price requested in Volume III are functionally equivalent – for a Time and Materials contract, the ceiling price sets the limit beyond which the performing contractor operates at risk absent direction from and a modification by the cognizant Contracting Officer. The information in Volume III will be used to assess price realism and price reasonableness, as well as set the Ceiling Price and Rates at which the successful awardee will invoice.

18 SOW - Scope of Work Would the Government open to solutions that include the use of cutting edge/transformative technologies/systems? I.E. Edge, Blockchain, AI, Machine learning, etc...

The Government is open to solutions that effectively and efficiently accomplish the tasks and objectives in the SOW.

19 RFP Does the Government have an anticipated period of performance? Award date range? Work start date range?

The Government is planning to award a base period of performance of one year, with the possibility of four one-year option periods. Award is anticipated in late January through mid-February, with work starting immediately upon award and clearance of contractor personnel.

20 RFP - E.6 Would it be advantages for offerors to register in Research.gov prior to proposal submission?

The successful awardee must be registered in Research.gov prior to award, which is a freely available process. However, registering is not required to submit a proposal, nor does it provide an advantage to an offeror during evaluation. The successful offeror will be notified and required to register if they have not already done so. Failing to register once notified would prevent award and the Government may choose to award to a different offeror at that point.

1. RFP E-26 The RFP states with respect to font size, “the parts shall be single-spaced and a minimum font size of 12 for the main text.” The text for graphs, charts, etc. may be smaller.”

Can the government confirm that offerors may use 8 point font in graphs, charts, tables, etc.?

Yes, fonts smaller than size 12 may be utilized in Graphs, Charts, Tables, etc. Offerors may not simply input the entire proposal into a chart or table format in order to circumvent formatting requirements.

2. RFP C-24 The RFP provides titles for three Key Personnel labor categories – Project Lead, Financial Task Manager, and IT Task Manager.

For consistency purposes in evaluating offeror’s responses, can the government please provide descriptions of these labor categories to include desired years of experience and education requirements?

No, the Government does not intend to prescribe specific requirements for the Key Personnel. The full scope of responsibilities may differ between proposed methods of meeting the requirements of the solicitation. Offerors should utilize their best judgement to determine what would be necessary to provide effective proposals that could successfully perform the scope of work.

3. SOW Task F The Technical Instructions require the offeror demonstrate an understanding of the requirements and approach to addressing the work tasks anticipated and how the task order’s requirements and objectives will be met, which includes Task F for Travel Requirements.

Can the government confirm that the offeror does not need to write a Technical Approach to how the offeror will address Travel Requirements?

Correct; any travel would arise from performing other tasks under the SOW and does not represent a standalone task in the technical approach.

4. RFP E-27-28 Can the government provide more details on how to structure the pricing proposal in excel?

Offerors should base their Volume III pricing on their proposed method of meeting the requirements of the statement of work. This would likely include labor rates by labor category, proposed hours for those labor rates, and total yearly prices, sectioned by contract year. It is possible that offerors may choose to provide the price information in differently structured formats. The sample CLIN structure in Section B indicates the intended yearly option structure.

5. RFP E-27 Do the four past performance questionnaires submitted by respondents per the instructions of Part IV need match the past performance citation included within the corporate experience examples described within Part III, Corporate Experience?

No, the past performance questionnaires submitted do not need to directly correlate with the Corporate Experience. No Past Performance would be rated as Neutral. However, no Corporate Experience information would be rated negatively. It is possible that Offerors may source corporate experience from a variety of methods that would not be reportable as Past Performance.

6. RFP E-27 Can the corporate experience section include additional citations beyond the four that will be submitted with questionnaires from Part IV – Past Performance?

Corporate experience is a separate evaluation factor from Past Performance, and they do not need to directly correlate. The requirement for information on Corporate Experience may, for example, cite the experience sourced through subcontractors or key personnel, which may not be information reportable as the offering Prime Contractor’s Past Performance.

7. RFP E-25 On page E-25, within the instructions for Part IV – Past Performance, the following language is found: “Offerors may utilize the attached Past Performance Questionnaire sheet to request information be submitted on relevant past performance. Offerors should submit a list of contacts to whom the Questionnaires were submitted, should the Offeror choose to solicit Past Performance Questionnaires.”

Does this mean the submission of PPQs is optional? If this is the case, is there a benefit to submitting PPQs?

Past performance information may be gathered from sources other than the PPQs, and a lack of past performance must not be interpreted in any other fashion than Neutral. Positive relevant Past Performance information would be evaluated positively under the Past Performance evaluation factor, which is one of the factors for award.

8. RFP E-27 Would the government consider changing the instructions of Part IV – Past Performance to allow the submission of PPQs from major subcontractors?

No. Past Performance is primarily to understand the performance of the offering Prime Contractor. The performance of subcontractors is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor, as the Government would not have privity of contract with any subcontractors. This does not preclude offerors from referencing a subcontractor’s experience under the Corporate Experience evaluation factor.

1) Request for Extension of Award Date: In consideration of the complexities involved in assembling a highly qualified team, would it be possible to request an extension of the proposal submission deadline?

See Amendment 0002.

2) Level of Effort Query: Could you please clarify the expected level of effort and respective responsibilities allocated between the IT Task Manager and the Financial Lead within the scope of this contract?

No. It is the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.

3) Division of Labor Clarification: Could you provide insight into the current division of labor and associated cost implications between the IT and financial components of this project?

The level of effort is typically split at 60% financial management tasks and 40% IT management tasks, although this can fluctuate, and offerors should use their judgement based on the tasks in the SOW.

4) Historical Hour Allocation: Regarding the hours previously obligated under this contract, could you disclose the total number of hours expended on customer-specific contracts by task?

No. It the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.

5) Travel Location Details for Cost Proposal: To accurately preparing our cost proposal, could you specify the anticipated travel locations involved in this contract?

In the past, contractors have supported NSF's internal controls and auditability assessments over US Antarctic Program property. This support has included trips to the Antarctic Support Contract's HQ (currently in Denver, CO) and NSF's Antarctic base. The need for these trips has reduced in frequency, and site visits during the last ten years have not included contractor support. The possibility of travel is included in the solicitation should the need arise in the future for trips to perform duties under the SOW but there are no trips currently planned.

6) Inquiry on Standard Operating Procedures from Incumbent: Will the incumbent contractor be required to provide existing standard operating procedures to the new awardee, or should the incoming contractor prepare these independently?

Standard operating procedures that are owned by the Government will be accessible to the new awardee. As work under the contract is performed, there will likely be the need for the new contractor to update existing procedures and/or draft new procedures.

7) Past Performance Evaluation Criteria: Our current sub-contractor does not have a history of past performance in the CPARS system, will the Government consider evaluating non-governmental work of similar scope and complexity as qualified past performance for this solicitation?

Past Performance Questionnaires should not be submitted for subcontractors. Offerors may indicate what experience a subcontractor provides to the team in the Corporate Experience factor. The government reserves the right to derive past performance information from any reputable source, and may do so independent of an Offeror’s submission.

8) Cost Buildup and Profit Margin Inquiry: Is it required for the proposal to detail the cost buildup and include a fee for each labor category?

Offerors should submit a price proposal with fully burdened labor rates. The rates must be those that will be invoiced at. This contract will be awarded as a Time and Materials contract with fixed rates identified, not a Cost Reimbursement or Cost-Type contract. Offerors should not propose overhead/G&A/Profit or other Cost elements separate from the labor rates.

9) Accounting System Utilization: Could you please specify which accounting system is currently being used for this contract? Does the awardee need past experience on these various systems?

The accounting system is called iTRAK and built on Oracle R12.2, as indicated in the Statement of Work. A successful awardee would likely need to have past experience on Oracle R12.2.

10) PP&E Management within DFM System: Is the Property, Plant, and Equipment (PP&E) for this contract managed within the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) accounting information system?

No.

11) Clarification on Equipment Provision by NSF: Will National Science Foundation (NSF) be providing necessary tools, such as computers, for project execution, or are we expected to provide our own equipment?

The agency does not expect to provide equipment or property to the successful offeror. The agency will provide user access to systems and data as required to perform contracted duties.

12) Place of performance: Are any of the positions expected to be on-site at a government location? If so, what location?

The work is expected to be performed off-site. There may be limited instances where on-site attendance is required in Alexandria, VA for a meeting or presentation, but that is expected to be rare, if at all.

1 C.9 NSF120 Key Personnel for Award Can you provide a level of effort and the labor categories for both key and non-key personnel?

No. It is the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.

2 Section B – Continuation Block B.1 Price/Cost Schedule Is there a defined period of performance?

The Government is planning to award a base period of performance of one year, with the possibility of four one-year option periods.

Award is anticipated in late January through mid-February, with work starting immediately upon award and clearance of contractor personnel.

3 Volume 2 Part 4 – Past Performance Are there any requirements for the past performance time frames? Do they have to be within the last 3 years like the Corporate Experience requests? Instructions to Offerors.

Past Performance should be recent and relevant. Relevancy of Past Performance information is determined by the Source Selection Official, per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii). Offerors are reminded that no Past Performance is not negative and shall be rated as Neutral.

4 Does the government require the vendor to be a licensed CPA Firm and provide evidence of their license? We recommend the government include this requirement as NAICS 541211 (Offices of Certified Public Accountants) is defined as “Establishments of accountants that are certified to audit the accounting records of public and private organizations and to attest to compliance with generally accepted accounting practices. Offices of certified public accountants (CPAs) may provide one or more of the following accounting services: (1) auditing financial statements; (2) designing accounting systems; (3) preparing financial statements; (4) developing budgets; and (5) providing advice on matters related to accounting.”

As vendors self-certify their NAICS in System for Award Management, it is possible that potential vendors will respond to this requirement without certification. Additionally, inclusion of this requirement will ensure that the potential vendor has the quality control system to sufficiently provide these services.

No, the Prime Contractor is not required to be a licensed CPA firm. However, lacking the ability to perform the scope of work would likely impact the ability to propose effectively to the scope of work. The Government intends to rely upon the evaluation of submitted Technical Proposal information and Price to determine the successful offeror, rather than specific licensing or certification requirements.

5 Who is performing the work now? If there is an incumbent contractor, what contract number are they performing under and can they bid on this solicitation?

The current contract is 49100418F1045.

6 Is this effort a consolidation of previous contracts, and if so, who were the contractors?

This award is not a consolidation of previous contracts.

7 Is the current contract similar in scope and size as the new contract?

Yes.

8 What is the historical Level of Effort to support this scope of work?

It is the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.

9 What is the Government Level of Effort estimate for this procurement?

It is the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.

The Government does not intend to prescribe a specific structure beyond what is present in the Scope of Work and Solicitation documents. It is the offerors responsibility to determine how best to structure their proposal in order to perform the scope of work on the resulting contract.