80MSFC21R0015 NFSS RFP Cover Letter.pdf

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

George C. Marshall Space Flight Center Marshall Space Flight Center, AL 35812

November 5, 2021

TO: All Prospective Offerors

SUBJECT: Request for Proposal (RFP), Solicitation No. 80MSFC21R0015, for NASA

Financial Support Services

You are invited to submit a proposal in response to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Financial Support Services (NFSS) solicitation. The principal purpose of this requirement is to provide financial and related support services for multiple NASA Centers.

NASA is conducting this acquisition as a small business set-aside competition. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541219, “Other Accounting Services,” and the small business size standard is $22M.

This competitive acquisition will result in a commercial services, single-award indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract with firm-fixed-price (FFP) and cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) task orders. The contract will have an ordering period of eight years from the contract effective date.

The anticipated contract award date is November 2022, with a December 2022 phase-in start date. Place of performance is envisioned at the following NASA centers: NASA Ames Research Center (ARC), Mountain View, CA; Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC), Edwards Air Force Base; CA, Glenn Research Center (GRC), Cleveland, OH; Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, TX; Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Merritt Island, FL; Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), Huntsville, AL; Stennis Space Center (SSC), Bay St. Louis, MS; and any other place of performance as approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, in accordance with the solicitation.

Prospective offerors should pay close attention to all solicitation instructions; however, the following requirements list is summarized to assist in proposal development. Please note that this list is not exhaustive, and the solicitation’s provisions in sections K, L, and M take precedence:

1. A Phase-in period will be conducted. The phase-in period for the contract will be 90 days and executed on CLIN 001 of the contract.

80MSFC21R0015

2. The Government will make available existing installation-provided property and services for contract performance in accordance with Section J, Attachment J-6, Installation- Provided Property and Services.

3. NASA has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest (OCI). Offerors should refer to Section H, NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Supplement (NFS) clause 1852.209-71, Limitation of Future Contracting, and Section L, MSFC provision 52.209-93, Notice of Potential of Organizational Conflicts of Interest, for a description of the potential conflict(s) and any restrictions on future contracting.

4. NASA appreciates the comments received in response to the release of the Draft RFP.

These comments resulted in improvements to the quality and content of the overall RFP.

Offerors should review the RFP in its entirety, as its content has changed from the Draft RFP version. Attachment B, Summary of Changes Between Draft and Final Solicitation, identifies areas where changes have been made from the Draft RFP to this final RFP that may not have been addressed in the Draft RFP questions and responses.

5. Be advised, in accordance with provision Volume III – Past Performance Factor, offerors need to encourage their references to submit their Past Performance Questionnaires directly to the Contracting Officer via MSFC-NFSSProcurement@mail.nasa.gov prior to proposal due date.

6. Offerors are required to have a Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code that matches the corporate address submitted with its proposal.

7. Offerors are encouraged to refer to FAR provision 52.212-1, Instructions to Offerors-

Commercial Items, in particular paragraph (g), which states that the Government intends to evaluate offers and award a contract without discussions with offerors.

Documents related to this acquisition, including this letter, the solicitation, attachments, and any amendments will be obtainable electronically through the Government-wide point of entry website at sam.gov. Prospective offerors are instructed to monitor this website for updates.

NFS clause 1852.215-84, Ombudsman, is applicable. The Center Ombudsman for this acquisition can be found at: https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement- Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf

This RFP does not commit NASA to pay any proposal preparation costs, nor does it obligate NASA to procure or contract for these services. This request is not an authorization to proceed, and does not authorize payment for any charges incurred by the offeror for performing any of the work called for in this solicitation.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall be due no later than December 17, 2021, 2:00 p.m. Central Time. Proposals for this solicitation are required to be submitted through NASA’s Enterprise File Sharing and Sync Box (EFSS Box), a FedRAMP Moderate certified platform. Prospective offerors, especially those that have not previously submitted a proposal mailto:MSFC-NFSSProcurement@mail.nasa.gov https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/regs/Procurement-Ombuds-Comp-Advocate-Listing.pdf utilizing NASA’s EFSS Box, are encouraged to review the solicitation instruction entitled “Electronic Proposal Delivery - Proposal Marking and Delivery Through NASA’s EFSS Box” which provides instructions related to the submission of proposal via EFSS Box. Offerors are encouraged to check with their corporate IT staff to determine if there are firewall restrictions that would need to be addressed prior to the submission of proposal files through NASA’s EFSS Box.

In accordance with NFS 1815.201(f), a “Blackout Notice” has been issued to NASA personnel.

All inquiries/communications pertaining to this acquisition shall be directed only to the Contracting Officer listed below.

All questions regarding this RFP should be submitted electronically in writing, to Mr. Ryan D.

Hardy, Contracting Officer, at MSFC-NFSSProcurement@mail.nasa.gov, no later than November 10, 2021, 2:00 p.m. Central Time, in accordance with Section L, MSFC provision 52.205-90, Designated Point of Contact. Offerors are encouraged to submit questions as soon as possible for consideration.

Thank you for your support. We look forward to receiving your proposals.

Kathryn Cooper Contracting Officer mailto:MSFC-NFSSProcurement@mail.nasa.gov

Enclosures:

Attachment A, Clarifications to All Prospective Offerors Attachment B, Summary of Changes Between Draft and Final Solicitation

Attachment A, Page A-1

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

1 Section J, Attachment J-3, Performance Requirements Summary

The magnitude of possible deductions as compared to possible profit on the part of a small business seems out of balance.

These deductions range from $500 to $15,000 and from 5% to 50% in fee payout. These deductions could severely impact a small business and significantly limit competition on this procurement. Has NASA performed an analysis to determine the magnitude of all deductions as compared to the possible fee that a small business would achieve under this contract?

Are the deductions reasonable as compared to possible fee?

NASA has determined deductions to be reasonable and commensurate in relation to each acceptable performance level (APL) regardless of task order/work package type.

2 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (d)(1)

Would the Government consider making the bar to $4,500,000 for the offeror and critical subcontractors? Also, could the Government answer this question at the upcoming Industry Day?

The Final RFP Section L provision Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph

(d) has been revised. Relative to size for offerors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $4,500,000 or greater, and relative to size for proposed subcontractors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $2,500,000 or greater.

3 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (d)(1)

[We] respectfully requests NASA to caucus and determine a lower, more appropriate annual value for offerors’ and JV managing partners’ past performance contracts in the interest of promoting competition.

See Answer to ID #2.

Page A-2

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

4 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (b) and (d)(1)

Will the Government consider relaxing the Past Performance requirement of two $10 Million contract citations for prime offerors or managing partners of a joint venture (JV) and provide an expedited response to this question?

See Answer to ID #2. In addition, in relation to Section L provision Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph (b) states, "… At least two past performance references should be for the offeror. …" While the solicitation recommends two past performance references from the offeror or JV managing partner, it does not require two references.

5 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (d)(1)

We urge NASA to reconsider these annual value requirements and to revise the RFP for final release reflecting lower thresholds of $5,000,000 or greater for offerors and $2,500,000 for subcontractors to increase the level of competition. We understand the Government has concerns with performance risk, but offerors having strong management capabilities and a well-qualified team can mitigate those risks for a successful performance.

See Answer to ID #2.

6 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (b) and (d)(1)

As this is total small business set-aside solicitation, would NASA consider adjusting this dollar requirement for relevant referenced contracts, i.e. average annual value of $10,000,000 or greater, to reflect total contract value, as opposed to annual contract value? Additionally, if this could not be adjusted to total contract value, as NASA is requiring two past performance references for the offeror, would NASA consider adjusting this requirement to reflect a revised requirement of one (1) contract with an average annual value of $10,000,000 or greater in conjunction with other relevant contracts of lesser annual value, i.e. greater than $5,000,000 average annual value and less than $10,000,000 in average annual value, in order to meet the minimum of two relevant past performances references?

See Answers to ID #2 and ID #4.

Page A-3

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

7 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (d)(1)

The "Size" of the past performance that is required for the Prime on Page L-31, Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions (Aug 04, 2021), paragraph (d)(1), states, "For offerors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $10,000,000 or greater, and for proposed subcontractors, an average annual value of $4,500,000 or greater." For the prime (offeror) $10,000,000 is 45% of the allowed annual revenue ($22M) under the size standard for NAICS 541219.

To create the appropriate competition for small businesses, please consider lowering these requirements to a $1M total contract value (not annually) for small business primes and subs.

See Answer to ID #2.

8 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions Paragraph (d)(1)

The draft solicitation states “(d) Offerors shall consider the following similarities to this effort in choosing the referenced contracts:

(1) Size – For offerors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $10,000,000 or greater, and for proposed subcontractors, an average annual value of $4,500,000 or greater.”

Q. Would an offeror’s referenced contracts be determined relevant, i.e., equal to or greater than the $10,000,000 annual threshold, if the offeror has one (1) $20,000,000 average annual value contract of similar content and complexity as Solicitation No. 80MSFC21R0015 as well as three (3) individual complementary financial management contracts, with one agency, totaling greater than $15,000,000 average annual value, of similar content and complexity as Solicitation No. 80MSFC21R0015?

Each referenced contract is evaluated individually against the requirements stated in the solicitation for size, content, and complexity (i.e., relevancy based on size, content, and complexity are individually evaluated per referenced contract, where all must be determined to be at least relevant in order for the referenced contract to be determined relevant overall).

Page A-4

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

9 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions (d)(1)

Reference states: “For offerors, a referenced contract will be determined relevant if it has an average annual value of $4,500,000 or greater, and for proposed subcontractors, an average annual value of $2,500,000 or greater.” For the recently awarded CPSS PP&C contract, for example, the past performance relevancy threshold for offerors was $7M average annual revenue and for subcontractors was $3M, a value less than half of that for offerors. That procurement was for a larger size standard under NAICS 541715.

Given the size standard of $22M in NAICS code 541219, it is unlikely that prospective offerors will have two relevant contracts meeting the proposed thresholds, unless they are a Tribally Owned or Alaska Native Corporations. These relevancy thresholds reduce competition in the small business community. We appreciate the government communicating a change in the original thresholds but respectfully suggest the consideration of an average annual revenue size threshold for past performance reference contracts of $4.5M for offerors and $2M for subcontractors? Any changes to these criteria would need to be communicated to industry in a timely fashion to allow for teaming arrangements to be made.

See Answer to ID #2. No further changes to size relevancy are anticipated.

10 Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 4.5, Financial Management Business Information Services

Section f provides a requirement to Managing local server, website access, and content. Can the government please provide more detail as to what is required to “manage local server” and will there be servers to manage at each location?

There isn’t a labor category with the server management experience as a requirement. Will the government provide updates to labor categories to support this requirement?

Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 4.5 has been revised to clarify requirements in relation to the administration of Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) servers, websites, and SharePoint sites.

Page A-5

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

11 Section H, GRC 52.237- 91, Contractors' Duties and Responsibilities on- Site; KSC 52.242-90, Controls Applicable to Contractor's Activities;

KSC 52.245-90,

Management of NASA- Owned/Contractor-Held Records; MSFC 52.223- 90, Asbestos Material;

MSFC 52.223-91,

Hazardous Material Reporting; MSFC 52.223- 92, Environmental - General Clause; MSFC 52.223-96, Medical Services; MSFC 52.223- 97, Mandatory and Required Training

The referenced clauses appear to be Center specific, limiting the requirement to performance occurring only at the specific Centers with Points of Contact for reporting also Center-specific. Can the proposer assume that these clauses will migrate to more common approaches, for efficient NASA-wide contract management, with the maturation of the MAP implementation to address the support required across multiple Centers by the NFSS contractor?

With the implementation of Mission Support Future Architecture Program (MAP), the Agency will continue to work towards establishing the most efficient operating model to meet current and future mission needs. At this time, Center specific clauses apply based on the center location/place of performance as identified in Government issued work packages.

Page A-6

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

12 Section G, JSC 52.204-92, NASA Security Program and Identification of Employees (FEB 2021)

Most of the credentialing sites listed are not the same as the places of performance listed. Can the places of performance also issue credentials (e.g., PIV cards)?

Section G, JSC 52.204-92, NASA Security Program and Identification of Employees, is a Johnson Space Center (JSC)-specific clause, whereas Center-specific clauses delineated in the solicitation/contract will apply only to efforts performed at the specified Center.

Relative to the issuance of personal identity verification (PIV) credentials, for locations otherwise not specified in the solicitation, the successful offeror will be provided supplemental information following award of the contract.

13 Section G, JSC 52.204-92, NASA Security Program and Identification of Employees (FEB 2021)

Request: Section G, JSC 52.204-92 NASA SECURITY

PROGRAM AND IDENTIFICATION OF EMPLOYEES.

(FEB 2021), mentions Facility Clearance, yet the draft RFP does not provide a DD254 form or state if this procurement will have a Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret level of classification for task orders issued. If this classification level is required, please provide instructions on how an offeror that does not have a Facility Clearance Level matching the level of classification needed will be considered for award.

The NFSS acquisition is unclassified and will not require a Facility Clearance Level (FCL).

Page A-7

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

14 Section H, 1852.209-71, Limitation on Future Contracting, paragraph (c)(1)

This clause states, “The restriction shall remain in effect for a reasonable time, as agreed to by the Contracting Officer and the contractor, sufficient to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias (this time shall in no case be less that the duration of the initial production contract).”

Please clarify what is meant by “initial production contract.” Is this referring to this NFSS effort or any future contract solicitation for which the successful offeror develops the specifications or statements of work?

In accordance with Section H, NFS clause 1852.209-71, Limitation on Future Contracting, paragraph (c)(1) is referring to any future contract solicitation for which the successful offeror develops the specifications or statements of work. NFS 1852.209-71(c)(1) is based on FAR 9.505-2, which also does not specifically define “production contract.” The (c)(1) restriction concerns the “biased ground rules” OCI-type that results when contractors prepare statements of work for the Government. The NFS clause requires the inclusion of paragraph (c)(1) even if, as here with the NFSS contract, the contractor will not be preparing statements of work for the Government.

15 Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 2.1.5

This section states the DRD deliverables that are required during the 90-day phase in period. That list includes DRD 1747CD-001 - Employee Location Listing. However, Attachment J-2 Data Procurement Document (DPD) provides an initial submission of 120 days after commencement of CLIN 001 for DRD 1747CD-001, which is 30 days after completion of the phase-in period. Does the Government require delivery of DRD 1747CD-001 - Employee Location Listing during the 90-day phase-in period? The winning offeror will not have full location information until near the end of the Phase In.

Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, has been revised. Data Requirements Description (DRD) 1747CD-001, Employee Location Listing, is due 120 days after commencement of CLIN 001, Phase-In Period. This DRD has been removed from PWS, Section 2.1.5.

Page A-8

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

16 Section J, Attachment L- 1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Index Tab

Request: The Excel file, Attachment L-1, 80MSFC21R0015 Excel Pricing Model (EPM), provides a check box for either then Prime or "Significant Subcontractor" at cell A3 of the "Index" sheet. Significant Subcontractor is not defined in the draft RFP, and it also contradicts Section L, Volume II, paragraph (a)(5). Please provide clarification on this within the

RFP.

Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), has been revised for tabs requiring subcontractor response.

17 Section L, Attachment L- 1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Tab F

Is EPM Tab F to be completed only for labor categories subject to SCLS or completed for all proposed labor categories?

Section L, Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Tab F shall be completed for all labor categories. Tab F is designed to detail the fringe benefit cost (e.g., Health, Dental, Retirement, Sick Leave, Bonus) and the payroll additives that are required by law.

18 Section L, Attachment L- 1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Tab F, Part C

The column for WYE contains the value of 1 for rows 98-107, but then increments by 1 for each subsequent cell (e.g. 2, 3, 4).

What is the government expecting to see in these cells?

Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Tab F has been revised.

19 Section L, MSFC provision 52.215-91, Due Date for Receipt of Proposals or Quotations

MSFC 52.215-91 DUE DATE FOR RECEIPT OF

PROPOSALS OR QUOTATIONS (SEP 2019), p. L-10, together with the Contracting Officer's DRFP cover letter dated September 17, 2021, expresses a requirement for proposal submission within 30 calendar days from release of the FRFP. Given the complexity of the requirements, the multiple NASA locations to provide support service, and the limited proposal development resources of small businesses that qualify within the NAICS size standard, will the Government consider adjusting the acquisition schedule to release the FRFP on or about January 10, 2022 and allow at least 45 days for proposal submission?

Request was considered and resulted in a revision to the due date for receipt of proposals in Section L, MSFC provision 52.215-91, Due Date for Receipt of Proposals or Quotations.

Page A-9

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

20 Section L, Electronic Submission of Proposals - Proposal Marking and Delivery through NASA's EFSS Box

The file name examples includes “-“ in each file name. The government states “Electronic file names shall be limited to letters, numbers, and single spaces, with the exception of the period that is required before the file extension. Are the file names to include the “-“ that is shown in the template?

Dashes have been added to Section L, Electronic Submission of Proposals - Proposal Marking and Delivery through NASA's EFSS Box (JUL 2021).

21 Section L, Attachment L- 5, Total Hourly Compensation Rate by Employee Category Form

The government has asked for completed Attachment L-5s from each offeror and proposed major subcontractor.

Formatting consistency in preparation and review is helpful in streamlining this process. Could NASA please provide Attachment L-5 in the native format for ease of use by offerors and subcontractors.

Section L, Attachment L-5, Total Hourly Compensation Rate by Employee Category Form, has been revised into a form-fillable table.

22 Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 4.6 Special Financial Analyses

This section states “The contractor shall conduct and participate in non-routine financial projects and studies.”

Will the government please provide some examples of “non-routine financial projects and studies?”

Non-routine financial projects and studies may include, but are not limited to, support to independent cost analysis activities, Program/Project initial baseline reviews, reconciliation/investigation special projects, etc.

23 Section L, Volume II – Price/Cost Factor Instructions, General Instructions, Section (a)(4)

The section states “Additionally, in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(c)(2), all proposed subcontractors, to include interdivisional and/or intra-company effort, as defined in Section L, Volume III – Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph (b).”

What is the government requiring of proposed subcontractors?

The sentence appears to be incomplete.

Section L, clause Volume II - Price/Cost Factor Instructions, paragraphs (a)(4) and (5) have been revised to clarify requirements for major subcontractor submission for Volume II price/cost information.

Page A-10

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

24 Section L, Volume IV - Contract Instructions

This section states, “All contract sections and attachments with all offeror fill-ins complete as specified in the table below. The volume shall be submitted in its entirety, to include all Section A through J pages and attachments provided in the solicitation as well as Section K, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of offerors.”

Sections A through J contain little to no requirement for fill-in information other that what is already listed in the Offeror Fill-ins table. Please confirm that only the items listed in the Offeror Fill-ins table are required, or clarify what additional items are required in Volume IV from sections A through J.

In accordance with Section L, provision Volume IV - Contract Instructions, paragraph (c)(3), offerors shall submit all contract sections and attachments with all offeror fill-ins completed (i.e., Sections A-K). This shall include all Volume IV pages as originally provided in the solicitation in order to form an executable contract document.

25 - Will the awardee be allowed to add subcontractors to their team post award?

Post-award, contractors may add new subcontractors to their team in accordance with FAR Subpart 44.2, Consent to Subcontracts.

26 Section L, Attachment L- 3, Past Performance Questionnaire, and Attachment L-6, Cognizant Audit Office Form refer to “Team Member” and “Teaming Member”. The RFP does not define nor create a distinction between a Subcontractor and Team Member. Please define “Team Member” in the RFP or state that it is Not Applicable for this Procurement.

The offeror is the legal entity from which the proposal is submitted. Any/all teammates, teaming members or partners, etc., considered to be synonymous with subcontractors.

Page A-11

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

27 DRFP Cover letter On page 2 of the Introductory letter, the Government states, "The successful offeror must pass an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) clearance before contract award (See FAR 22.805)." Can the Government please provide the requirements and specific steps for how offerors are to complete this process?

Offerors shall be compliant in accordance with FAR Subpart 22.8, Equal Employment Opportunity, and requirements established in FAR clause 52.222-26, Equal Opportunity.

Information pertaining to Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) compliance can be obtained via https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/Complianc e-Programs Further information pertaining to EEO compliance can be obtained directly from the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/Compliance-Programs https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ofccp/Compliance-Programs

Page A-12

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

28 Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 1.1, Background

The work under this contract is in support of consolidated financial support services at:

• Ames Research Center (ARC) Mountain View, CA;

• Armstrong Flight Research Center (AFRC) Edwards, CA;

• Glenn Research Center (GRC) Cleveland, OH;

• Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, TX;

• Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Merritt Island, FL;

• Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Huntsville, AL;

• Stennis Space Center (SSC) Bay St. Louis, MS; and

• Other NASA Centers, Component Facilities, and Technical & Service Support Centers LaRC, GSFC and HQ are not listed. Given the cross-center approach to work at NASA (GSFC supporting work at MSFC for example), is the “Other NASA centers” in final bullet meant to acknowledge these cross-center touchpoints and if so, would the scope under this contract be expected to co-mingle with the scope of similar financial services contracts at LaRC, GSFC and HQ? Can any of the Centers listed in the contract opt out of NFSS at any time?

In accordance with NFS Appendix A, A-102.8 Financial Support Service, NFSS is a mandatory use contract for ARC, AFRC, GRC, JSC, KSC, MSFC, and SSC. These Centers are expected to have a continuing requirement for NFSS services in support of various programs, projects, and institutional areas in NASA’s portfolio. The Program Analysis and Control (PAAC) V contract will provide financial support services primarily to HQ, GSFC, and LaRC. However, all Centers will have the flexibility of using NFSS.

Page A-13

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

29 Section I, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires (52.222-42)

In the paragraph under the table, there is a mention of 10 Federal holidays. In 2021, an 11th holiday, Juneteenth, was approved. Should this contract cover all 11 Federal holidays?

In accordance with the note pertaining to the "Estimated Hourly Wage Rate" detailed in Section I, FAR clause 52.222-42, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires, a minimum of 10 federal holidays are listed. Section J, Attachment J-5, Wage Determinations, will be updated through the life of the contract in accordance with U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Employment Standards updates for recently added Federal holidays. A Wage Determination will also be validated at time of award and will reflect current Federal Holidays.

The solicitation includes current wage determinations as authorized by the DOL.

30 Section J, Attachment J-1, PWS, Section 4.2.1 (i)

“Supporting the creation, approval, and review of purchase requests and the disbursement of those funds to vendors and contractors”. Disbursement of funds typically follows the award of a contractual document, performance, and invoicing.

Please clarify the ‘disbursement of those funds’ aspect of this requirement.

The resulting contractor will be aiding NASA in the financial processes specific to supporting work managed and developed under a variety of agreements with in-house organizations, NASA Centers, contractors, universities, and international sources and partners, whereas any/all of these efforts may be involved with the NFSS contractor supporting the disbursement of associated funds.

Page A-14

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

31 Section J, Attachment J-1 PWS, Section 2.0, Contract Phase-In / Phase- Out

This section states that the contractor shall submit a single invoice to the Government for phase-in activities at the completion of phase-in. The successful NFSS small business offeror, with revenues averaging no more than $22M over the previous 3 years, will be conducting phase-in at multiple NASA locations and incurring considerable expenses. Is the Government not concerned over the financial strain that would be placed on a micro small business to wait approximately 120 days for payment as well as disregarding the purpose of the Prompt Payment Act?

Section J, Attachment J-1 PWS, Section 2.0 has been revised. Payment of phase-in services shall occur in accordance with contract terms and conditions.

32 Section J, Attachment J-3, Performance Requirements Summary

The PRSs in general are punitive and could be very impactful to a small business that meets a size standard of $22M. With respect to PRS #5 and PRS #6, there are no definitive measurements defined for this performance standard in DRD 1747MA-010 that track or measure: continuously improve collaboration, establish and maintain effective partnerships, provide consistent high-quality services across the NASA enterprise, or team-oriented working relationships. Without a defined method of evaluation, the contractor is at risk for not understanding how the government will evaluate its performance to this requirement. Contractor goals and objectives should ideally be clearly identifiable and measurable and not based on subjective opinions of a customer(s). Clarification: Please provide the approach the government will use and corresponding evaluation criteria that matches the performance measure/standard.

In accordance with Section J, Attachment J-3, Performance Requirements Summary (PRS), Examples of Method(s) of Surveillance, for PRS #5 and #6, review of customer feedback and DRD 1747MA-010, Work Package Activity Reports, have been provided as examples of surveillance methods outlined. Based on an assessment of the surveillance results, if determined that acceptable performance level(s) (APLs) have not been met in accordance with the associated performance work statement (PWS) requirement(s), the associated monthly deduction(s) would be assessed.

Page A-15

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

33 Section J, Attachment J-3, Performance Requirements Summary

This PRS is concerned with contractor personnel meeting the minimum stated qualification levels, per NASA labor categories. Offerors do not have insight into this information for current employees, yet it will impact our proposed staffing approach and our ability to maintain an incumbent workforce.

Government contractors have extensive experience in staffing positions, and in some cases, there are qualified individuals that do not meet the education or the years of experience requirements. There may even be incumbents today that do not meet the education and years of experience requirements. This PRS will result in the government losing qualified individuals that are trained with years of experience performing excellent work for the government. Due to the significance of the deduction of $1,500 per incident increasing at a daily rate of $500/day, we respectfully request this PRS be deleted. If the government does not delete the requirement, we request detailed information on the incumbent workforce that does not currently meet this requirement. This data is necessary to prepare for replacing these individuals at contract start to ensure full staffing of all positions on day 1.

Which of the Labor Category Description fields represent the minimum qualifications: required education, required experience or job skills? What documentation is required to prevent the contractor from receiving a deduction? What is the timing of submitting the required documentation? If incumbent personnel do not meet the minimum requirements will the government provide a waiver process to request incumbent employees be given exception and if not will the govt provide a transition period for these positions so that the new contractor does not start on day 1 with a potential deduction to mitigate during transition?

Information pertaining to incumbent contractor employees in relation to NFSS labor category education and experience requirements is not available. It is the successful offeror's responsibility to screen all potential contractor employees to ensure minimum required education and experience have been satisfied in accordance with Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories as stated within the required experience columns. NASA is reliant on the successful offeror for verification of this information. If requested by NASA, information pertaining to contractor employee's education and work experience, along with the successful offeror's method of verification of this information, shall be provided. Contractor format is acceptable for reporting this information to NASA.

Page A-16

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

34 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph (c)

The draft solicitation states “Offerors which are joint ventures (JVs) should provide at least two of the five past performance referenced contracts required above in the name of the JV. If the JV is newly established and cannot provide past performance referenced contracts in the name of the JV, then past performance referenced contracts from individual partners of the JV should be submitted for consideration, not to exceed a combined total of five referenced contracts. Two past performance referenced contracts should be provided for the JV managing partner.”

Q. For a newly established JV, does NASA require the two relevant past performance referenced contracts remain equal to or above the $10,000,000 annual threshold for the JV managing partner?

Q. Would it be acceptable to NASA if one relevant past performance from each member of the newly formed JV provide a relevant past performance equal to or above the $10,000,000 annual threshold to satisfy this requirement?

See Answer to ID #4.

Each referenced contract is required to satisfy size, content, and complexity thresholds in accordance with Section L provision Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph (d). Offerors are free to allocate the five references as they deem appropriate. The solicitation contains recommendations for how referenced contracts should be distributed (e.g., if the joint venture (JV) is newly established and cannot provide past performance referenced contracts in the name of the JV, then past performance referenced contracts from individual partners of the JV should be submitted for consideration, not to exceed a combined total of five referenced contracts).

While the solicitation requests two references for the JV managing partner within the five reference limitation, referenced contracts for the JV non-managing partner may also be provided within this limitation.

Page A-17

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

35 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance, paragraph (d); Section M, Factor III Past Performance Volume Evaluation, paragraph (b)

Section L indicates that an offeror’s past performance record needs to be greater than $4.5M to be deemed relevant; it also indicates that two past performance references need to be provided for the JV managing partner (which, according to SBA’s rules, is the protégé company in a mentor/protégé JV).

Section M indicates that references for protégé members of a mentor/protégé JV will be evaluated at the relevancy thresholds for proposed subcontractors ($2.5M). If the offeror is an all-small mentor/protégé JV (and the managing partner of the JV is the protégé, as required) are that company’s PP references assessed at the offeror or proposed subcontractor past performance value threshold?

In accordance with Section M provision Factor III - Past Performance Volume Evaluation, paragraph (b), if an offeror is a new joint venture (JV) without a past performance record, past performance will be evaluated for each individual JV partner for which a referenced contract is submitted, in accordance with the relevancy thresholds established for the offeror for the small business JV mentor and the relevancy thresholds established for subcontractors for the JV protégé.

36 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions, paragraph (c)

This section states that “(c) Offerors which are joint ventures (JVs) should provide at least two of the five past performance referenced contracts required above in the name of the JV. If the JV is newly established and cannot provide past performance referenced contracts in the name of the JV, then past performance referenced contracts from individual partners of the JV should be submitted for consideration, not to exceed a combined total of five referenced contracts. Two past performance referenced contracts should be provided for the JV managing partner.” As the JV is the offer, and not just the managing JV partner, would NASA please amend the statement regarding the managing partner references to “Two past performance referenced contracts should be provided by the members of the JV with at least one being from the JV managing partner.”

No further revisions have been made to Section L provision Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions.

See Answer to ID #34.

37 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions

Please confirm that the two past performances required to be submitted in the name of the JV (for Offerors bidding as JV) must have an average annual value of $4.5M+ in order to be considered relevant.

See Answer to ID #34.

Page A-18

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

38 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions

Please confirm that the two past performances required to be submitted for the JV managing partner (for Offerors bidding as a newly established JV) must have an average annual value of $4.5M+ in order to be considered relevant.

See Answer to ID #34.

39 Section L, Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions

It is our understanding that the qualifications and past performances of the large business mentor company can be used on behalf of the small business protégé company when bidding as an SBA-approved mentor-protégé JV. In other words, the two $4.5M+ average annual revenue past performance contracts coming from the offeror can come from the large business mentor company. This puts the stand-alone small businesses in a position of having to compete against large business past performances and qualifications for this SBSA opportunity.

(a) What accommodations or preferences will NASA provide to the stand-alone small businesses to level the playing field for these inequities?

(b) Will NASA consider not allowing a JV bid construct in order to level the playing field?

(c) What evaluation criteria will NASA apply to evaluate the past performance of offerors?

No revisions have been made regarding the past performance evaluation of joint ventures (JVs) in relation to established Section L provision Volume III - Past Performance Factor Instructions. All referenced contracts will be evaluated in accordance with Section M provision Factor III - Past Performance Volume Evaluation. That notwithstanding, a lack of relevant referenced contracts for JV managing partners could impact the confidence level assigned to the offeror.

40 Section L, Attachment L- 2, Anticipated NFSS FY23 WYEs; and Attachment L- 4, Background and Historical Data

Is there a matrix by Center of what is required at each specific Center?

Historical and projected requirements as outlined within the Performance Work Statement (PWS) are provided in Attachment L-2, Anticipated NFSS FY23 WYEs, and Attachment L-4, Background and Historical Data.

Page A-19

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

41 Section L, Attachment L- 4, Background and Historical Data

On page J-2-18, the draft solicitation states “In the event of a competitive solicitation for a follow-on effort, NASA may provide nonproprietary historical information such as average composite direct labor rates, number of Work Year Equivalent (WYE) personnel, and approximated seniority level profiles of incumbent personnel to all interested parties in order to increase the probability of realistic pricing. Specific rates for individual labor categories will not be disclosed.”

Q. Is NASA able to provide the average composite direct labor rates of incumbent personnel from previous contracts supporting NASA for equivalent requirements for solicitation

80MSFC21R0015?

This information is currently not available.

Information pertaining to historical contractor workforce seniority has been added to Attachment L-4, Background and Historical Data.

42 Section L, Attachment L- 4, Background and Historical Data

Attachment L-4 Background and Historical Data provides high level information concerning current WYEs and labor categories per center. Is there a crosswalk for the labor categories to the work elements being performed (e.g., Accountant II labor category currently fulfills Quality Assurance Services as well as accounting functions)?

Information pertaining to NFSS labor categories associated with specific work elements currently being performed is not available.

Work packages as outlined in Attachment J-7, Contract Administration System (CAS), will outline requirements by labor category.

43 Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, Schedule D, Labor Category Descriptions

Exceptions to labor category requirements list that an MA/MS is equivalent to 2 years of experience. Does a PhD count as an equivalent of 4 years of experience in addition to a BS/BA?

No, a PhD does not count as equivalent of 4 years of experience. Unless specifically stated in the J-7 table, no additional equivalents for education to number of years' experience are provided.

Page A-20

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

44 Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, Schedule D, Labor Category Descriptions

Exceptions to labor category requirements list that an MA/MS is equivalent to 2 years of experience. Given the current job market conditions, NASA may consider the impact to turnover of requiring degrees where none is currently required. This may result in losing incumbent staff with significant experience/knowledge without the ability to replace them. For positions that require a BS/BA, would NASA accept experience in lieu of a degree, especially for incumbent personnel?

The successful offeror shall satisfy minimum education and experience requirements for all contractor employees as stated in the solicitation.

45 Section I, 52.217-9, Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (MAR 2000)

Paragraph (a) states: “The use of overtime is authorized under this contract if the overtime premium does not exceed $0 or the overtime premium is paid for work…” Can NASA explain its intent on making the dollar limit $0 for overtime premiums?

Inclusion of FAR clause 52.222-2, Payment for Overtime Premiums, is mandatory in accordance with FAR Part 22. That notwithstanding, overtime is not envisioned for this effort.

Page A-21

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

46 Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, Schedule D, Labor Category Descriptions; Attachment J-2, Data Requirements Description (DRD) 1747MA-003; and Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM)

The Program Executive Assistant is not listed on Schedule D Labor Category Descriptions. This position is part of the Program Management Operations (PMO). The Program Manager and Program Lead are listed in the Labor Category Descriptions, and they are also part of the PMO. Should the Program Executive Assistant be listed on Schedule D Labor Category Descriptions?

Each offeror shall determine the nature and composition of their program management operations (PMO) staff above the required program manager position. At a minimum, NASA envisions a single program manager will be required. Accordingly, NASA has established minimum education and experience requirements as contained within with Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, for the program manager position.

In addition, references to the Program Lead and Program Executive Assistant have been removed from the solicitation. Any additional PMO staff shall be determined exclusively by the offeror, such that NASA does not envision mandating additional PMO staff positions and/or their minimum education or experience requirements.

47 Section J, Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, Schedule D, Labor Category Descriptions

The government has not provided a labor category description for “Program Executive Assistant” in Schedule D Labor Category Descriptions. Is it the government’s intent to allow the offeror to determine the qualifications for this overhead project management role?

See Answer to ID #46.

48 Section H, and Attachment J-7, Rates Schedule and Labor Categories, Schedule D, Labor Category Descriptions

The distinction between Site Managers and Program Leads Can the government please provide further clarification on the relationship between “site manager” (H-4), “on-site manager” (H-10) and Program Lead labor category (J-7-38) in the

DRFP?

In relation to Center-specific clauses, the NFSS NASA Labor Category of Program Manager is equivalent to Site Manager and On-site Manager.

Page A-22

Index

(ID)

Solicitation Reference Section(s)

Question All questions are “as received” from prospective offerors.

Answer

49 Section L, Attachment L- 1, Excel Pricing Model (EPM), Tab D

WYE Calculation The current calculation for determining WYE in Attachment L-1 is based on an 1840 hour work year, however the PWS references a work year as 1880 hours. Is it the government’s expectation that pricing be based on 1840 or 1880 hours?

In accordance with Section L, Attachment L-1, Excel Pricing…