RDQ__75D301-19-Q-70337_Amendment_00002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

1 5

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

00002

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

06/28/2019

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 436 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE 436

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/OCOO OFR / Office of Acquisition Services - Branch 4 626 Cochrans Mill Road

Pittsburgh PA 15236-3611

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/OCOO OFR / Office of Acquisition Services - Branch 4 626 Cochrans Mill Road

Pittsburgh PA 15236-3611

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

All Potential Offerors

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

75D301-19-Q-70337

9B. DATED (See Item 11)

06/21/2019

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (See Item 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEGMENT

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 telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, 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)

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

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

The purpose of this amendment is to provide additional answers to questions submitted in response to the solicitation. The answers are contained on continuation pages attached to this Standard Form

30. The previously extended 03:00 PM Eastern time 07/05/19, due date of the solicitation, is not extended by this amendment further.

Responses remain due by 03:00 PM Eastern time 07/05/19. See continuation page for questions and answers.

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.

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

16A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY ___________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE 30-105 Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

ITEM 10A.

75D301-19-Q-70337 00002

Solicitation RFQ 75D301-19-Q-70337 – NPPTL Leadership Coaching and Development

Questions and Answers - Continued

14. The solicitation was posted on June 21 with a very tight June 28 response date.

Can the deadline be extended to July 8, in order to allow more qualified offerors to submit responsive proposals?

Amendment 00001 extended the due date to 03:00 PM Eastern time on 07/05/19.

Further extensions are not anticipated.

15. Is there an incumbent for this requirement? If so, please identify the incumbent and its contract number.

Austin and Associates Consulting LLC, Contract No 75D30118P02724

16. Task 3 - Coaching: Is the 150 coaching hours inclusive of both one-on-one coaching and group coaching, such that one hour coaching to small groups (3-5 individuals) or one hour coaching to large groups (e.g. 20 individuals) counts as a single hour against the 150 hour total coaching allocation?

Yes, this is correct.

17. Task 4 - Training Sessions: (a) please provide examples of likely training topics to be required by NPPTL; (b) please confirm that the three group training sessions for 15-25 individuals shall be no longer than 3 – 4 hours each; (c) please clarify whether the same 15-25 individuals will attend each of the three group training sessions as a single cohort, or will each group training session be comprised of individuals who take only a single session and not all three;

(d) please clarify whether the self-assessment instrument is to be administered for just one of the three training sessions or whether different assessment instruments should be administered for each of the three training sessions; (e)

Can 360 degree assessments be used as a self-assessment for the NPPTL leadership participants?

a) NPPTL is unable to provide “likely” topics as the topics will be selected in collaboration with the contractor (based on input being received from one-on-one and group coaching sessions) and from other members of the leadership team as they reflect on the various tasks within this contract. However, we can provide examples of previous topics, which include (1) reviewing a SWOT analysis and discussing the influencing factors and actions needed to address various issues, (2) revising existing performance planning instruments to capture the concept of “teamwork” in a measurable and consistent way across NPPTL, (3) communicating NPPTL Director priorities and vision to NPPTL leadership for discussion, understanding, and alignment, and

(4) understanding and leveraging different personality types based on the

DiSC assessment tool framework.

b) Group training sessions shall be no longer than 4 hours each.

c) The 15-25 individuals identified to attend the training sessions will be the same group and will represent a single cohort.

d) One assessment instrument will be administered and will, likely, be the subject of one of the training sessions. NPPTL expects only one assessment instrument to be proposed in support of this entire SOW.

e) The contractor is free to propose this assessment tool. However, please note that several members of NPPTL’s leadership have already used this assessment tool, so it may not be suited for all participants as it would not offer new insights to some.

18. Task 5 - Work Unit Assessments: (a) Can the contractor use a mix of one-on-one interviews and carefully facilitated, structured group discussions to develop these work unit assessments, or are one-on-one confidential, structured interviews the sole method by which information is gathered for these work unit assessments?; (b) if facilitated, structured group discussions are allowed, will the contractor be allowed the leeway to determine which work unit participants are included in particular group discussions, so that an appropriate mix of viewpoints are obtained?

a) The use of group discussions must be one that makes sense for the specific group in question. The option of including this approach is attractive;

however, may not be ideal in all cases. Therefore, if the contract wishes to propose this as approach, it is suggested that the option for confidential one-on-one interviews always be retained as an option.

b) If, on a case-by-case basis, structured group discussions are selected, the participants will be decided in collaboration with the contractor.

Contractor input will be considered, but the final decision will be at the

NPPTL Director’s discretion, or at the discretion of her delegate.

19. Task 6 – One Day Strategic Planning Meeting: (a) Will meeting venue rental costs be paid directly by the government outside of this contract, or should the contractor factor in rental costs in firm fixed price to the government for this contract? (b) If food and drink costs are not to be billed to the government, will the meeting participants be responsible on their own for obtaining all food and drinks they require during the one day strategic planning session?

a) The contractor should factor in the rental costs as part of the firm fixed price contract. The government will NOT be responsible for covering these rental costs.

b) For all tasks within this contract, the participants will be responsible for providing their own food and drink. Under the conditions set for in this

SOW, it is not legal for the government to pay for food or drink, not even through a contract.

20. ICF or Sherpa Certifications: (a) are ICF or Sherpa Certifications the only coaching certifications accepted, or are equivalent coaching certifications also acceptable – e.g. both Georgetown University and George Washington University

(among many others) award coaching certifications officially recognized and endorsed by the ICF; (b) there is a reference to “other relevant certifications”

– does this refer to just coaching certifications, or certifications in other matters relevant to leadership development and training – e.g. certifications in various 360 assessments (Leadership Circle Profile, Leadership Practices

Inventory); diagnostic instruments (e.g. MBTI, Thomas-Kilmann, EQ-I, DISC, StrengthFinders, etc.); (c) are scanned copies of actual certification documents required as evidence, if not, what other forms of evidence will be acceptable?;

(d) is there a page limit to this evaluation factor?

a) These are the only two certifications accepted and represent a minimum criteria.

b) “Other relevant certifications” are those certifications that are relevant to any part of this SOW. These may include coaching, facilitation, or training-related certifications. These will be considered only if the required two certifications (ICF and Sherpa) are met.

c) Scanned copies of actual certificates are requested.

d) There is no page limit for this evaluation factor. The only goal for this evaluation factor is to verify that the two desired certifications are held by all involved staff and to demonstrate that these staff possess other relevant certifications. No text should be provided, only scanned copies of certificates.

21. Coaching Federal Workers: (a) many executive coaching engagements are obtained via individual retention arrangements, which are paid by cash, check, credit card, or other similar arrangement and not necessarily from government contracts

– can offerors reference the number of these engagements with individual workers and cite several specific examples in lieu of a government contract number?

Yes, so long as the provided information is directly, and easily, verifiable.

Only arrangements that clearly relate to coaching federal workers should be included. Attempts to “misrepresent” or “skew” past experience will result in immediate disqualification from consideration.

22. Is single-spaced 11 point Calibri font to be used as the standard in determining the 1,000 character limitation for Federal coaching experience and the 1,500 character limitation for group facilitation experience?

The character limitation will not be impacted by font, text size, or line spacing. The offer is permitted to use any desired line spacing, font, or text size where character limits are provided. Please note, the character limits include spaces.

23. I wanted to make comment and ask questions regarding the response to question #2 shown below.

As I stated in a previous email XXX submitted a proposal on July 6, 2018 to your organization in response to Procurement Request: 0000HCCL-2018-23486 NPPTL

Leadership Coaching and Development.

In my opinion there a similarities between the requirements in last years request and this years request. I do not understand why this year there is a requirement that coaches and training facilitators must be certified by the

International Coach Federation (ICF) or Sherpa. This requirement is technically restricting competition for Woman-Owned Small Businesses looking to compete for a government contract.

In XXX case we are preparing proposals in response to government solicitations in hopes of winning …... Restricting the requirements does not provide hope for small businesses to compete based on their experience which is on par, or exceeds, those of a "Certification" from a single organization.

Furthermore, what purpose does past performance serve if it is superseded by the need for a "Certification"? Perhaps, you could explain why the certification of instructors is needed for this solicitation?

There are 17 Vendors on the "Interested Vendors" list in FBO. …………… , there could be certified vendors who will be providing a response to the solicitation but did sign up as an interested vendor.

I believe that you could bring in more competition by taking away the ICF certification requirement and replacing it with "Vendors must meet the same level of ICF requirements for ACC (Associate Certified Coach). The ACC is the lowest level of ICF Certification

(100+ Hours Coaching experience).

Question #2. Per section “1) Technical Evaluation" in the "Solicitation Instruction and Eva luation Provisions” section of the “Solicitation_RFQ_No_75D301-19-Q-70337.pdf” document posted at FBO.gov, is it sufficient for the Prime Contractor and lead instructor to be sole ICF-certified instructor? Our team has a highly qualified member who has five years experience as a GS-14 with the Department of the Navy running a training department and teaching leadership to over 2000 government employees at all GS levels. This instructor also served as the lead performance and leadership coach for a team of 9 coaches for a year-long government contract prior to being hired as a GS. We believe that this prior experience surpasses any certification requirements.

Response: All coaches and facilitators must be certified.

Question 10. in Amendment No. 00001 provided a more comprehensive response to coaching certification requirement inquiries, excerpted again below.

10. I have a question related to the above named RFP. The RFP said it wanted the coaches and the training facilitators to have coaching certification. I subcontract my coaches, all of whom are certified.

I provide the training and facilitation and have done so on BPAs like this for … … years. I'm a …….with …years of training and facilitation experience (with advanced facilitation training). I have never been asked for coaching certification for my facilitation or training work. Training and facilitation are very different skills than coaching.

Can you please clarify if coaching certification is required for the person facilitating the training sessions and the one day strategic planning session?

Coaching certificates are required for all involved. NPPTL does not see each task as being separate. Rather, we see all tasks as being part of a larger system of support. NPPTL desires individuals who have coaching, facilitation, and training experience. In this way, addressing identified issues/challenges in work units, amongst the leadership team, or at the individual level can be supported holistically—e.g., realizations that occur during training, strategy, and work unit sessions may be, in part, incorporated and addressed during the coaching sessions.