SF30 A0001_Q and A.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUISITION NUMBER 5. PROJECT NUMBER (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 11/2016)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended. is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NUMBER IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation data, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

Previous edition unusable

A0001 70T010

Mr. Sam Heim

The purpose of amendment A0001 is to:

See following pages.

WORKFORCE & ENTERPRISE OPERATIONS

6595 Springfield Center Drive Springfield, VA 20598

See block 6.

PR237670A018

70T01023R7670N018

1 10

03/30/2023

03/10/2023

70T01023R7670N018-A0001

The purpose of solicitation amendment A0001 is to:

1. Provide answers to Offeror questions. See Q&A table below.

2. Attachment 1 Statement of Work is hereby revised in track changes via Amendment A0001 in response to various Q&A below.

3. Attachments 2-5 and 10 are hereby revised via Amendment A0001 in response to Q&A #38.

4. Hereby revise block 10 of the SF 1449 to state this acquisition is unrestricted.

5. Revise Attachment 6 Instructions to Offerors, to clarify that slide decks are not allowed during oral presentations.

Q&A Number

Questions and Answers

Q1 SOW 2.2.1 Please clarify the total number expected attendees per cohort.

A1 Up to 30 per cohort. See revised SOW 2.2.1 via amendment A0001.

Q2 SOW 3.1.2.2 There are a variety of 360 assessment tools. Does TSA have preference to a specific assessment/publisher?

A2 It is the contractor’s business decision on which 360 assessment tool is recommended for the program.

Q3 3.1 – Overall Course Design and Curriculum: What is the ratio of virtual learning to in-person learning that TSA expects?

A3 Each cohort delivery will consist of a blend of in-person and virtual sessions. See revised SOW 3.1 and 4.1 via Amendment A0001.

Q4 3.1.1 – Course Design and Curriculum: How much of the content needs to be customized to the various TSA experience and positions, vice directed towards the program participants?

A4 After award, the contractor will be provided a Curriculum Guide which will define outcomes, specific learning objectives and include TSA Required Resources to assist in developing instructional content and participant activities. Course outcomes should have more weight in course time or cognitive ability for program participants. Learning objectives will require more time and effort from participants. Outcomes that are more ‘weighted’ represent critical leader tasks defined job descriptions for participants. Job Role data will be provided for additional clarity.

Q5 3.1.3.1 – Application Activities: Will the approved contractor receive a copy of the “applicable development plan, provided by TSA” prior to course development?

A5 Yes, the applicable development plan will be provided to the contractor after contract award.

See revised SOW 3.1.3.1 via Amendment A0001.

Q6 3.3.1 – Institution of Higher Education (IHE): Can practitioners/professionals with field experience be selected, as opposed to academic professors?

Questions and Answers

A6 The contractor is required to be an IHE, therefore the faculty/staff provided shall be employed by the IHE and carry requisite credentials to perform the requirements of the SOW para 3.3.

Q7 3.3.3 – Familiarity with federal government: Will TSA’s current strategy policies be provided for review prior to course development?

A7 Yes, TSA’s current strategies and policies will be provided to the contractor after award.

Q8 3.4 – Academic Component: Does each course need to be from Graduate and Baccalaureate Level Content, or is that a reference to the rigidity and quality of the course?

A8 See definition at SOW para 3.4. The rigor of the course material should be at the baccalaureate or Graduate level not necessarily from an existing program.

Q9 3.4 – Academic Component: Does each course need to stem directly from existing Graduate or Baccalaureate level programs?

A9 See answer A8 above.

Q10 4.1 – Program length: What is the rigidity of the quantity of training hours mentioned? Can this be asynchronous or does this need to be in person?

A10 The curriculum development should utilize asynchronous and synchronous delivery formats to meet required program goals and objectives. See revised SOW para 4.1 via Amendment A0001.

Q11 Reserved.

Q12 6.1 – Program Development: What is the turnaround time on draft course outlines being presented to TSA and TSA providing edits/feedback, prior to implementation of the courses to the required staff?

A12 TSA feedback will be provided within 2 weeks of course outlines being submitted for review.

Questions and Answers

Q13 SOW Section 2.2.1-There are two pilots alluded to. One for the School of Professional Studies and one for the School of Advanced Leadership studies. Request following clarifications:

a. Please verify the intended cohort size.

b. The numbers currently presented indicate up to 90 individuals per cohort (30

Supervisors, 30 managers, 30 executives). That is a total of 90 individuals per cohort- is 90 the expected number for each pilot?

c. What is the intended cohort size for each of the four referenced schools?

d. Are the two pilots for 90 total participants each?

e. What is the expected cohort size for the four programs after the pilots?

f. Section 2.1.1 Indicates the TSA LI curriculum is for four separate groups. Section

2.2.1 Indicated the potential to blend cohorts with supervisors and managers, but not executives. This implies that individuals in School 1-3 can serve as supervisors and managers, even though they are separate GS grades. Is this accurate?

A13 a. Intended cohort size is 30 participants each

b. Only two Schools are included in the pilot. They will have 30 each: School of

Professional Studies and the School of Advanced Leadership studies.

c. Intended cohort size is 30 for each of the four schools

d. Two pilot are 30 each

e. Expected cohort size is 30

f. This is accurate.

SOW para 2.2.1 has been revised via Amendment A0001 to clarify.

Q14 SOW Section 2.4 Please clarify what co-facilitate means in the context of this section. Will these SMEs be permanently assigned to the position or TDY personnel? How long will their tour of duty be as an SME/co-facilitator to TSA LI Program?

A14 TSA subject matter experts will join the contractor staff at times to participate in the facilitation and delivery of course content. This will be determined jointly between contractor and Government during course design.

Q15 SOW Section 2.6 The intended scope of this is not clear. Is all of this coaching expected to occur during the duration of a cohort, or during intercessional/before/after cohort

A15 Coaching is expected to occur during the duration of a cohort, and also before and after a cohort. See SOW para 2.6, 2.7, 3.1.2, 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 revised via Amendment A0001.

Q16 SOW Section 2.7 When are the coaches to serve in the advisor role? What is the expected/desired time allocation for them to advise?

A16 See answer A15 above.

Q17 SOW Section 2.8 What specific TSA guidelines apply? Will the government provide them for review?

A17 TSA guidelines will be provided upon contract award.

Questions and Answers

Q18 SOW 3.1 What proportion of the blended delivery is expected to occur person-to-person and what proportion is expected to occur virtually?

A18 See revised SOW para 3.1 via Amendment A0001.

Q19 SOW 3.1.2.2 What amount of individual coaching associated with individual 360 assessment is expected for each participant?

A19 See revised SOW para 3.1.2.2 via Amendment A0001.

Q20 SOW 3.1.4.3 How many one-on-one coaching sessions of what duration are expected for TSES participants?

A20 See revised SOW para 3.1.4.3.

Q21 SOW 3.1.4.5 How many of these peer coaching sessions and application activities are expected for each participant in each school? What is the estimated group size for each coach to coach?

A21 See revised SOW para 2.2.1, 3.1.4.4 and 3.1.4.5 via Amendment A0001.

Q22 SOW 4.2 The statement reads “Classroom materials and handouts will be mailed to the participants using the United States Postal Service.”

Please verify TSA requires hardcopy AND advanced mailing to participants vice electronic delivery?

A22 See revised SOW para 4.2 via Amendment A0001.

Q23 Section XIV: Performance Requirements/QASP- The SOW reference numbers in the SOW Requirement column of the table do not appear to trace to any of the SOW elements in this document. Please clarify source reference for the requirement

A23 Removed via Amendment A0001.

Q24 Reserved.

Q25 Will the government provide TSA SME contacts to collaborate with the selected vendor to engage in development of case studies tailored for TSA during the curriculum development phase? If so, to what degree are they available/accessible?

A25 Yes. Availability of SME contacts will be determined jointly between contractor and Government during course design.

Questions and Answers

Q26 SOW 3.1.4.1- The International Coaching Federation has three levels of accreditation for coaches: Associate Certified Coach (ACC) Credential, Professional Certified Coach (PCC) Credential, and Master Certified Coach (MCC) Credential. Are all credentialed levels acceptable for assignment as a coach? For proposed coaches without ICF certification, is the vendor authorized to certifying that the coach meets the “equivalent in relevant experience?”

A26 Yes, all ICF credentialed levels are acceptable for assignment of coaching. See SOW para

3.1.4.1 for “or relevant experience” guidance.

Q27 SOW 4.1- Will multi-week programs be offered in one continuous cohort over the proposed time duration, or are they to be broken into shorter (i.e., one week) periods and delivered over an extended period via shorter residencies?

A27 See revised SOW para 4.1 via Amendment A0001.

Q28 SOW 4.2- Are alternate methods of shipping, other than US Postal service, authorized? (i.e., UPS, FEDEX, etc.)

A28 Yes, and this change has been added to the SOW via Amendment A0001.

Q29 SOW 4.2-

a. Is “virtual connectivity” defined as the Contractor providing an agreed upon virtual learning portal for participants to connect to (paragraph 6.2.2)?

b. Will the Government be responsible for ensuring the participants have materials and infrastructure required to connect to the virtual learning portal, e.g., modern computer or tablet with high-speed internet connection with appropriate permissions enabled and/or required software?

A29 a. Yes, and see SOW para 4.2 and 6.2.2 revised via Amendment A0001.

b. Yes, and see SOW para 4.2 and 6.2.2 revised via Amendment A0001.

Q30 SOW 6.2.1- Will TSA LI be performed at a single location (of those listed) for the life of the contract? Or is the Contractor expected to deliver course offerings at each of the listed locations?

A30 The Contractor is expected to be prepared to deliver course offerings at any of the listed locations. Revised SOW para 6.2 to clarify via Amendment A0001.

Q31 Paragraph 6.2.2- What is the anticipated ratio of virtual training to in-person training? Are any cohorts anticipated to be offered solely in the virtual environment? Will any cohorts be offered in a hybrid virtual and in-person format (i.e., live feed to participants not in attendance at in-person location)?

A31 See revised SOW para 6.2 to clarify via Amendment A0001.

Q32 Reserved.

Questions and Answers

Q33 SOW 2.2.1- For instances where cohorts are blended with Supervisors and Managers, is the intent for participants to attend the next course in the curriculum (i.e., GS 12-13s attending and receiving credit for the School of Advanced Leadership Studies with a GS-14 target audience).

A33 Not necessarily. This would depend on the career progression of the participant.

Q34 SOW 3.1.2.1- Can you provide an expanded definition of “intact work team activities”?

A34 The curriculum designed and implemented by the contractor will include activities that relate to the participants’ work teams they supervise or manage.

Q35 Reserved.

Q36 SOW 3.1.1.3- TSA is “an intelligence-driven operation.” How much of the leadership programs should focus on other-than-leadership development topics like emerging technologies and data-driven decision-making?

A36 TSA will provide Course Outcomes, Learning Objectives, and knowledge, skills, and behaviors alignment upon contract award for each school.

Q37 Will TSA provide any or some of the elements of the gathered feedback as described in the Background paragraph of the SOW as part of the final RFP package? For example, the document describes, “Feedback was gathered from all levels of TSA’s workforce and from external surface and aviation industry stakeholders via facilitated working sessions, the TSA Idea Factory, and a survey to field leadership.”

A37 TSA will provide relevant background information upon contract award, however, not during the RFP process.

Q38 a. What is the anticipated size of each of the two cohort pilots?

b. Please verify that each cohort will be comprised of up to 30 participants from whichever segment of the target audience is appropriate for that particular pilot (i.e., 30 supervisors or 30 managers or 30 executives).

c. Verify that the cohorts for each of the subsequent four schools are blended by function (supervisors and managers) but not by grade (GS-12/13 blended with GS-14 and/or GS-15).

A38 a. Pilot cohorts will be approximately 30 each.

b. Pilot cohorts will be comprised of participants from whichever segment of the target audience is appropriate for that particular pilot.

c. Cohorts will be blended by function (e.g. school of study) and to clarify, RFP Attachment 2-5 and 10 are revised via Amendment A0001 to delineate the school of study in each spreadsheet tab where “Employee Pay Band” is stated and “K & L band” are now combined.

Q39 Reserved.

Questions and Answers

Q40 SOW 3.1-Blended delivery-Please verify TSA intent. We interpret this to mean that all cohort members will attend in-person for in-person delivery elements and virtually for virtual elements. There is NOT an expectation to virtually accommodate participants not able to attend scheduled in-person elements.

A40 This statement is correct. SOW para 3.1 has been revised to clarify via Amendment A0001.

Q41 SOW 3.1.4 Does TSA intend that the winning vendor provide both peer coaching and group coaching in this solicitation

A41 Yes, and to clarify see revised SOW para 3.1.4 via Amendment A0001.

Q42 SOW 4.1 Number of Programs: How far in advance will TSA provide the number and dates of expected delivery of each program for each year? Is there any expectation for concurrent delivery of multiple types of the four programs?

A42 See Answer 30 and SOW para 4.1 is revised to clarify via Amendment A0001.

Q43 SOW Paragraph 3.3.1 states: To ensure the Contractor has the infrastructure and on-board bench strength to adapt quickly to the changing needs of TSA and the participants the Contractor shall be an IHE.

This requirement limits competition, excluding companies that provide similar training capabilities to other Federal Agencies. Will the Government eliminate this requirement and allow offerors to demonstrate their bench strength through the Phase I experience and Phase II submittal? Recommend a change in the paragraph language to read:

“To ensure the Contractor has the infrastructure and on-board bench strength to adapt quickly to the changing needs of TSA and the participants it is desired that the Contractor is IHE or partners with an IHE.”

A43 To promote competition, the statement of work was revised to de-scope work that can be performed by entities that are non-IHE. See RFI # 70T01022I7670N003, and continued updates at SAM.gov, for the scope of work available to non-IHE entities that will be solicited for competition in the near future. For the instant TSA Leadership Institute RFP 70T01023R7670N018, the requirement for an IHE remains unchanged.

Questions and Answers

Q44 SOW Paragraph 2.3 states: Provide all staff for program instruction. Contractor shall be an Institute of Higher Education (IHE). The IHE must be accredited by an accrediting organization recognized by the United States Department of Education or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation. An IHE is defined as an institution or organization that offers post-high school level of education, such as college-level courses, which include career and technical colleges that award academic degrees or professional certifications. Staff shall have experience teaching at the bachelor level for the Supervisor and graduate level for the Manager and Executive.

This requirement limits competition, excluding companies that provide similar training capabilities to other Federal Agencies, without Department of Education accreditation.

Additionally, neither the Department of Education or the Council for Higher Education Accreditation leverage tools such as the Kirkpatrick Evaluations to evaluate and improve existing content. Will the Government consider eliminating this requirement and allow offerors to demonstrate the quality of delivered curricula through the Phase I experience and Phase II submittal? Recommend a change in the paragraph language to read:

“Provide all staff for program instruction. Staff shall have experience teaching at the bachelor level for the Supervisor and graduate level for the Manager and Executive.”

A44 See answer A43 above.

Q45

In several places within the documents, TSA lays out the requirements for having an Institute of Higher Education (IHE). Specifically, under Factor 1-Demonstrated Prior Experience section B, it lists IHE Accreditation as a requirement by the “Offeror.” We have a long standing relationship with a IHE accredited University we were planning on partnering with to meet TSA requirements. Does a partnership that includes an accredited IHE meet TSA requirements for this, since the IHE will be a key part of the “Offeror”?

A45 The prime contractor is required to be an IHE as required by SOW para 2.3. The Government only has privity of contract with the prime contractor, not subcontractors.

Q46 On the SF1449 it does not detail if this is a set-aside of any kind. Is this a full and open category or is there a set-aside? If there is a small business requirement, can the set-aside be met with a teaming or subcontractor plan? Please clarify NAICS and any set-aside requirements.

A46 The SF 1449 has been revised in Amendment A0001 to check the box in block 10 to state this acquisition is unrestricted (i.e. full and open competition).

Q47

[Attachment 6, page 4] Regarding the IHE Confirmation, will TSA consider a company that is accredited with IACET (International Association for Continuing Education and Training) to provide Continuing Education Units and/or a registered education provider of PMI (Project Management Institute) for Professional Development Education units in lieu of IHE accreditation?

Questions and Answers

A47 The requirement for IHE is defined at Attachment 1 Statement of Work para 2.3. Offers that do not meet the requirements of the solicitation will not be evaluated.

Q48 Is there an incumbent contractor?

A48 Yes, the incumbent contractor is American University.

Q49 Is this a new requirement?

A49 This is not a new requirement.

Q50 If this is a re-compete of an existing contract, please provide the existing contract number.

A50 The Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) with American University is # HSTS01-16-A-

TWE018.

(End of Amendment A0001)