OFFERORS_QUESTIONS_SUBMITTED_IN_RESPONSE_TO_EEAA_SOLICITATIONfinalAnswers(002)MW.pdf

OFFERORS QUESTIONS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO EEAA SOLICITATION – 75A50119R00047

1. On page 14, requirements 8 and 9 say the same thing. Please clarify. It is a duplicate, therefore requirement #8 is hereby deleted in its entirety.

2. Are the incumbent firms eligible for re-compete on this contract? Yes

3. What is the labor category description for a senior exercise facilitator? Senior Exercise Facilitator is listed as Key Personnel but this position is not listed in Attachment 9, Labor Category Descriptions. Exercise facilitator is the same as senior facilitator so use the senior facilitator labor description in attachment #5.

4. Can experience substitute for educational requirements for any of the key personnel? Yes, this is possible. If the experience is relevant and aligns closely with the requirements, the Government may take it under consideration. For Lead positions 5 years of experience, specific to the task would likely equate to a Bachelor’s Degree. For Support positions 2-3 years’ experience would likely equate to a Bachelor’s Degree.

5. Pg. 25-26 ARTICLE C.27. Key Personnel indicates the contractor should propose key Personnel, yet Pg 49 H.19. Key Personnel indicates all of the LCATS are key Personnel. Can the government please clarify? The Government included a wide range of labor categories of key personnel to ensure that offerors could best match their staff to our needs.

Not all labor categories will be key for each individual task order. Therefore and again each offeror should propose what they think or feel are key personnel for this requirement.

6. The RFP requires contractors to cross-walk LCATS within the RFP with their own LCATS but there doesn’t appear to be any LCAT descriptions within the RFP. Can the government provide those descriptions? Table was provided in the solicitation.

7. Will Small Business participation be required at the overall contract level or at the task order level? Small Business participation is at the task order level as subs to the prime contractor.

8. In the rate structures within the Business proposal, do Offerors need to show the build up to the ceiling rates? Or only hourly rate and bill rate? The Government is comfortable with showing hourly rate and bill rates.

9. The proposal submissions are currently due on Labor Day; will the Government consider extending the submission deadline to Sept. 6? We are comfortable going until 9/4/2019.

10. Is it likely that the due date be extended to 9/9/19? No, however, it will be extended to 9/4/2019.

11. Is there a required physical presence for the vendor to be in a specific location for the duration of this project? Not on site at HHS, but available for short notice, for in person meetings with senior leaders. Depends on the specific task. In some cases we have required contract staff to be on site to support long term tasks or be required to travel during a response/exercise to capture data.

12. What determines which tasks will be firm fixed fee and which ones will be reimbursable?

E2A2 funding is typically incremental which drives us to an IDIQ over a firm fixed price. Thus the contract is designed as an IDIQ, under rare exceptions we may use a Firm Fixed Price task. The resultant contract will be a hybrid between time and materials and firm fixed price.

13. On page 10, Section C.1.0 (Objectives), the Government states that this procurement will result in a multiple award IDIQ contract. However, on page 81 Section M.1, the Government states that they intend to award a single contract with the award made to the Offeror representing the best value. Can the Government please clarify the number of awards it intends to make for this procurement? The government intends to award a single contract to each of the two selected contractors.

14. On the first page, Section A.3, the Government says that the total value of the procurement will be under $25m across all five potential years of the period of performance. Given the relatively low value of $5m per year, is there a reason why the Government decided not to make this a set-aside, either as Small Business or some other socio-economic category? Research in accordance with the Government conducted RFI indicated that small business could not support the task.

15. On page 5, article B.12.1, there are line items for estimated materials and travel, as not-to-exceed numbers. The Government then mentions that “dollar amounts shown for travel are based on a pre-contract Government estimate. Travel requirements will be set forth in individual Task Orders.”, yet all of the cells within the pricing table are blank. Can the Government provide what NTE numbers they want the offeror to submit? No, but TBD.

16. Page 9, section C.1.0, the Government states “these requirements are fluid, dynamic and can vary by task order. The requirements can develop with little warning and in unexpected volumes.” Because of this fluidity of requirement, should the Offerors assume that it would be impossible to estimate hours in the tables on B.12.1, and therefore create an estimated total cost by labor category? Based on the Offerors experience and judgement, the Government expects an informed estimate.

17. Article C.17, the Government states “Key supervisory and technical support personnel must be supported by resume for each task here aforementioned.” Is it the Government’s intent to see Key Personnel resumes for all four task areas at the time of initial submission of our proposal, and not at a later date in response to an IDIQ task order? (it appears in H.2, page 42 that 3 resumes of key personnel will be required at each IDIQ RTOP) Yes, it is the government’s intent to see key personnel resumes for all tasks at the time of submission. The Government may request resumes for each task order going forward in the contract.

18. Article C.18, page 20, historically, how many contractor personnel are located at the ASPR/EEAA offices? Typically none. However, for long term projects we have required on-site staff for the duration of the project.

19. Article H.19 page 50, ‘Key Personnel’ lists most of the labor categories referenced in Article B.12 yet there are some discrepancies; For example, there is a project/program manager listed in the Key Personnel list yet no similar labor category exists in B.12. Additionally, there is a Senior Exercise Facilitator and Senior Facilitator listed in H.19 under Key Personnel, but the corresponding labor categories in B.12 are Senior Exercise Planner and Senior Facilitator. Can the Government provide guidance as to which labor categories the offeror should price, and clarity around which labor categories (if any) are key personnel at the time of IDIQ proposal submission (as opposed to at the RTOP stage). Use Senior Exercise Planner, Senior Facilitator and

Program Manager which should be key personnel.

20. L.2.3, Section 5 (Past Performance) – Regarding the Government’s requirement for three CPARS reports (0or using the Past Performance Questionnaire as a proxy), can any of those Past Performances references be from a Subcontractor or teammate? If so, what is the minimum number of Past performance references required of the

Prime contractor? The Government prefer that the three Past Performance

References come from the Prime. However, the Subcontractor Past Performance

Reference is acceptable.

21. In light of the number of questions that the Government is likely to receive, would the Government consider a three week extension of the due date for proposals? No, but the Government will the due date to 9/4/19.

22. Article B.12: The tables in Section B.12 do not include the NTE amounts for Estimated Materials and Estimated Travel. Can the Government please update these tables to include those amounts? No, the government will not know the specifics until the tasks are awarded and work begins.

23. Article B.12: While the PWS specifies the type of work to be conducted, it does not specify the quantities of work to be delivered (# of exercises, etc.), making it difficult to accurately estimate hours by labor category for the tables in Section B.12. Can the Government provide estimated hours by labor category to ensure that price evaluation is consistent across all offerors? Historically, HHS has conducted up to 6 exercises per year in various locations across the country so staff will need to travel periodically under cost reimbursable basis. On average travel outside the Washington DC area will be limited to approximately 2 contractors for planning meetings and up to 5 for exercise conduct.

24. Article C.1.9. Task 4: CAP Tool Management: The solicitation states “Tools shall be developed and maintained for tracking and monitoring corrective action programs.

The contractor shall develop processes/tools in accordance with government guidance to support enhanced data quality and data management. Current tool is built in dot.net and the operating system is windows server 2012R2 and the database server is SQL Server 2012. The contractor shall also maintain both web-based database and in person tools for tracking and monitoring the corrective action program. Contractor shall update the system when needed and create new applications when requested based on the needs of HHS.”

a) Does this mean “managing an existing system and implementing minor enhancements” to that system? and/or Yes

b) Does this mean creating brand new applications under an approved Systems

Development LifeCycle (SDLC)? The Government will continue with the current system, but the Government is open to new ideas. However for the purpose of this IDIQ, please speak to the described task.

c) Will HHS prescribe a systems development lifecycle or expect the contract to bring their own? The Government will provide a timeline but is also open to the contractor’s recommendations.

25. Article C.10.3: The solicitation notes a minimum of 5 years of experience for Task 2, 3, and 4. Is this limitation just for the lead(s) for these Tasks? Yes

26. Article E.5: The solicitation requires contractors to develop a Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan (QASP) but the QASP is not mentioned in the evaluation factors.

Can the Government confirm that offerors are to include a QASP and clarify if/how it will be evaluated? It is required but it is not an evaluation factor.

27. Article F.9.a: Under the Task Order Management Plan section, an “onsite Project Manager” is referenced. Is it the government’s intention that offerors propose a full-time, on-site Project Manager to serve as the primary daily contact? Are any other positions anticipated to be full-time, on-site? If so, can the government provide a number of available work spaces? No, the contractor does not need to propose an onsite project manager, however a project manager must be available to discuss project related topics on an as needed basis. Again, as mentioned earlier, depending on the task there may be a requirement for a position or two to be full-time on-site support.

28. Article H.19: Does the Government expect offerors to identify at least one key personnel for each labor category? Or do offerors have the flexibility to offer key personnel for only certain labor categories? Offerors should identify key and supporting personnel.

29. Article H.19: The Key Personnel table provided shows a Project/Program Manager, but this position is not listed in Attachment 5 – Labor Category Descriptions or the pricing template provided in section B.12. Should offerors be identifying and mapping one of the functional labor categories provided in Attachment 5 to the Project/Program Manager role? If not, can the government provide the labor category description and required qualifications for the Project/Program Manager?

Use the labor categories in the revised Labor Description Table, Attachment 5.

30. Article L.1.1.3: Will the Government be able to provide timely confirmation of receipt of proposals on the proposal due date (9/2/19) given that it is a Federal holiday? The Government is extending the due date to 9/4/2019.

31. Article L.1.1.3: Is the 10 MB size requirement for the proposal submission email per file or all files combined? The answer is per email.

32. Article L.2.1: Will the Government accept hand-delivered proposals in hard copy on the proposal due date (9/2/19) given that it is a Federal holiday? Due date is extended to 9/4/2019 and the Government will accept hand-delivered proposals.

33. Article L.2.1: Are electronic signatures acceptable for all required signatures in the proposal? Yes

34. Article L.2.2: Are key personnel resumes excluded from the Volume 2-page count?

Yes

35. Article L.2.2.G: Will the successful contractor be required to submit an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Avoidance Plan if no potential for OCI has been identified by the contractor based on the required preliminary analysis?” No, only if there is a potential conflict of interest.

36. Article L.2.3: Are offerors expected to have Past Performance Surveys completed for projects that have a CPARS report, or does the CPARS report replace the need to have a Past Performance Survey completed? The past performance survey is required. The Government can obtain the CPARS report if the contractor cannot provide it.

37. Article L.2.3: Is the Technical Volume limited to 50 pages total or 75 pages total (25 pages + 50 pages of appendices)? 50 pages excluding the appendices.

38. Article L.2.3: Since past performance surveys do not count toward the Technical Volume page limit (because they are submitted by references to the Government directly), can the Government exempt CPARS reports from the Technical Volume page limit as well? Yes

39. Article L.2.3: The business proposal instructions note that “Offerors should assume that all positions are full-time.” Can the Government clarify/explain what is meant by this statement? The government expects the awardee to maintain a full time staff in support of this contract. Offerors should expect that once the task is awarded, they ensure that they make the awarded task a priority and not spread their team thin on other contracts that may take away from the current task.

40. Article L.2.4: The instructions state that offerors are to assume that all positions are full-time. Is it the government’s intention that offerors propose all labor categories as full-time equivalents (1920 hours) or is the reference intended to describe the type of indirect costs to be applied to the direct labor rates in preparing the fully burdened rates (full-time employees rather than part-time employees)? Please refer to answer for question #39.

41. Article L.2.4: The instructions state that both on-site and off-site labor rates should be proposed for all positions. What rates should be used to establish the offeror’s overall price based on the template in section B.12? Can further clarification be provided around the expectations for on-site vs. off-site support on this contract?

Use off-site labor rates.

42. Article L.2.4: In section 2, the instructions state that “labor categories should support each offerors’ proposed approach as described in the Technical Proposal in the format described in Section B”. Are offerors expected to provide an estimated number of hours for each labor category across all tasks in the PWS? Without further clarification and specific requirements, it is not possible to accurately estimate level of effort based on the IDIQ requirements as currently described. No, the Government requires the contractor to make their best estimate in terms of fulfilling the requirement satisfactorily on the four requirement tasks in Secton C.

The offeror can chose which key personnel the offeror deems to be relevant for the specific task.

43. Article L.2.4: In section 2, the instructions state that “hourly rates proposed for each labor category shall be listed as unburdened with a cross walk chart to show the total fully built up rates, listing out any indirect or overhead rates applicable for all positions.” Are offerors required to provide a complete buildup for all labor rates to include individual indirect cost elements or are offerors expected to simply provide the unburdened direct labor rates used as the basis for the proposed fully burdened labor rates? Use burdened and unburdened labor rates.

44. Article M.1: This section indicates an anticipated single award while previous references indicate two awards. Can the Government clarify which is correct? As stated in section M.1 the Government intends to award a single contract to two contractors (from this solicitation).

45. Article M.2: The government states “The proposal must document the Offeror’s technical and administrative approach (detailed in SECTION C.5) to achieve at least an Acceptable Quality Level.” There is no Section C.5 – will the government please provide this section? Change SECTION C.5 to read SECTION C. Due to miss numbering there is currently no SECTION C.5. Therefore, Section C has been renumbered correctly as provided in the attached revised solicitation document.

46. Article M.2: As part of the basis for award, the evaluation criteria mention that “technical activities must connect directly to costs in the business proposal which is required.” Without more specific requirements, it is not possible to accurately estimate a number of hours to be priced in the business proposal. Would the government consider removing this requirement from the evaluation criteria, considering the IDIQ nature of this contract? No, the Government will not consider removing this requirement.

47. Article M.3.1: Regarding Element C: Staffing Plan, it is written that “the proposal shall demonstrate how the offeror’s staffing plan supports their technical approach by providing labor categories, experience and skill level of proposed personnel, labor hours and a crosswalk to the SOW requirements”. While all other elements of the staffing plan are understood, the requirement to estimate labor hours cannot be done accurately given the task requirements as currently described. Would the government consider removing the labor hour requirement from the staffing plan evaluation criteria, considering the IDIQ nature of this contract? If the government keeps the estimate labor hour requirement in the Staffing Plan, will the hours be an illustrative example of the type of work the vendor can provide and not linked with the estimated hours in the business volume? Can the staffing plan be excluded from the page limitation? Contractor shall submit their proposals with estimated labor hours for required positions to complete the task. The staffing plan can be excluded from the page limitation.

48. Article M.3.4: The cost/price evaluation criteria states that “the government will evaluate the price of labor, number of employees, number of hours per labor category and any other incidental costs proposed by the offeror for propriety and reasonableness for performing all requirements outlined in the SOW. Cost reasonableness pertains to the offeror’s ability to project costs/prices which are reasonable for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the technical requirements, indicate the offeror’s understanding of the nature and the scope of the work to be performed, and are consistent with any unique methods of performance described in the offeror’s technical proposal.” With open-ended requirements that contain language such as “including, but not limited to…” and

“the contractor may be asked to…”, how is the reasonableness of an offeror’s proposed hours per labor category going to be assessed? Considering the IDIQ nature of this contract, would the government be willing to provide their own estimate of hours, or remove the requirement to estimate hours altogether? The Government requires the contractor to make their best estimations in terms of fulfilling the requirement satisfactorily.

49. Article M.3.1: The evaluation factor language appears to reference an unrelated solicitation—there are references to biotechnology/biopharmaceutical R&D as well as technical elements/requirements not mentioned elsewhere in the solicitation.

Can the Government please update this language to reflect the evaluation priorities for the SOW included in this solicitation? Not in our contract. Change the references to biotechnology/biopharmaceutical R&D found in ARTICLE M.3.1 to read: The Offeror should specify their approach for successfully accomplishing the tasks as described in the SOW. Provide evidence of effective understanding of relevant areas of retaining and recruiting advanced subject matter experts and project/program managers in Exercise, Training Development, Evaluation and After Action planned and real world events.

50. Article M.3.2: The evaluation factor language appears to reference an unrelated solicitation—there are references to R&D subject-matter expertise and other elements/requirements not referenced elsewhere in the solicitation. Can the Government please update this language to reflect the evaluation priorities for the SOW included in this solicitation. Not in our contract. Change the references to biotechnology/biopharmaceutical R&D found in ARTICLE M.3.2 to read: The Offeror must demonstrate the availability and the degree of commitment of its personnel with technical expertise in Exercise, Training Development, Evaluation and After Action planned and real world events.

51. Attachment 2: Can the Government provide an editable version of this attachment to facilitate offerors sharing it with past performance reference POCs? The answer is No.

52. Attachment No. 5: The labor category description for Subject Matter Expert IV includes the following requirement, “previously served as a Federal Senior Executive and had the requirement to develop and provide cabinet level briefings”. This seems to be an overly restrictive requirement that excludes highly qualified staff that meet all other criteria, including the development and provision of cabinet level briefings. Would the government consider removing the former Federal Senior Executive requirement from the description or be willing to accept similarly qualified personnel that meet all other criteria, including the development and provision of cabinet level briefings? No

53. Attachment 6: Attachment 6 appears to be duplicative of the SOW included in Section C of the solicitation. Can the Government clarify the purpose of Attachment 6 vis-à-vis Section C? Minnie will remove it? Removed in its entirety.

Q Questions for RFP_75A50119R00047 from CNA Corporation

In Section L.2.4, 4. Business Proposal, pg. 75, the RFP recommends the business proposal include: ‘…the information requested in the SOW associating cost with identified task…’. Could the Government please clarify this requirement? Since this is an IDIQ contract, costs by task cannot be determined until work plans are approved and task orders are issued. Previously answered.

In Section L.2.4, 4. Business Proposal, pg. 75, the RFP says the offeror should assume that all positions are full-time. Are the positions being referred to the labor categories listed in Section

B? Previously answered above.

In Section L.2.4, Section 2. Business Proposal, pg. 76, the RFP says the labor categories should support each Offerors’ proposed approach as described in the Technical Proposal in the format described in Section B. Is this referring to the tables shown on pages 5-9 (Article

B.12.1)? The answer is Yes.

In Article B.12.1 through B.12.4, pp. 5-9, How should the offeror estimate the hours to be included in the tables? The hours required would depend on the specific requirements of each task order (e.g., number of exercises, duration of exercises). Could the Government provide estimated hours for evaluation purposes only? Previously answered.

In Section B, pg. 9 the Government includes Notes B and C that indicate estimated dollar amounts for travel and materials/other direct costs should be included in the tables. Could the Government please provide those NTE estimated dollar amounts for each contract year?

No.

In Article E.5, Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (pg. 29), the Government requires contractors to submit a proposed QASP as an appendix to the technical proposal. Could the

Government please clarify the specifics of this requirement? As most of the deliverables and specific requirements for work under the IDIQ, along with associated performance requirements, will be defined at the Task Order level, what specific performance criteria should be included in the proposed QASP? Are the criteria defined under Article C.26 on pages 21 through 25 of the RFP sufficient to include in the proposed QASP at this stage? Also, does HHS have a specific QASP template it prefers to use? This is up to the offerors discretion.

The Labor Category lists in Article B.12 contain a Modeling/Simulation Specialist Level III and a

Modeling/Simulation Specialist Level II, but no Modeling/Simulation Specialist Level I. Should there be a Level I Modeling/Simulation Specialist? No.

Section L.2.1 Delivery of Proposal states the proposal is due on September 2, 2019, which is a

Federal holiday (Labor Day). Because Federal offices are closed that day, is the Government amenable to moving the due date to September 3, 2019? Previously answered.

Will the Government allow offerors to propose additional labor categories in support of their solutions across PWS requirements that would offer additional value to the Government? Yes.