Questions_and_Answers_-_Amendment_3.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 38 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Program Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 70FA5019R00000006
About this file
Q&A - Amendment 0003
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 20
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| # | Solicitation Section | Question | Government Answer |
| 1 | Section L.10 (pg 66) | Section L.10 (pg 66) states that “offers must certify that it currently has an ACTIVE TS FACILITY CLEARANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE”. Can that requirement be amended to include active TS Facility Clearances from other USG Agencies…specifically the Department of Energy? If not, is it acceptable if our sub has one? | See answer to Question 18. The prime should have the TS Facility Clearance. |
| 2 | Section M.6, Factors 2 and 5 (pgs 68 and 69) indicates | Section M.6, Factors 2 and 5 (pgs 68 and 69) indicates for experience to be considered current, it must be within 3 years. Will the government consider changing that to 5 years? Considering that the initial RFP was cancelled and re-issued a year later, the 3 year limitation disproportionately favors the incumbent, who has now been on the contract in excess of 3 years. Consequently, technical experience and performance within the FEMA CBRN office prior to the incumbent will not count. | Section M.6. has been updated to allow for offerors to have experience within 5 years instead of 3 years. |
| 3 | General | Is the solicitation number 70FA19R0000000006 or 70FA5019R00000006? | The solicitation number is 70FA5019R00000006. |
| 4 | General | Will this IDIQ be a single or multiple award? | The Government contemplates a single award IDIQ contract. |
| 5 | General | Is the contract start date of 3 May correct? | The period of performance start shall begin on or about June 5, 2019. |
| 6 | General | What Knowledge Management systems are currently in use? | There is not a Knowledge Management System currently in place. |
| 7 | General | What requirements/tasks of the SOW are currently being executed by existing contracts? | Most tasks in the SOW are being conducted by current contractors, to include contractors in other FEMA Offices. |
| 8 | General | What requirements/tasks of the SOW were executed by contracts now ended? | There are no requirements in the SOW that were executed by contracts that are now ended. |
| 9 | General | What requirements/tasks of the SOW are new work? | The planning element of the SOW is new work. |
| 10 | General | Is there an incumbent contractor in place doing the work right now? | Yes, there is an incumbent contractor for a portion of the work. Some tasks are currently led by other FEMA components. |
| 11 | General | Will the incumbent contractor be available to transition with the awardee? | Yes, the incumbent contractor will be available to transition with the awardee. |
| 12 | General | Will the government be providing full time work space for the Program Manager? | No, government will not be providing full time work space for the Program Manager. |
| 13 | General | Will the government be providing full time work space for the Analyst (CMCU-DEST)? | |
| No, government will not be providing full time work space for the Analyst (CMCU DEST), although space can be provided for any programmatic position based on availability and advanced scheduling. | |||
| 14 | Attachment D | How will the pricing of the tab "Labor Categories & Rates" in Attachment D be evaluated? | See RFP Section M.5. for information on how price evaluation will be conducted. |
| 15 | General | Will additional Labor Categories and Rates be added to the IDIQ post award? | The Government does not anticipate additional labor categories and rates to be added to the IDIQ post award. |
| 16 | Section C.1.C | Section C.1.C (Key Personnel) states “1. The proposal shall address the offeror’s plan to provide personnel with Top Secret clearances (eligible for SCI), that possess demonstrated experience, education and qualifications required to perform this SOW” |
Section L.10 (Documentation of Security Requirements) states “In order to be awarded a contract, offerors must certify that it currently has an ACTIVE TS FACILITY CLEARANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE. In addition, it is anticipated that some contractor proposed to perform under the resultant award will be required to have a CURRENT TS CLEARANCE WITH SCI. Due to the need for contractor support immediately after award, pending clearances waiting approval are NOT acceptable.
These two sections appear to conflict with each other. C.1.C would suggest that personnel (including Key Personnel) need not have an SCI caveat in place at the time of award, whereas Section L.10 would appear to require that certain personnel have SCI caveats in place at the time of award.
| Could the Government please clarify whether any Key Personnel will be required to have TOP SECRET clearances with an SCI caveat in place at the time of award or whether the Government will accept personnel who have current TOP SECRET clearances if they are “SCI-eligible”? | RFP Section L.10 has been updated to state "Current Top Secret clearance (SCI eligible)." | ||||
| 17 | General | The government answers to questions from the previous FEMA CBRN solicitations (HSFE50‐15‐R‐0018, dated 6/22/2015 & 70FA5018R00000019, dated 8/8/2018) indicated that Department of Energy Q clearances were acceptable. For this procurement (70FA5019R00000006), will a Department of Energy-issued Top Secret facility clearance be acceptable to meet facility clearance requirements articulated in the solicitation? | See answer to Question 18. | ||
| 18 | General | Will personnel possessing active Q clearances be acceptable for positions requiring a DOD TS clearance? | There is no guarantee that a Q clearance from Department of Energy (DOE) will be accepted by Defense Security Service (DSS, however, the offeror/awardee's Security Officer will make attempts to achieve reciprocity with DSS for Q clearances. | ||
| 19 | General | Our interpretation of the government requirements for personnel clearances is that, at the start of the period of performance, only the analyst positions supporting CMCU and DEST must have an active TS SCI clearance. Is our interpretation correct? | Yes, this interpretation is correct. | ||
| 20 | General | Within the FBI managed Weapons of Mass Destruction Strategic Group (WMDSG) department of energy personnel leverage a Q clearance for access and support of the mission. Is it acceptable that the personnel supporting the FEMA CMCU & DEST positions possess a Q clearance at the time of award, eligible for reciprocity? | See answer to Question 18. | ||
| 21 | Section E.1, page 65 | Will the government provide an extension of the proposal submission date to May 30, 2019? | No; however, the proposal due date has been extended to May 3, 2019. | ||
| 22 | Section L.10, page 66 | Will the government accept offers when a large business teaming partner maintains an active TS facility clearance and the small business prime does not? | No, the prime must have a TS facility clearance. | ||
| 23 | General | Will the government consider releasing a sample task order in order to level the playing field for interested bidders and aid in the evaluation of the costs required to execute a task order under this contract? | No, the Government is unable to release a sample task order at this time. | ||
| 24 | General | Will the government provide historical levels of effort for the various work elements contained within the SOW? | No, the Government is unable to provide historical levels of effort for various work elements contained in the SOW at this time. | ||
| 25 | General | Will the government provide not-to-exceed amounts or a plug number for material costs associated with this project? | Material costs (ODCs) not-to-exceed amounts are included in Attachment D, tabs Base Year through Option 4. | ||
| 26 | General | Does the government anticipate using an electronic evaluation tool for the scoring of proposals (ie. ASSIST)? | No, the Government will not being using an electronic evaluation tool for scoring of proposals. | ||
| 27 | SOW section 3.3 Key Personnel (page 16) | SOW section 3.3 Key Personnel (page 16) lists a Program Manager. Attachment E, LCAT Qualifications, list a Project Manager. Is there a separate description for the Program Manager or does FEMA use Program Manager/Project Manager interchangeably? | Attachment E, LCAT qualifications has been updated to reflect Program Manager instead of Project Manager. | ||
| 28 | Section L.9, C. Proposal Submission Requirements under C.1.E for Past Performance | One of the requirements is for the size of each past performance be no less than $1M per year. Given that this is a small business procurement and the scope of work is fairly unique, this requirement restricts competition. Would the government consider changing the requirement from 3 to 1 relevant past performance to be no less than $1M per year. | See answer to Question 43, which has decreased the dollar value requirement from $1M to $300k. | ||
| 29 | SOW, section 2.1.4, second bullet. | Is the requirement to develop the FY20 strategic plan or to update the FY19 strategic plan, as needed? | The requirement will be update the FY19 strategic plan as needed. | ||
| 30 | SOW, section 2.9.2 | Can the government provide any additional tasks/requirements regarding the coordination bullets that are listed? | No, the Government is unable to provide any additional tasks/requirements regarding the coordination bullets. | ||
| 31 | General | Please confirm that we can add labor categories to facilitate bringing the right resources to FEMA in execution of work. | Yes, offerors may add labor categories to facilitate bringing the right resources to FEMA in execution of work. | ||
| 32 | Attachment D | Please confirm that for the 5 labor categories identified in Attachment D that we can include differentiated levels of experience (e.g. junior, mid, senior) in our proposal. | Attachment D is provided for price evaluation purposes only. Offerors may include differentiated levels of experience as needed in Attachment D, tab "Labor Categories and Rates" and in its proposal. | ||
| 33 | RFP, Section C.2 | Please confirm that the compliance information including the SF-33, SF-30 with amendments, and completed reps & certs are outside of the 5-page limit. | Yes, compliance information is excluded from the 5-page limit in accordance with RFP Section L.9.B.l. | ||
| 34 | General | Given the technical nature of the work in the SOW, we recommend allowing for up to 3 non-key personnel resumes to be provided. | Yes, Offerors may include capability statements for non-key personnel. RFP Sections L.9.C.1.C.3 and L.9.B.l have been updated accordingly. | ||
| 35 | Attachment D | Should we modify the tables to include columns for both onsite and offsite rates? | Attachment D, tab "Labor Categories and Rates" has been updated to include columns for both offsite and onsite rates. | ||
| 36 | Attachment D | Please confirm that we should use offsite rates to complete Attachment D. | Offerors shall use on-site rates to complete Attachment D, as the primary place of performance is the Government's facility. Attachment D has been updated accordingly. | ||
| 37 | RFP Section M.6, Factor 3, mentions (IN BOLD): | The qualifications for proposed personnel for each labor category will be evaluated. Can FEMA please explain what is meant by this statement? | This statement has been removed from RFP Section M.6. Factor 3 of solicitation. | ||
| 38 | C.1.A.2 Technical Approach and Understanding of the Statement of Work (Factor 1), RFP Page 63 | Request clarification of the statement that: “Offerors shall describe their approach to perform all aspects of the SOW, and the resources proposed to perform this requirement, including subcontractors, if applicable.” In describing the “resources proposed,” is the intent to provide a general description of the competencies of the prime contractor and subcontractors involved in supporting the SOW as part of Factor1? If more detail than this is expected, including task-specific detail, how would such information be different from that required in C.1.B.1: Technical Experience (Factor 2), “Offerors shall provide a narrative that describes the Offeror’s relevant technical experience, similar to the tasks required in the SOW, including experience of proposed subcontractors?” Given the 30-page limitation for Volume 1, request additional clarity be provided so as to capture the required information within a single Factor write-up if possible. | In Factor 1 Offerors shall provide a general description of the competencies of the team and/or subcontractors. Furthermore, the Offeror shall address its strategy in which the proposed resources/team will be allocated to complete the tasks outlined in the Statement of Work. Factor 2 provides for a more detailed description of the prior technical experience of the proposed team. The page limitation has been updated from 30 pages to 40 pages for Volume I. | ||
| 39 | C.1.A.3 Technical Approach and Understanding of the Statement of Work (Factor 1), RFP Page 63 | Request clarification of the statement that: “Offerors should provide a transition plan to address their proposed milestones, timeline, and mitigation of potential risks.” Is this plan intended to be general in nature and applicable only to an initial contract onboarding period, or more broadly applicable to the entire initial contract period of performance? Development of explicit “milestones and timelines” associated with individual tasks identified in the SOW will require discussion with and approval by government task leads following contract award as part of the POA&M development/approval process specified in the solicitation. | Yes, this plan intended to be general in nature and applicable only to an initial contract onboarding period. | ||
| 40 | C.1.C.1 Key Personnel and Staffing Plan (Factor 3), RFP Page 63 | Request clarification that that personnel proposed for positions requiring TS/SCI clearance must have an active TS clearance and eligibility for SCI access on Day 1 of contract initiation, with actual SCI access granted following an appropriate program read-on and completion of agency SCI onboarding protocols. | |||
| Yes, that is correct. Positions requiring TS/SCI clearance must have an active TS clearance and eligibility for SCI access on Day One of contract initiation, with actual SCI access granted following an appropriate program read-on and completion of agency SCI onboarding protocols. | |||||
| 41 | C.1.C.4 Key Personnel and Staffing Plan (Factor 3), RFP Page 63 | Request clarification of the statement that: “Attachment E to this RFP contains suggested Labor Category Qualifications for offerors to use in staffing their team. Offerors should describe the qualifications for proposed personnel for each labor category.” Is the intent to allow the contractor to propose modifications to the government-suggested labor category qualifications, including the proposal of additional categories and qualifications? As this requirement might require significant space within the technical approach to complete, request that this requirement not be included within the mandatory 30-page count stipulated for Volume 1 of the proposal package and that this information be included in Volume 2, Business Proposal. | Information regarding Attachment E has been removed from C.1.C.4. and put into RFP Section C.2.D. The intent of Attachment E is to provide the minimum labor category qualifications for the suggested labor categories within the solicitation and Attachment D. Offerors may propose different labor categories and shall include the proposed labor category's minimum qualifications which is exempt from page limitations. | ||
| 42 | C.1.E Past Performance (Factor 5), RFP Page 63 | Request clarification to stipulate that past performance submissions may cover all work ongoing or completed any time during Calendar Years 2016-2019. The delay and re-issue of this RFP accidentally prevented the inclusion of past performance on this contract for all but the current incumbents. | RFP Section C.1.E. has been updated to allow for past performance references to allowed from up to five (5) years ago (2014-2019). | ||
| 43 | C.I.E Past Performance (Factor 5), RFP Page 64 | Request partial modification of the following statement: “Each past performance contract summary must reference contracts and/or orders of relevant scope and complexity with a funded/obligated value of no less than $1 million for a 12-month period of performance.” It benefits the government for prime offerors to include niche subcontractors with specific skills critical to one or more tasks highlighted in the solicitation. This requirement would limit a prime’s ability to showcase, via an appropriate past performance, a small business with unique services to offer. Would the government consider that the stipulated size requirement need not be applied to subcontractor past performances, or, alternatively, allow one of the optional past performances to be at a lower annual revenue threshold (i.e. $500K)? | RFP Section C.1.E. has been updated to allow values of no less than $300,000.00 for a 12-month period of performance. | ||
| 44 | Attachment A, 2.5.2.1. Specific Project Support, Page 9 | What is the nature of the DEST and CMCU equipment maintained at FEMA Headquarters and off-site locations, and corresponding maintenance requirements?” Are there any specific technical certifications required on the part of the contractor in order to maintain this equipment? What is the government’s estimated level of effort for this work on a monthly basis? Which LCAT is contemplated on performing this work (an analyst)? | Equipment maintenance to be completed at multiple locations, on-site and off-site, on a bi-weekly basis. Equipment to include, but is not limited to, secure voice, video, and data equipment. LCAT for the equipment maintenance (not general DEST-CMCU program support) would be a junior “Communications Systems Analyst”. | ||
| 45 | K.3 (a) (3) on pg48 of the RFP | This section mentions a 500 person size standard. Please confirm that this aspect of the size standard is not applicable to the services conducted under this RFP and only companies with a total revenue of $15M or less are eligible. | K.3. (a) (3) is not applicable to this contract, as it’s a service contract. The size standard for this solicitation and associated NAICS is $15M. | ||
| 46 | Attachment D and Business Proposal | It is our experience that providing various levels of personnel for each LCAT is advantageous to the government in order to ensure that the most cost-effective person is assigned to each task. In this proposal, it would be beneficial to break out the SME and Analyst labor categories into “senior”, “middle” and “junior” sub-categories. We propose to show all LCATs and rates in the tab on Attachment D of the same name, and then expand the number of rows in the yearly cost breakout tabs to show a variety of sub-categories of labor rates. We feel that using only the personnel who meet the minimum qualifications of the position would artificially decrease the cost estimate for the government. However, if for simplicity, it is desired to use just the lowest level person who qualifies for the LCAT, that can be done as well. Please advise. | Please see answer to Question 41 and revised RFP Section C.2.C. | ||
| 47 | M.4 Top Secret Clearance Documentation | The ISFD has migrated to the National Industrial Security System (NISS). Please confirm that copies of security clearance information for contractor facilities, staff and any proposed subcontractors or consultants should be downloaded from NISS. | Yes, copies of security clearance information for contractor facilities, staff and any proposed subcontractors or consultants should be downloaded from NISS if ISFD is no longer accessible. | ||
| 48 | Section L.9. C.2. Volume 2: Price Proposal | Are the tables in Section B.2 IDIQ Labor Categories to be inserted into Volume 2? If so, would the government consider increasing the page limit for the Pricing Narrative, or should these tables be presented as an appendix? | These tables should be submitted as a part of Attachment D - Labor Categories and Rates tab. The contractor may also submit them as appendix in addition to Attachment D, if desired. | ||
| 49 | Attachment D | Should the Price Evaluation Worksheet be submitted to the government as an Excel file? | Yes, Attachment D shall be submitted as an Excel file. | ||
| 50 | L.9. Proposal Preparation Instructions, A. Proposal Organization | Would the government consider increasing the page limit to 40 pages for the Technical Proposal, Factors 1 through 4, in order to adequately address all of the requirements/tasks in Attachment A? | Yes, RFP Section L.9.A has been updated to 40 pages for Factors 1-5. | ||
| 51 | Attachment E | In addition to the suggest Labor Category Qualifications (Attachment E), can we add additional Labor Categories? | Yes. See revised RFP Section L.9.C.2.C. | ||
| 52 | Attachment A SOW– pgs. 4 & 22 | Communications and Outreach & Deliverable 2. Task area 2.1.2 states contractor support in development of a communications strategy whereas Deliverable 2 indicates updating a communication and outreach plan. Can the government clarify if contractor support is needed to develop a new communications strategy or provide updates to an existing communications strategy? | Both will be needed. We have a current plan that would be updated, but there may be certain elements of the outreach that may need to be developed from scratch. | ||
| 53 | RFP Pgs. 3-4 - IDIQ Labor Categories | Can the government clarify where in our proposal response we should include the labor category tables? | All IDIQ labor category tables shall be included as an appendix in Volume II. This is considered compliance information and will not be counted toward page limitations. | ||
| 54 | RFP Page 61 | Is Factor 5 outside the 30 page Technical Proposal limit? | No, the information contained L.9.C.1.E - Contract Summaries is included in the Technical Proposal page limits. The table has been updated to reflect Factors 1-5. | ||
| 55 | RFP Section L.10 (pg 66) | This section states that “offers must certify that it currently has an ACTIVE TS FACILITY CLEARANCE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE”. Can that requirement be amended to include active TS Facility Clearances from other USG Agencies…specifically the Department of Energy? If not, is it acceptable if our sub has one? | See answer to Question 18 and 1. | ||
| 56 | Section M.6, Factors 2 and 5 (Pgs. 68 and 69) | This section indicates for experience to be considered current, it must be within 3 years. Will the government consider changing technical experience and past performance to 5 years? | See answer to Question 42. | ||
| 57 | L.9.A. Proposal Organization Table | Past Performance is included in this table but under page count it says - 30 Pages (Combined Total for Factors 1 through 4). What is the page count for Factor 5: Past Performance contract summaries? | See answer to Question 54. | ||
| 58 | RFP P 61 / L.9A Table and L.C.1.E Past Performance (Factor 5) | The table states that there is a 30 page limit for factors 1-4. What is the page limit for the contract information and summaries required by Factor 5 Past Performance? | See answer to Question 54. | ||
| 59 | Attachment D and RFP P65 / Section L.C.2.C | Paragraph L.C.2.C states that “both FEMA and Contractor site Location” rates should be provided in Attachment D. But Attachment D Labor Categories and Rates tab does not provide for two different rates. May contractors edit the spreadsheet to provide this information? |
| Also with respect to Tabs Base Year thru Option Year 4 should FEMA site Location rates or Contractor site Location rates be used? | Attachment D tab "Labor Categories and Rates" has been updated to include space for on-site and off-site rates. See revised RFP Section L.9.C.2.C. for additional information. | ||||
| 60 | SOW P 22 / Section 6. Deliverables Table foot note | Would the Government please clarify what is meant by footnote 1 to the Deliverable Table? For instance, Deliverable 2 has “*4 months | |||
| after award” as the “Due by”. Since it has an asterisk at what frequency will this deliverable be required “through the life of the contract”? | The asterisk deliverables will be done on an annual basis. The deliverables without an asterisk will only be required year one. | ||||
| 61 | SOW P 22 / Section 6. Deliverables Table | Deliverable numbers 11 thru 14 are repeated. | The SOW has been reviewed. The deliverables are not repeated. | ||
| 62 | RFP P 63 / Section L.C.1.D.3 | Section states, “(ISFD verification should be | |||
| submitted with the Business/Technical Proposal.)” Is it correct to assume the Government wants the ISFD verification in the Business/Price Proposal Volume II? If the Government requires ISFD verification in Technical Proposal Volume I, respectfully request that it be outside of page limit. | Yes, ISFD verification is exempt from page limitations. See updated RFP Section L.9.B. | ||||
| 63 | RFP P 3 / Section B | Does the Government require that Section B be filled out? If so, should the completed Section B be included in the Business/Price Proposal Volume II? | Yes, this is considered to be proposal compliance information. See RFP Section L.9.B. | ||
| 64 | RFP P 65 / L.C.2.A | Is it correct to assume that the Signed SF-33 and SF030(s) and the Completed Reps and Certs are outside of the Volume II Business/Price Proposal page count? | Yes, this is considered to be proposal compliance information. See RFP Section L.9.B. | ||
| 65 | RFP P 67 / M.4 | ISFD verification is no longer available. All FCL clearance information is now located in the NISS. Will the government accept an ISFD facility verification from last year? | See answer to Question 47. | ||
| 66 | General | Consistent with the answers provided in the 2015 iteration of this solicitation, and the cancelled solicitation in 2018, will an active Department of Energy facility clearance be accepted in lieu of a Department of Defense facility clearance as required in L.10? | See answer to Question 18. | ||
| 67 | General | Can you please verify that a Q/SCI will not be accepted for the Key Personnel positions? We have employees who currently support WMDSG, CMCU, and DEST with Q/SCI on other contracts and work regularly with these programs. A Q/SCI has been adequate to support all aspects of these programs. | See answer to Question 18. | ||
| 68 | General | Can the government confirm that this is a single award, and not a multiple award contract? If multiple awards are anticipated, how many awards are expected? | Yes, the Government contemplates a single award IDIQ contract. | ||
| 69 | General | Can the government provide historical information on the number and size of the task orders released, along with the type of work, under the current contract? | No, the Government is unable to provide historical information at this time. | ||
| 70 | General | For the cancelled 2018 solicitation, the government allowed for the Volume 1 to be 40 pages. The SOW in the 2019 solicitation has expanded, yet page limit shrank to 30 pages. We do not feel that we can adequately respond to all Volume 1 requirements in 30 pages. Will the government consider expanding the page limit to at least 40 pages (consistent with the 2018 solicitation)? | Yes, RFP Section L.9.A has been updated to 40 pages for Factors 1-5. | ||
| 71 | General | If we intend to use subcontractor past performance, can you clarify what specifically is required in the “Letter of Consent” outlined in section L.9 “Proposal Preparation Instructions”? | Th Offeror shall demonstrate in its proposal via letter that it authorizes the Government to discuss past performance with the subcontractor. | ||
| 72 | SOW, Section 5 | This section states the government will provide the workspace, equipment and supplies necessary to perform the on-site portion of Contractor services required in this contract.” Could the government please clarify the on-site portion of this contract? | See answer to Question 73. The primary place of performance will be on-site at FEMA HQ in Washington, DC. | ||
| 73 | General | Are the contractor employees expected to work at contractor furnished facilities (off-site) or government furnished facilities (on-site) with government provider workspaces | |||
| (telephones, computers, desks, etc.)? | Primary place of performance will be split between government furnished facilities, based on space availability, and off-site. | ||||
| 74 | General | What is AWR-920? | AWR-920 is a FEMA certified 2-day course on CBRN awareness for Federal, State, Local, Tribal and Territorial (FSLTT) decision makers. | ||
| 75 | General | FEMA requests completed Section K, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror to be submitted in Volume 2. If Offeror is actively registered in SAM, will a SAM registration confirmation with a paragraph outline such registration suffice in place of the 6.5 pages of Section K contained in the RFP? | Yes, Offerors may submit SAM registration confirmation with a paragraph outlining such registration shall suffice in page of Section K, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offeror. | ||
| 76 | Attachment C | Attachment C includes a Past Performance Questionnaire. Is the contractor expected to send this to our client POCs or will the government send Attachment C to our client POCs? | See answer to Question 89. | ||
| 77 | Attachment C | Should the PPQ in Attachment C be included in it’s entirety (all four pages) in Volume 1 with the Past Performance narratives? | No, the blank PPQ does not need to be included in the Offeror's proposal. It is being provided for informational purposes only. See answer to Question 89. | ||
| 78 | Attachment D | FEMA offered sample Levels of Effort by each Labor Category in the cost evaluation worksheet. May we confirm that the Offeror should use these LOEs to allow the most effective evaluation between Offerors? | Yes, that is correct. See revised RFP Section L.9.C.2.C for additional information. | ||
| 79 | General | Please explain why the I.24 HSAR 3052.209-72 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST and I.25 HSAR 3052.209-73 LIMITATION OF FUTURE CONTRACTING paragraphs that were included in the June 2018 solicitation were removed from this RFP. It is not clear why these clauses were removed as it seems reasonable that potential conflicts could exist; particularly due to offerors being in a position to favor its own products, capabilities, and services. | After consulting internally, the Government has decided this clause is not applicable to this work. | ||
| 80 | SOW section 2.7 | What is the relationship of the “CBRN Responder” tool mentioned in SOW section 2.7, Tools and Standards, to the Rad Responder tool previously developed by the FEMA CBRN Office under a separate performer contract? | This has been removed from the Statement of Work. | ||
| 81 | SOW section 2.7 | Is the tool referenced in Section 2.7 of the SOW an extension/evolution/modification of Rad Responder? | This has been removed from the Statement of Work. | ||
| 82 | SOW section 2.7 | Is the tool referenced in Section 2.7 of the SOW is an extension/evolution/modification of RadResponder, does this make Section 2.7 a consolidation of requirements as defined in FAR 7.107-2? | This has been removed from the Statement of Work. | ||
| 83 | General | Regarding personnel security clearances, is a Q/SCI acceptable if it has gone through reciprocity and is annotated in subject’s JPAS record? | See answer to Question 18. | ||
| 84 | RFP Section L.8, Paragraph B | Is it correct to assume that the labor category descriptions in L.8, paragraph B. for the Project Manager, Subject Matter Experts, Analyst, Web/Graphics and Technical Writer/Editor describe the Junior level as the minimum qualification? | Assuming L.8 Paragraph B is in reference to Attachment E - Labor Category descriptions, yes, the descriptions reflect the minimum qualification. See revised RFP Section L.9.C.2.C for additional information. | ||
| 85 | RFP Section L.8, Paragraph B | If the extension of total amounts is required and if the offeror differentiates the labor categories by Senior, Mid and Junior, what is the mix of labor hours that should be associated with each level or would using a Mid for each labor category be acceptable? | See revised RFP Section L.9.C.2.C for additional information. | ||
| 86 | RFP Section L.C.1.E | Past Performance, the government states “Offerors may submit information on work performed by major subcontractors, and work performed as part of a team or joint venture, and other previous reincarnation of its current organization. The Offeror shall clearly define what entity performed the work if other than the prime offeror’s past performance is submitted.” Is the offeror able to utilize a joint venture contract (Prime and Sub relationship) to reach the required value of $1 million per a 12 month period to demonstrate relative past performance, if both the Prime and Subcontractor are teaming for this RFP? | No; however, the $1M requirement has been reduced to $300k. See updated RFP Section L.C.1.E. | ||
| 87 | RFP Evaluation Factor 3 | Regarding Factor 3, Key Personnel and Staffing Plan, do all contract personnel (including Web Graphics) need a Top Secret clearance? | No, not all personnel need a Top Secret Clearance. See Section 4.1. in Attachment A - SOW for additional information. | ||
| 88 | Attachment C | The RFP lists the PPQs as a portion of Volume 1 on page 62; however on page 65, it states “A copy of the questionnaire is listed in Attachment C, the Government will contact the past performance references listed by the offeror and complete the questionnaire with information obtained from references Offerors must provide the above information or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant, directly related, or similar past performance.” Can the Government please confirm offerors are not to include a completed PPQ with their proposal submission? | This is correct. See answer to Question 89. | ||
| 89 | Attachment C | If offerors are required to submit the PPQ with their proposal submission, can the Government please provide instructions (i.e. where/how to submit the completed PPQs)? | In accordance RFP C.1.E, the Government shall contact the offerors past performance references and complete Attachment C. The Offeror needs to provide the information under C.1.E. Contract Summaries, in bullets 1-11. | ||
| 90 | RFP Section L.C.1.A | Regarding the Transition Plan, reference Section L C.1.A Technical Approach and Understanding of the Statement of Work (Factor 1), Can the Government please clarify the transition time allowed by the Government in order for offerors to appropriately develop the transition plan? | The Government anticipates 30 days of transition. | ||
| 91 | Attachment C | Can the Government please provide a word version of the Attachment C, Past Performance Questionnaire? | Yes, a Word version of Attachment C has been provided as part of Amendment 1; however, see answer to Question 89. | ||
| 92 | RFP Section L.C.1.D.3 | According to Section L.C.1.D.3, offerors are to provide ISFD verification with the Business/Technical Proposal. However, the Business and Technical Proposal are two separate volumes. Can the Government please provide clarification on where offerors are to include the documentation? | RFP Section L.C.1.D.3 has been updated to state "technical proposal" instead of technical/business proposal.. | ||
| 93 | General | The headings on some of the pages of the solicitation include solicitation number 70FA5018R000000019; can the Government please confirm the solicitation number for this effort is 70FA5019R00000006? | The solicitation number is 70FA5019R00000006. This has been updated throughout the solicitation document. | ||
| 94 | RFP Section M.4. | Offerors are to provide a copy of the Industrial Security Facilities Database (ISFD) facility verification for any proposed subcontractors or consultants that possess clearances. Can the Government please confirm subcontractors are not required to possess a separate security clearance; and offerors are only required to include such documentation should the subcontractor have a clearance? | For any work under the contract that is Top Secret, both the prime and any subcontractors must have a TS Clearance. | ||
| 95 | General | Will the Government please confirm the required level of effort for this effort? How does this compare to the current staffing level? | The level of effort will vary by task order. A sample level of effort across all labor categories and task orders for each year is provided in Attachment D. However, the overall level of effort for task orders under this contract could change depending on task order requirements. | ||
| 96 | General | Does the Government anticipate any part-time positions in the provided Labor Categories? | There may be task orders that require LCATs to work part-time depending on requirements. | ||
| 97 | General | Can the Government please provide the staffing level, by Labor Category, of the current contract? | See answer to Question 95. | ||
| 98 | Attachment D | Can the Government please clarify if Attachment D - Price Evaluation Worksheet reflects the actual hours to be staffed/worked per Labor Category, or are the hours provided purely for a price evaluation to fairly and objectively evaluate each bidder’s proposed price? | See answer to Question 95. Additionally, the hours in attachment D are provided for price evaluation purposes to fairly and objectively evaluate each Offerors proposed price. |
File details come from the government source that posted it.