Government Answers to Questions Submitted.pdf

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 75D301-23-R-72632

CDC Responses are in Red.

Note: For clarity and to avoid duplication some questions that were substantially alike have been combined

1. Under section L.9 Proposal Contents & Page Format (page 72), the instructions state that “Where a page limit applies, the page limit includes cover letter, table of contents, index, appendices, illustrations, charts, tables, diagrams and all other documents.” The page limit of 25 pages is indicated under L.10 CDC0_L012. (Technical Proposal Preparation Instructions) followed by instructions about what the response is to include. Did CDC intend for sections describe in L.9 that surround the technical written response to be include or excluded from the 25 pages for the technical response? Can CDC clarify which sections to include in the 25 pages?

This has been corrected to clarify that appendices will not be included in the 25 page limit.

2. We assume that resumes, which may be up to 10 pages (page 8) would fall outside of appendices and the

25 page limit. Can CDC confirm that this is a correct assumption?

It has been clarified that appendices, including resumes are not included in the page limit.

3. Under L.5 CDC0.L018 Past Performance Information the RFQ describes that the offeror is to include a number of contracts completed in the past three years for past performance. The number of contracts is not specified. Does CDC have a minimum number of contracts to include?

This has been corrected.

4. Task 8 (page 7) includes progress reports in the task title, but the task does not include progress reports.

Are there additional technical progress reports under Task 8 that CDC expects, or are these the same as the monthly progress reports described in Task 9?

Yes. they were the monthly progress reports described in Task 9. “Progress reports” were removed from

Task 8.

5. In the scope of work, the RFP requests specification of the algorithm used to link all of the mathematical equations in the model. Is that different from specifying the overall architecture of the simulation model, and if so, how?

The two are related. The algorithm is more specific to describe how the mathematical equations were linked in the model. The overall architecture of the simulation model is more like a flowchart to show how different parts of the model linked together.

6. In the scope of work, the RFP requests a “run book” that includes written procedures for IT administrators for installation and deployment. Can a “run book” be considered a user manual where the intended audience is IT administrators, or is there a formal set of requirements for a run book or understanding of a run book that we should be aware of?

Correct. The “run book” is used by IT administrators or other programmers to understand how the model is programmed and different parts of the model work together to install the model initially or reinstall the model on CDC network if there is a change in IT environment.

7. Who are the intended “end users” of the simulation model? Would the model be internal to CDC or external to the public?

Internal CDC researchers currently, but the model should be such that it could be easily modified to external users later if CDC decides to do so.

8. Section 7 Deliverable/Reporting Schedule has 2 similar deliverables for task 4, one referencing 3 ESEP meetings (row 3) and one referencing 2 ESEP meetings (row 4), with identical delivery dates. Can we assume the first is a duplicate?

There were 3 ESEP meetings in total. The deliverable table specified the time for each of the three meetings, i.e., within 4, 14, and 21 months after contract award.

9. Can you provide any more details corresponding to expected user-interaction with the final model deliverable? What are the expectations for a user interface for CDC staff during and after the project timeline? Is a graphical interface within the scope of this project or may we assume the user is comfortable interacting with the model via a terminal and corresponding updates to model configuration files?

The contractor can design the model to meet the requirement “The final platform of the model must also be simple enough for end users who were not involved in the development of the model to run the model as instructed by the user manual.

10. Is there an incumbent for this work?

This is new work

11. Does the CDC have any preference on the type of modeling methods to be used (e.g., microsimulation, agent-based modeling, network analysis, system dynamic modeling, Markov modeling, or discrete-time modeling), or is the contractor free to choose the most suitable approach?

The contractor should propose the most suitable approach and the justify the approach used.

12. In section 3; Scope of Work, sub section 3(1) of the solicitation, Microsoft Azure is referenced as the platform for the simulation. Is CDC only supporting the Microsoft Azure platform for this procurement i.e. simulation model? Is CDC moving away from the multi-cloud strategy as stated in the Data Modernization Accelerator (DMAC) initiative and the EDAV technology platform?

CDC is not moving away from the multi-cloud strategy, the SOW has been edited to reflect that Azure is not required. However note that the CDC Cloud Smart section, and the use of EDAV which is built in Azure, any proposal using other solutions should explain how it will interact with EDAV.

13. Given that the model will be operated on CDC’s Microsoft Azure cloud environment, does the CDC have a preference for the type of programming language to be used in developing the simulation model, or any specific software requirements?

The programming language used should work on Azure cloud or other cloud environments.

14. Are there any specific data sources or databases that the CDC recommends or requires for use as a baseline dataset?

The contractor needs to specify the baseline dataset used.

15. Given the scope and complexity of the tasks outlined in the RFP, the proposed duration of 24 months and the estimated budget of 1 million dollars (need to verify?) might be challenging to accomplish all tasks effectively: Is there any flexibility in extending the project duration and increasing the budget to ensure successful completion of the project and delivery of a high-quality simulation model?

CDC has not released an estimated budget of any type.

At this time there is no expectation of extension of duration, however note that FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services (Nov 1999) is included in the request for proposal. Vendors however should propose the solution they believe best accomplishes the tasks outlined within the period of performance (24 months).

16. Can you provide any examples or case studies of previous projects with similar complexity and scope that have been successfully completed within the given time frame and budget, to help us better understand best practices and strategies for effective project management in this context?

Vendors should propose their own solution based on the tasks required and their past experience.

17. Would the CDC consider providing any technical assistance or guidance, especially in the areas of model validation, calibration, and integrating the model with the CDC's Microsoft Azure cloud environment?

Vendors should propose their solutions independently.

18. In the event of unforeseen challenges or obstacles arising during the project, what is the process for requesting adjustments to the project timeline, budget, or scope, and how can we ensure open communication with CDC representatives throughout the project to proactively address any issues?

All CDC contracts are assigned a Contracting Officer’s representative for day to day communications.

Vendors should be addressing how they will handle challenges and obstacles in their technical proposal.

19. The RFP references 10 tasks, and refers to Task 3 in the Task 6 description, but does not specify what tasks 3 and 4 are. Can the government please provide descriptions for Task 3 and Task 4 if those are tasks in the RFP?

Original tasks 3 and 4 have been integrated into other tasks and no longer exist, there is no task 3 or 4, the reference to task 3 has been removed

20. The second attachment for Past Performance did not appear to be included. Can the government please provide this form?

Uploaded simultaneously with this document

21. Perspective offerors could include large companies with hundreds of active contracts and contracts within the intel community that cannot be divulged void of client permission. Given this situation, please confirm the offeror could instead submit the following:

The total number of active contracts Total number of proposals submitted Total aggregate value of contracts

Yes

22. The Business Proposal Instructions, the Government states “Cost and pricing data is not required with initial proposals” but in the evaluation approach described at M.2 the Government references Cost Realism Analysis. As a competitive solicitation, please confirm that the Government evaluate initial offers on the basis of price, and please specify what data it needs to from offerors to do so.

Clarified, that certified C&P data is not required. Business proposal should include price and such information as is needed to reasonably determine the basis for that pricing.

23. Can the gov’t confirm the Past Performance doesn’t count against the 25 page limit of the technical if included? “Offerors shall submit the past performance information as part of their business, technical or as a separate proposal.”

Clarified that past performance is separate document or appendix

24. The solicitation states, "This is a firm fixed price, non-severable line item." To enable contractors to propose an approach that follows best feasible methods and data sources within CDC's budget, would CDC please share a preferred budget range or "not to exceed" price point?

Vendors should propose pricing based on what they believe is necessary to complete tasks

25. The SOW states "To build the simulation model, the contract shall: (...) (3) Obtain the parameters/equations needed for the model from published literatures. If not available, obtain the most appropriate data, both available publicly and not available publicly, to estimate the parameters/equations."

Would CDC please provide examples of non-public, proprietary data that could be considered to meet this requirement?

some commercial claim or epidemiological study data from study groups that are available for purchase or by application.

26. Which deliverables listed in the solicitation will be public-facing such that they must meet Section 508 compliance requirements?

The web-based based model must meet 508 compliance requirements

27. Given the delay in posting Attachment 2, would CDC please extend to Friday, April 28, 2023 the deadline for program managers/ CORs to complete and submit Attachment 2 forms?

Given this delay, and the delay in issuing responses to questions the submission deadlines have been extended

28. Section C, Section 3 - Scope of Work. P.5. Bullet (7), “ Ensure the web-based platform meets the technical and security standards for the CDC platform.”

Please specify the technical and security standards for the CDC platform.

Use the information in this RFQ and the industry best practice as a reference.

29. Section L.5 Past Performance Information, P. 71, and Section M.1 (B) – Similar Experience, P. 75.

a. Section L requires Past Performance information and Section M requires information on Similar Experience. Will CDC consider combining these requirements to minimize the burden on CDC reviewers and contractors?

Past performance and similar experience are separate topics

b. It appears that Past Performance is not considered in the Technical Evaluation. How will it affect contract award if it conflicts with the results of the Technical Evaluation?

Past performance will be referenced as an additional source of information, and potentially inform evaluation of similar experience.

30. We appreciate the concern about cramming text into graphics and illustrations. However, the 30-word limit on text is overly restrictive and may hinder CDC in reviewing proposals. For example, Section L.10 notes that the technical proposal must not contain reference to cost, but it requires resource information concerning labor hours and categories, materials, subcontracts, etc. Typically, we provide this information in part through a labor loading chart that shows labor hours by task, staff member, and labor categories.

With a 30-word limit and 9 tasks, we cannot include all this information in a useful, easy-to-review table.

Similarly, it will be difficult to provide helpful organization charts, summary information on similar experience, and Gantt charts with the 30-word limit. Will CDC consider loosening this requirement?

This information may be provided in a chart via an appendix, and the 30 word limit may be relaxed within reason if the charts remain easily legible.