PRLRS MA-IDIQ QandA 20 Sept 23.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 44 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Post Release Legal Services
- Solicitation number
- 75ACF23R00004
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a draft solicitation for Post Release Legal and Related Services. The solicitation will result in an indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity contract to provide legal representation and related support services to released unaccompanied children. Key details include that the contract will have a one-year base period and five one-year options, with a total value of $904 million. Offerors will be required to submit pricing on labor categories for providing legal services in increments of 1000, 5000, 8000, and 12,000 cases. The questions and answers provide clarification on aspects of the solicitation such as period of performance, labor categories, past performance submissions, and technical approach requirements.
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
PRLRS MA-IDIQ
Attachment 7: PRLRS MA-IDIQ Questions and Answers Template
| Q-ID | Document / Reference | Section | Page | Question | Answer |
| Q-001 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | A, item 8 | 1 of 95 | Item 8 indicates that the government will accept only one proposal from each offeror. However, sections L.3 and L.6(e) indicate that multiple offers are encouraged presenting alternatives. Can the government clarify if offerors can submit multiple offers? | Confirmed. Section A, item 8 has been removed from the RFP. |
| Q-002 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(8) | 80 of 95 | Section L.7(8) states that offerors are to include teaming/partnership agreements in the front of the Technical proposal, as well as a letter of commitment that identifies the relationship, role and responsibility of the team member. If this information is called out in the teaming/partnership agreement, do offers still have to submit letters of commitment? | Yes. |
| Q-003 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(9) | 80 of 95 | Section L.7(9) indicates that the font size for text shall be not less than 11 point Times New Roman. May offerors use a 9 point Times New Roman font for tables, graphics, charts, and text boxes, page headers footers, and disclosure statements? | Yes. Section L.7 (9) has been updated to include the following: Offerors may use a 9 point Times New Roman or Arial font for tables, graphics, charts, and text boxes, page headers footers, and disclosure statements. |
| Q-004 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(9) | 80 of 95 | Section L.7(9) states that offerors should not submit any PDF documents that are not copied as images. Does the requirement also apply to scanned images with signatures for teaming agreements, letters of commitment, SF-1449, transmittal letters, and any amendments? | Yes. |
| Q-005 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(9) | 80 of 95 | Section L.7(9) indicates that the email size limitation is approximately 10 megabytes for emails. Is it acceptable to submit multiple emails (i.e., 1 of 3, 2 of 3, 3 of 3) to ensure the email size limitations are not exceeded? Or may offerors submit a single .zip file? | It is acceptable to submit multiple e-mail to ensure the email size limitations are not exceeded. |
| Q-006 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 81 of 95 | Section L.7(10) indicates that volume IV is Contract Documentation and no volume V; however, on page 85, volume IV is labeled as the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and volume V is labeled as Contract Documentation. Please clarify the correct labels for volumes IV and V. | The correct labels for volumes IV and V are Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Contract Documentation respectively. Section L.7(10) has been updated accordingly. |
| Q-007 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 81 of 95 | Section L.7(10) indicates that documentation for the Technical Experience Project is not included in the page count. Is a completed Attachment 3 included in the page count with all of its instructions? Or just the supporting documentation excluded? Can offerors alter Attachment 3 so that it does not have all the instructions? | Page count for Vol I Techincal Subfactors 1-3 has been increased from 30 pages to 35 pages to account for instructions. |
| Q-008 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 82 of 95 | Under Technical Subfactor 3 - Program Management and Staffing Approach, can the government clarify the difference between the first sentence of the first bullet and the entire second bullet? | |
| Technical Subfactor 3 - Program Management and Staffing Approach has been revised to read as follows: The Offeror shall demonstrate their program management and staffing approach to provide the Government with a reasonable assurance that the Offeror has the appropriate management approach to staffing required to meet potential MA-IDIQ requirements post-award. This narrative shall demonstrate the following: |
• Offeror’s ability to manage and balance technical performance, time constraints, cost factors and the management of subcontractor personnel, whilst insuring taskings regarding providing legal services are accomplished in a logical sequence in the best interests of the UC, including how resources will be allocated and reasonableness of hours.
| • | Offeror’s ability to detail all tasks that will be subcontracted and how subcontracted work will be monitored. Note: Lines of communication between the contractor, the Administration of Children & Families, and subcontractors are to be carefully considered in the project organization. | |||||
| Q-009 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 82 of 95 | Under Technical Subfactor 3, Program Management and Staffing Approach, the phrase "to manage and balance technical performance, time constraints, cost factors and the management of subcontractor personnel" appears 3 times in the first two bullets. It appears there was a "copy and paste" error with the first two bullets. Can the government please clarify what the offeror should demonstrate in response to these first two bullets? | Technical Subfactor 3 - Program Management and Staffing Approach has been revised to read as follows: The Offeror shall demonstrate their program management and staffing approach to provide the Government with a reasonable assurance that the Offeror has the appropriate management approach to staffing required to meet potential MA-IDIQ requirements post-award. This narrative shall demonstrate the following: |
• Offeror’s ability to manage and balance technical performance, time constraints, cost factors and the management of subcontractor personnel, whilst insuring taskings regarding providing legal services are accomplished in a logical sequence in the best interests of the UC, including how resources will be allocated and reasonableness of hours.
| • | Offeror’s ability to detail all tasks that will be subcontracted and how subcontracted work will be monitored. Note: Lines of communication between the contractor, the Administration of Children & Families, and subcontractors are to be carefully considered in the project organization. | |||||
| Q-010 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 82 of 95 | Under Technical Subfactor 3, Program Management and Staffing Approach, the first bullet includes the phrase "whilst insuring taskings regarding providing legal services are accomplished in a logical sequence in the best interests of the UC." The third bullet includes the phrase "how management will assign and accomplish work in a logical sequence that will lead to successful performance." If these two phrases are not essentially duplicative (i.e., how the tasks/work will be assigned and accomplished in a logical sequence to ensure success), can the government please differentiate between the two phrases? | Technical Subfactor 3 - Program Management and Staffing Approach has been revised to read as follows: The Offeror shall demonstrate their program management and staffing approach to provide the Government with a reasonable assurance that the Offeror has the appropriate management approach to staffing required to meet potential MA-IDIQ requirements post-award. This narrative shall demonstrate the following: |
• Offeror’s ability to manage and balance technical performance, time constraints, cost factors and the management of subcontractor personnel, whilst insuring taskings regarding providing legal services are accomplished in a logical sequence in the best interests of the UC, including how resources will be allocated and reasonableness of hours.
| • | Offeror’s ability to detail all tasks that will be subcontracted and how subcontracted work will be monitored. Note: Lines of communication between the contractor, the Administration of Children & Families, and subcontractors are to be carefully considered in the project organization. | |||||
| Q-011 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 83 of 95 | Under Technical Subfactor 4 - Technical Approach for Executable Task Order 1, may offerors include the required key personnel resumes in an appendix since they are not included in the page count? | ||
| Yes | ||||||
| Q-012 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 83 of 95 | Technical Subfactor 4 - Technical Approach for Executable Task Order 1 requirement states, "Offerors shall provide the management and staffing plan with an organization chart for the execution of this Order’s PWS (Attachment 2) that adhere to their overarching management and staffing approach described in Technical Subfactor 3." Are offerors expected to provide a staffing plan for each of the five scenarios of cases? | ||
| No, the staffing plan should be comprehensive and flexible enough to ensure representation on each of the five scenarios provided. | ||||||
| Q-013 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 83 of 95 | Technical Subfactor 4 - Technical Approach for Executable Task Order 1 requirement states, "Offerors shall provide an achievable schedule with task, subtasks, and milestones to execute and meet all of the requirements of this Order’s PWS (RFP Attachment 2) from award to completion and closeout." In order to reflect an accurate schedule, is Task Order 1 for the base year only of the IDIQ or for the base year plus four option years as indicated in attachments 6a through 6e? | ||
| The period of performance of performance for task order 1 is five years. It is expected that multiple Request For Task Order Proposal (RFTOP) will be issued during the base ordering period. | ||||||
| Q-014 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 83 of 95 | Under Volume II - Factor 2 Past Performance, the requirements state, "Past Performance submitted shall cover the duration of the Technical Experience Project. The following sources shall be used for Past Performance in order of precedence: If an interim or final CPARS report is available, the Offeror must submit their interim or final CPARS report, this will be used as the basis for the past performance evaluation for that period of performance of the project." Please clarify if offerors should submit CPARS for all periods of performance to cover the duration of the Technical Experience Project or only the most recent CPAR. | ||
| Past Performance submitted shall cover the duration of the Technical Experience Project. Offerors shall submit CPARS for all periods of performance to cover the duration of the Technical Expereince Project. | ||||||
| Q-015 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 83 of 95 | Under Volume II - Factor 2 Past Performance, the requirements state, "If an interim or final PPIRS/CPARS report is not available, the Offeror must submit a Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 4). The questionnaire will be used as the basis for the past performance evaluation for that period of performance of the project." Should offerors submit a copy of the PPQ or just a list of the POCs who were sent the questionnaire? | ||
| The Offeror shall email to the Contracting Team a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. | ||||||
| Q-016 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | L.7(10) | 84 of 95 | Price Factor, Subfactor 1: Attachment 5 PRLRS MA – IDIQ Labor Rate Table, item number 3 states, "The price volume shall include the following logic to support the pricing volume..." Please provide the logic items referenced in the sentence. | ||
| Price Factor, Subfactor 1: Attachment 5 PRLRS MA – IDIQ Labor Rate Table, item number 3 has been revised to read as follows: 3) The price volume shall include narrative to support the pricing volume for both the prime’s proposal plus any subcontractor proposals. | ||||||
| Q-017 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | M.2.1.1 | 89 of 95 | The Confidence Ratings lists the ratings for evaluation factor 1. Can the government provide the definitions or criteria that must be met for each rating? | FAR 15.304(d) states: All factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be stated clearly in the solicitation ( 10 U.S.C. 3206(b)(1) and 41 U.S.C. 3306(b)(1)) (see 15.204-5(c)). The general approach for evaluating past performance information shall be described. The rating method need not be disclosed in the solicitation. | |
| Q-018 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | M.2.2 | 89 of 95 | M.2.2 lists the ratings for the Past Performance evaluation factor. Can the government provide the definitions or criteria that must be met for each rating? | FAR 15.304(d) states: All factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be stated clearly in the solicitation ( 10 U.S.C. 3206(b)(1) and 41 U.S.C. 3306(b)(1)) (see 15.204-5(c)). The general approach for evaluating past performance information shall be described. The rating method need not be disclosed in the solicitation. | |
| Q-019 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | M.2.2.1 | 89 of 95 | The Confidence Ratings lists the ratings for evaluation factor 2. Can the government provide the definitions or criteria that must be met for each rating? | FAR 15.304(d) states: All factors and significant subfactors that will affect contract award and their relative importance shall be stated clearly in the solicitation ( 10 U.S.C. 3206(b)(1) and 41 U.S.C. 3306(b)(1)) (see 15.204-5(c)). The general approach for evaluating past performance information shall be described. The rating method need not be disclosed in the solicitation. | |
| Q-020 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | M.2.3.2 | 91 of 95 | The Price Evaluation Factor M.2.3.2 Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for Executable Task Order 1 indicates that submission of a completed Attachment 6: Executable Task Order 1 Pricing Sheet. However, section L (page 84) does not indicate which number of UC cases will be evaluated in Attachment 6, only attachments 6a through 6e. Please clarify which of the UC case scenarios offerors will be evaluated on for the TEP. | Attachment 6e - Pricing for 4000 cases will be utilized to evaluate Total Evaluated Price (TEP) for task order award. Section M.2.3.2 has been updated. | |
| Q-021 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | M.6 | 93 of 95 | Item (b) states that "any offeror responding to this solicitation must comply with established HHS EIT accessibility standards." Additionally, (c) states "In order to facilitate the Government’s determination whether proposed EIT supplies meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, offerors must submit an HHS Section 508 Product Assessment Template, in accordance with its completion instructions." However, section H.7 on page 13 states, "Special conditions such as Section 508 Compliance, HSPD-12, Human Subjects, etc. will be addressed at the task order level when the requirement is defined." Please clarify whether offerors are required to submit an HHS 508 Product Assessment Template with our proposal; and if so, is it a separate attachment or as an appendix to the Technical proposal? | TBD. | |
| Q-022 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | 1.2 | 2 of 37 | In the description, the government states "This Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (MA-IDIQ) contract shall also provide legal services for other populations eligible for legal services funded by the ORR, if requested by the government." Can the government elaborate on what other populations (besides unaccompanied children) an awardee would be expected to serve under this contract? | Any population eligible for ACF services. | |
| Q-023 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 5.1.2 | 16 of 24 | Can the government provide an example of tasks that would be performed in a task order for the category of Studies, Analyses and Evaluation Services? | The government anticipates issuing additional task orders for needs assesment and other studies, analysis and evaluation pertaining to the legal services for unaccompanied children in the United States. | |
| Q-024 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 5.1.2 | 16 of 24 | Can the government explain the relationship between Studies, Analyses and Evaluation Services listed in Section 5.1.2 of the IDIQ PWS and the objectives listed in section 1.3 of the Executable Task Order 1 ? | There is no relationship between the two. | |
| Q-025 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3 | 2-3 of 24 | Does the government anticipate issuing additional task orders in the base year for the remaining objectives in the table that are listed as not applicable to Executable Task Order 1? Will there be separate contracts? | The Government anticipates issuing additional task orders in the base year for the remaning objectives that are listed as not applicable to Executable Task Order 1. Request For Task Order Proposals (RFTOPs) will be issued for these requirements to all vendors who receive a PRLRS IDIQ contract. | |
| Q-026 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3 | 2-3 of 24 | Are offerors expected to address the other objectives that are not applicable to Executable Task Order 1 in their IDIQ response? | No. | |
| Q-027 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3, Section 5.2 | 2-3 of 24 | How will the successful contractors receive referrals for the legal services required to be delivered in Executable Task Order 1? | It is preferrable that vendors establish a referral network to receive community-based referrals for legal representation for eligible UC. However, ORR will provide referral lists for eligible cases, as required. | |
| Q-028 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3, Section 5.2 | 2-3 of 24 | As not all Management, Operational, and Professional Support Services are addressed at the TO level, how will those services be evaluated in Executable Task Order 1? Additionally, how will infrastructure tasks (i.e., recruitment and training, outreach, the process for intake and vetting of legal services providers) that would be required at the IDIQ be evaluated at the national level? |
| The previous draft solicitation had infrastructure tasks, which are not included in Executable Task Order 1 and those infrastructural tasks have not yet been addressed in any task orders. Will the offeror's ability to deliver those services be evaluated in Executable Task Order 1? For example, providing legal services without the ability via a defined objective or task to recruit paid and pro bono as indicated in the previous DRFP. | Section L-7 technical subfactor 3 (Program Management and Staffing Approach) has been updated, and will be evaluated as part of the establishment of the IDIQ. However, these factors will not be evaluated as part of Task Order 1. However, if they are applicable to future task orders, they will be evaluated at that time. The government anticipates issuing a future task order focused on establishing a pro bono network. | |||
| Q-029 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Will additional task orders be issued in the base year? Executable Task Order 1 tasks focus on legal services and reporting. This appears out of synch with a needs assessment, recruitment, vetting, and training of legal services, and the outreach to ORR providers and UC related to service availability and intake. | Yes. ORR expects that work on direct representation Task Order should start upon award. Any needs asssessment and related task orders will inform future representation strategies. | |
| Q-030 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | If Executable Task Order 1 is the only task order in the base year, how will cases be assigned outside of an outreach and communication plan? | It is anticipated that multiple Request For Task Order Proposals (RFTOP) will be issued during the base year ordering period. The issuance of multiple RFTOPs will result in multiple task orders being issued during the base ordering period. | |
| Q-031 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | The scope of work for this IDIQ requires a firm with the financial capacity and demonstrated performance to responsibly manage provision of legal services across the entire nation to protect the rights of vulnerable unaccompanied minors. However the Technical Experience Project requirements do not consider a firm’s capacity to cover the entire statement of work (e.g., data collection and analysis; program management; training and education; studies, analyses, and evaluation services), potentially leading the government to rely only on firms who cannot cover the entire SOW for the BPA and therefore are unable to provide the necessary expertise and services to minimize the risk of nonperformance and resulting in potential detriment to vulnerable unaccompanied minors. |
| Therefore, will the government consider requiring 3 past performances of which only one, from either the prime or a subcontractor on the team, is submitted using the Technical Experience Project template (Attachment 3), and the other 2 past performances from the prime being more general to demonstrate experience which fulfills the scope of the BPA in its entirety and allows the government to evaluate an offeror’s total capacity to support a highly scrutinized, prominent program? | No, Attachment 3 - Technical Expereince Project Template has been revised. | |||||
| Q-032 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | 3-5 | Given that this award is for an IDIQ contract that includes qualifications for potentially additional tasks as listed on Attachment 2, page 3-5, and to assure the government has the most capable teams qualified across all tasks listed, will the government consider a subcontractor’s Technical Experience Project on the offeror’s team? | Yes, the Technical Expereince Project Template has been revised. | ||
| Q-033 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | Item 1 | 3 | Will the government accept a Technical Experience Project that is a collection of contracts that is demonstration of performance by the offeror’s entire team on a similar contract? | Yes, the Technical Expereince Project Template has been revised. | |
| Q-034 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | Period of Performance | 4 | With the government funding of legal services for Arriving Afghans awarded only in the last 9 months which includes a substantial performance across thousands of cases, and assuming this IDIQ contract will be awarded within the next 90 days, will the government consider amending the minimum period of performance requirement to 9-months? | Yes, the Technical Expereince Project Template has been revised. | |
| Q-035 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | Item 5 | 4 | Will the government confirm the requirement for “200 immigration cases per year” includes all services related to case review, case compliance, or case management services supporting immigrants and not just legal services? | No, the definition only covers legal services. | |
| Q-036 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 3 - Technical Experience Project Template | Item 5 | 4 | Will the government confirm that the annual project value should reference a quantity rather than a dollar value and that Item 6 should reference dollar value? Are the instructions for calculation of annual project value relevant to Item 6? | Confirmed. Yes, the instructions for calculation of annual project value are relevant to Item 6. | |
| Q-037 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 8 - Draft Questions and Answers | Q-005 | In response to a question about tracking case data in a case management system, the government responded that it is not proscribing a case management system. Does this mean that awardees can use their current systems and do not need to request an Authorization to Operate (ATO) a government-funded case management system? And no GFE/PIV needed either? | Yes, the government is not prescribing a case management system. | ||
| Q-038 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 8 - Draft Questions and Answers | Q-027 | In response to a question about whether task 4 can take place independently of task 2, the government responded that the contractor must represent the child in their immigration case. Does the government concur that the contractor is providing representation for both tasks even though different attorneys are handling different steps for the same cases? | Yes, the contractor should provide representatino for both tasks, even if different attorneys handle different steps of the same case. | ||
| Q-039 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 8 - Draft Questions and Answers | Q-032 | In response to a question about state licensing requirements, the government responded that attorneys should be licensed in the jurisdiction they are appearing in. Does the government concur that attorneys practicing immigration law are licensed to practice in that federal jurisdiction nationwide so long as they have a valid license to practice law in at least one jurisdiction of the U.S.? | Yes | ||
| Q-040 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Section 1.4.1.1 Quality Control Plan | 3, 33 | The solicitation states that the Contractor should submit to CO a Quality Control Plan within 30 days after contract award (Deliverable 9). Conflicting information (on page 33) indicates such plan is due 10 days after the contract award. Could the government specify the correct timeline for submission of the Quality Control Plan? | The Quality Control Plan shall be submitted within 30 days after contract award. The Deliverables Schedule has been updated accordingly. | |
| Q-041 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.13 Key Personnel | 7 | Given the potential economies of scale achievable by allowing the 4 identified key personnel to allocate time to other related projects, would the government consider modifying the current stipulations concerning key personnel dedication to allow for time allocation to other concurrent projects within the organization as long as the key personnel are full time staff at the organization? | Section 1.13 Key Personnel has been updated to remove the following sentence: "The following Key Personnel positions are full-time, regardless of the numbers of cases." | |
| Q-042 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.22 Ordering | 19 | Can the government confirm that the term "cases assigned to contractors" as stated in the PWS refers to funding allocation and not the actual assignment of individual clients? | Section 1.22 of Attachment 1 has been updated to clarify. It is preferrable that vendors establish a referral network to receive community-based referrals for legal representation for eligible UC. However, ORR will provide referral lists for eligible cases, as required. | |
| Q-043 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 5.3 Certification | 28 | This section notes, "For direct representation cases, attorneys representing unaccompanied children must be licensed to practice in the jurisdiction in which they are representing the child." Recognizing that different adjudicative bodies have their own rules and requirements regarding who may practice before them, as well as the government’s answer to question 32 in the Draft RFP Questions and Answers, would the government consider rephrasing this requirement to "For direct representation cases, attorneys representing unaccompanied children will meet all requirements to practice in front of any adjudicative body they appear in front of on behalf of their clients." |
The current wording implies that attorneys representing unaccompanied children must be barred in the state in which they are working. Because immigration court is federal, attorneys do not need to be barred locally to practice in it. Additionally, state courts have different practices and procedures regarding whether attorneys barred in other states may still appear before them. Imposing a requirement that all attorneys undertaking this work be barred in the state in which they are working may preclude some organizations from participating in this work, limit overall capacity, and add barriers to recruitment and retention of staff.
Yes, Section 5.3 Certification has been updated to read as follows: 5.3 Certifications
In addition to the job description requirements, the Government may require additional certification requirements. For direct representation cases, attorneys representing unaccompanied children will meet all requirements to practice in front of any adjudicative body they appear in front of on behalf of their clients. Representation before the Board of Immigration Appeals, the immigration court and/or Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may also be provided by accredited representatives, as defined by the Department of Justice.
| Q-044 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.4.1.1 Quality Control Plan | 4 | With regards to clause 1.4.1.1, could the government provide a more detailed delineation of what constitutes 'issues or potential issues'? The current phrasing appears quite broad and may encompass a wide range of situations, making the 2-hour notification window logistically unfeasible in certain circumstances. Further clarification would assist in ensuring compliance without compromising program delivery. | Reporting timeline hasAttachment 1 – Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ, section 1.4.1.1 has been updated to increase reporting timelines to 24 hours. Descriptions pertaining to what constitutes an issue or potential issues will clarified at the kickoff meeting for the associated task orders. been increased to 24 hours |
| Q-045 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.15.2 Non-Local Travel | 17 | Given that LSPs often need to undertake travels exceeding 100 miles to reach the nearest asylum office, USCIS office, or Immigration Court, and considering the limitations and potential compromise on the attorney-client relationship that may result from mandated remote appearances, would the government consider revising the existing rules concerning the approval of Travel Authorization Request (TAR) to provide more flexibility for in-person representations? Additionally, could the government address the potential breach of attorney-client privilege that might arise from the requirement to submit a detailed report of meeting/survey/briefing activities post-travel, as stipulated in the noted clause on Travel Authorization Request (TAR) (Deliverable #A.005)? | The Travel Authorization Request (TAR) requirement has been removed. Government anticipates reviewing and approving an annual travel plan for each vendor. |
| Q-046 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3 | 2 | Considering the intrinsic connection between Objective 5 (recruiting/training/retaining legal staff) and Objective 9 (Provide and/or facilitate learning and development trainings to immigration attorneys) and the provision of high-quality representation to children, would the government consider including these objectives in the Task Order PWS? | Government expects that the legal services staff funded under this task order should be trained and retained so as to provide high-quality legal representatino to children. |
| Q-047 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Task description breakdowns | n/a | In regards to the budget templates categorizing costs into three "tasks" - providing legal services (task 5.2.1), third-party audit (task 5.2.2), and providing reporting on the work (task 5.2.3)- the most suitable section to encompass program management work appears to be the reporting section (5.2.3), given its intrinsic connection to program management activities. These activities represent fixed costs, independent of the attorney service hours. Considering this, would the government consider allowing offerors to consolidate all program management costs under the reporting section (5.2.3), thereby facilitating a more streamlined and comprehensive budgeting approach that encompasses the core program management activities? | Offerors are not prohibited on their approach to provide services as articulated in the respective PWSs. |
| Q-048 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Subfactor 2: RFP Attachment 6 – Executable Task Order 01 Pricing Sheet | 84 | Can the government clarify if the ordering number allocations pertaining to Executable Task Order 1 pricing in Attachments 6a-6e will be exclusive to a single Offeror or potentially distributed among multiple Offerors? Could one offeror be awarded multiple "numbers" ex. 1000 cases and 5000 cases? Or will one offeror be awarded a single "number" of cases? | The ordering number allocations pertating to the first executable task orders will potentially distributed among multiple Offerors. |
| Q-049 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Subfactor 2: RFP Attachment 6 – Executable Task Order 01 Pricing Sheet | 84 | Are offerors required to bid on all items listed under Executable Task Order 1 in Attachments 6a-6e? | Yes |
| Q-050 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Other Direct Costs | n/a | Considering that Technical Assistance is a direct cost of legal services work, can the government confirm that Technical Assistance would be considered allowable under the Other Direct Costs sections in attachments 6 and 6a-6e. | Confirmed. |
| Q-051 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 5 - PRLRS MA-IDIQ Labor Rate Table | RFP Attachment 5 & 6 | n/a | The sample tasks in Attachment 6, 6a-6e require rates along with the cost build up (e.g. indirect, G&A, O/H etc.) whereas Attachment 5 does not appear to require cost build up for the rates. Could the government specify if cost buildup should be required for Attachment 5 to establish reasonableness, but then cost detail not be required in the pricing of task orders given it will have been approved at the IDIQ level? | Attachment 5 provides instruction for completion. Once RFTOPs are issued, if applicable, the Government may request additional information to substantiate pricing at the task order level. |
| Q-052 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Section 11 | 2 | Section 11 on page 2 of the RFP makes it clear that no assumptions or alternate terms, conditions, caveats etc. are allowed. When proposing and pricing a RFP Contractors don’t have all the answers to many questions when developing pricing and its technical approach. Pricing assumptions are common for contractors and help to balance the costs to the Government while mitigating unknown risks to itself. The clause in Section 11 will require contractors to price in any of these unknown risks thereby elevating the pricing to the government. Would the Government consider removing this restriction in Section 11? | Section A, bullet 11 has been removed from the RFP. |
| Q-053 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Task description breakdowns | n/a | In relation to the pricing documents and their structure by number of cases, could the government clarify the expectations regarding how pending cases should be accounted for in future task orders? Will future task orders be completely independent of earlier task orders, or will there be a cumulative maximum caseload for a single contractor? | Pending cases should not be accounted for in future task orders. Future task orders will be completely independent of earlier task orders. There is not an established cumulative maximum caseload for a single contractor. The only limitation is on the ceiling value of the MA-IDIQ contract which is $904,000,000.00. |
| Q-054 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Subfactor 2: RFP Attachment 6 – Executable Task Order 01 Pricing Sheet | 84 | Could the government confirm that Attachment 6 is designed to consolidate the pricing data presented in Attachments 6a-6e? | Attachment 6 has been deleted. Attachments 6a-6e remain. |
| Q-055 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 5 - PRLRS MA-IDIQ Labor Rate Table | Column A | n/a | Could the government clarify the meaning behind the “LCAT #” column in Attachment 5? | Labor Category Number. |
| Q-056 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 5 - PRLRS MA-IDIQ Labor Rate Table | Column C | n/a | In Attachment 5, could the government specify the expected details to be filled under Column C “Locale”, and if the locale of work for each task order will be known at the time of bidding? | Offerors shall develop their pricing based on a national model for providing legal services under the IDIQ contract. The locale of each case is not known at this time. |
| Q-057 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Applicable locales | n/a | Can the government provide information on the geographic locales applicable to each set of cases detailed in Attachments 6a-6e? | Offerors shall develop their pricing based on a national model for providing legal services under the IDIQ contract. |
| Q-058 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Section 5, Section F.1. | 2, 6 | Section 5 of page 2 of the RFP and Section F.1. of page 6 indicate a period of performance that consists of a base year and five (5) option years for a total of 5.5 years contract years going from 10/31/23 through 4/30/2029. However, in Section B.5 it only provides for 5 contract years to price. Also, Attachments 5 and 6 and 6a-6e only provide for 5 contract years to price. In view of the conflicting details regarding the contract years as mentioned in various sections and attachments of the RFP, could the government provide a clarification on the exact duration for pricing? | The ordering period for PRLRS MA-IDIQ is estimated as follows: |
Base Ordering Period: 10/31/2023 – 10/30/2024 estimate Optional Ordering Period 1: 10/31/2024 – 10/30/2025 estimate Optional Ordering Period 2: 10/31/2025 – 10/30/2026 estimate Optional Ordering Period 3: 10/31/2026 – 10/30/2027 estimate Optional Ordering Period 4: 10/31/2027 – 10/30/2028 estimate Optional Ordering Period 5: 10/31/2028 – 4/30/2029 estimate
If the 5th Optional Ordering Period is exercised, it is the intent of the Government to use the labor pricing from Optional Ordering Period 4 to price task orders issued during the 5th Optional Ordering Period. As it pertains to Attachment 6 (6a -6e), this spreadsheet is only utilized for the pricing of the first executable task orders under the MA-IDIQ contract and should be completed as directed.
| Q-059 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Applicable LCATS | n/a | Should the offerors propose labor categories pertaining to every objective listed in TO 1 or exclusively for the objectives selected by the government in TO 1? | Exclusively for the objectives selected by the Government. |
| Q-060 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 6a-6e | Ordering | n/a | Could the government confirm whether multiple Task Orders with differing objectives can be awarded to a single vendor? | Confirmed. |
| Q-061 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.8.5. Position Sensitivity Designations | 11 | Could the government specify if the personnel security requirements and public trust investigation stipulations mentioned in the referenced language apply broadly to the listed classes of individuals, and if exemptions might be considered? a. pro bono attorneys; |
b. attorneys who primarily handle information subject to privilege;
c. individuals processing referrals for representation;
d. individuals delivering legal orientation services in person;
e. individuals delivering legal orientation services remotely over call center lines;
f. paralegals and legal assistants;
g. DOJ accredited representatives;
h. social workers;
i. individuals managing data entry;
j. volunteers providing program services;
k. individuals primarily handling information for public consumption;
l. administrative staff; and
m. program management staff responsible for materials, trainings, and technical assistance.
n. Acacia employees who have access to low-level datasets and/or database systems
o. subcontractor and provider data contacts who have access to low-level datasets and/or database systems
| p. contractor and subcontractor employees that manage access to database systems | Vendors will need to supply position descriptions for staff hired under this contract. Position descriptions will be reviewed to determine suitability requirements. | |||||
| Q-062 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.8.6 Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD)-12 | 11 | Given the potential delays associated with the existing security clearance procedures, would the government consider implementing a grace period to facilitate smoother contract commencement? In light of the substantial time required for obtaining security clearances as mentioned in the referenced clauses, would the government consider introducing a grace period of 180 days for personnel to "apply" and "until cleared" to meet the clearance prerequisites? | Yes | |
| Q-063 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 5.2.1 | 14 | Considering the confidential nature of retainer documents, would the government consider revising the requirements mentioned in section 5.2.1 to either remove the necessity to maintain retainers or allow the maintenance of redacted versions? | The maintenance of redacted versions of the retainer is sufficient, so long as information is available to confirm the child's name and consent by the child and/or their legal guardian to representation and date of signature. | |
| Q-064 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 5.2.3 | 15 | Given the confidential nature of case disposition data, could the government revisit the non-anonymized data reporting requirement in section 5.2.3 to possibly allow for anonymized reporting, thereby preserving client confidentiality? | The government expects that the legal service provider will obtain consent from the child or their legal guardian before entering into representation to share the information required for the non-anonymized data reporting requirements. If the child is unable to consent or withdraws consent during the course of representation, the vendor should notify the COR and report accordingly. | |
| Q-065 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 5.2.3 | 15 | In regards to the directive in Section 5.2.3 on the sharing of anonymized information, could the government provide further guidance on the protocols to be followed when a child is unable to give informed consent or opts not to consent? | The government expects that the legal service provider will obtain consent from the child or their legal guardian before entering into representation to share the information required for the anonymized data reporting requirements. If the child is unable to consent or withdraws consent during the course of representation, the vendor should notify the COR and report accordingly. | |
| Q-066 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRS MA-IDIQ | Section 1.22 | 2 | Concerning the provisions outlined in section 1.2 pertaining to the establishment of increased capacity for legal representation post-release, could the government specify if organizations are permitted to initiate cases under this contract which were previously pending but lost or faced depletion of prior funds? | If the child is currently represented by immigration counsel, then they are not eligible for representation under this contract. | |
| Q-067 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004-Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Section 1.3 | 3 | Given that Task Order 1 omits Objective 6 concerning the coordination of pro bono representation and related services, could the government clarify if this implies a restriction on the utilization of pro bono resources to facilitate works commissioned under Task Order 1? | There is no restriction at using pro bono resources to facilitate work under Task Order 1. The government also anticiptes issuing a subsequent task order to manage and oversee a pro bono network. | |
| Q-068 | SOL-DOC 75ACF123R00004 | Section H.8.2 | 13 | Section H.8.2 stipulates the necessity for all Awardees to submit a Task Order Proposal (TOP) in response to every RFTOP issued under this MA-IDIQ contract and to confirm receipt via email. Could the government specify if acknowledging receipt of the RFTOPs via email is sufficient, or if a comprehensive proposal submission is mandatory for each RFTOP? | Section H.8.2 Ordering Procedures has been revised to remove the requirement to submit a Task Order Proposal to all RFTOPs. | |
| Q-069 | Attachment 1 - Overarching PWS PRLRA MA-IDIQ Contract | 5.1 Basic Services | 27 | The Basic Services listed under sections 5.1.1 and 5.2.2 are significantly shorter, more limited in scope, and less descriptive than previously released draft PWSs, including the June draft RFP which included 12 objectives and 12 specific tasks. That construct of PWS objectives and tasks appears to be carried over to Task Order 1 PWS but is missing from the PWS of the base contract. Please explain the difference and specifically, which of the previously released objectives and tasks are still in scope under this PWS. | The government will be issuing multiple task orders for all objectives and tasks specified in the overarching PWS for the IDIQ. | |
| Q-070 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | 5.2.1 | 14-15 | How will the Government assign cases to Contractors? Though the contract will be "national," will assignments be along regional lines, or another means? Understanding this is critical for Contractors to accurately develop program and pricing plans under the contract. | It is preferrable that vendors establish a referral network to receive community-based referrals for legal representation for eligible UC. However, ORR will provide referral lists for eligible cases, as required. | |
| Q-071 | Attachment 5 - PRLRS MA-IDIQ Labor Rate Table | All | All | The template in Attachment 5 provides for different pricing based on locale, in recognition that pricing may vary depending on the region/city. Does the Government have any pre-determined cities or regions that contractors should use when developing pricing by location? | No. | |
| Q-072 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | 1.3 Objectives | 2-3 | Does the Government intend to issue separate task orders for any or all of the unchecked objectives in the chart in Section 1.3? | Yes | |
| Q-073 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | 1.3 Objectives | 2-3 | The chart Section 1.3 of the PWS for Task Order 1 excludes Objective 6, "Oversee and coordinate qualified pro bono representation and related services for eligible, assigned unaccompanied children in their immigration proceedings." But, Section 5.2.3.1 of the same document instructs Contractors to indicate the source of all case referrals, including whether the referred case "was placed with an attorney [and] . . . whether the attorney was contract-funded [] or pro bono." |
Leveraging the private pro bono sector is a critical component of ensuring sufficient legal representation for released unaccompanied children.
• May Contractors place cases with private pro bono attorneys to represent UCs under this Task Order, or must Contractors and their subcontractors represent UCs directly using only in-house staff?
| • If Contractors may not use private pro bono attorneys to represent UCs under Task Order 1, will the Government issue a separate task order to allow for the use of private pro bono attorneys? | For this task order, there is no prohibition on using pro bono support for this task order, but the contractor will be obligated to ensure that representation is continued until the end of the case. The government will separately issue a task order for the management and oversight of a pro bono network. | ||||
| Q-074 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | 1.3 Objectives | 2-3 | The chart in Section 1.3 of the PWS for Task Order 1 excludes Objective 5, "Recruit, train, and retain legal services and support staff," and Objective 9, “Provide and/or facilitate learning and development trainings to immigration attorneys and other legal services staff on legal representation for unaccompanied children.” |
Building capacity through training and retaining and developing attorneys through legal technical assistance are critically necessary to increase and sustain the number of attorneys and legal representatives providing high quality, trauma-informed and child-centered legal services to released unaccompanied children.
• May Contractors train, recruit, and facilitating learning of attorneys and other legal services staff under Task Order 1?
| • If Contractors may not train, recruit, and facilitate learning of attorneys and other legal services staff under Task Order 1, will the Government issue a separate task order for these critical services? | No. RFTOPs will be issued during the ordering period to provide solutions for all objectives specified in Attachment 1. | ||
| Q-075 | Updated Draft Solicitation No. 75ACF123R00004; Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | Updated Draft Solicitation: Section I.10 52.222-42 Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires; | |
| Attachment 2: Section 1.2 Scope | Updated Draft Solicitation: p. 42; | ||
| Attachment 2: pp. 1-2 | The Government includes "Social Worker/Case Manager" as a "class[] of service employee[] expected to be employed under the contract." And, Attachment 2 - PWS for Task Order 1 instructs Contractors to "use developmentally appropriate and culturally responsive techniques and methods to assist unaccompanied children navigating the complex immigration system, to the extent practicable," which normally involves use of social workers and/or social services professionals. |
• Will the Government fund social work/case management under Task Order 1?
| • If not, will it issue a separate task order for social work/case management services? | No, the Government will not fund social work/case management under Task Order 1. It is not anticipated that separate task orders will be issued for social work/case management services. | |||||
| Q-076 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | All | All | Does ORR intend to make one or multiple awards under the first task order of this contract? | Multiple awards | |
| Q-077 | Attachment 2 - PWS for Executable Task Order 1 | 5.2.1 Provide Immigration Legal Services . . . . | 14-15 | Section instructs Contractors to "propose for each increment of cases as specified in attachments 6a - 6e." |
• Are the case increments proposed in this section specific to the Base Year, or over the life of the contract?
• What is the maximum number of cases one prime Contractor may be awarded in the Base Year under Task Order 1? The case increments proposed are specific to the first round of task orders to be awarded concurrently with…
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .