00057ContractingandTechnicalQuestions_7.8.20.docx

Solicitation No. 86615619R00018 Amendment 0005

Contracting

1. Page 38 of the RFP states that, “The response shall consist of TWO (2) separate parts; Part I – Technical Proposal and Part II – Business Proposal.” We’re presuming that the Business Proposal would only contain pricing, socio-economic, and certifications information; while the detail on technical approach, management plan, key personnel resumes, past performance, etc., would all be in the Technical proposal section? Please provide any other guidance if we have misunderstood. Since the Socio-Economic Participation section includes dollar figures, we presume that this would belong in the Business Proposal section, but again, please clarify if we have misunderstood.

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity. The response shall consist of two of each for a total of four parts. Please see ‘B. Proposal Preparation Instructions.’ Additionally, it is fine to include Socioeconomic in with your IDIQ Technical Proposal.

2. Page 39 of the RFP, 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors, Section C has a different solicitation number than Section D immediately below. Should we assume that both sections should say “86615619R00018”?

Answer: The correct solicitation number for this requirement is 86615619R00018.

3. Page 42 of the RFP states that the Business Proposal (Part 2) shall be divided into a section A (Base Pricing) and a section B (Task Order 1 Pricing). Page 39 states that the copies provided shall include “Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ” and “Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One”. These two pages seem to contain conflicting guidance – should we submit a single version of each part with separate sections that cover both the IDIQ and the Task Order 1 as suggested on page 42, or should we submit four separate documents, with a Part 1 and a Part 2 for both the IDIQ and the Task Order as suggested on page 39?

Answer: That is correct in reference to what is suggested on page 39.

Email copies shall include:

Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One

4. Is the Task Order provided the actual TO or just a sample?

Answer: The task order provided is the actual task order; it is not a sample.

5. Are we to respond to the TO with a narrative or is this the TO only to be used for pricing and scheduling purposes?

Answer: Yes, respond to the TO with a narrative because it is the actual first TO.

6. On page 13 of task order 1, Southern Hospital, it says “HUD will develop a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan to be used to provide contract oversight.” On page 3 of the Q&A, the answer to question 19 is “The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal. Would you be able to clarify whether the QASP will be developed by HUD or must be included in the proposal response?

Answer: HUD developed a QASP to be used to provide contract oversight. The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

7. The CLIN on the SF1449 and Amendment 2 SF30 differ the LIN in the revised RFP Word Document. Will the government please clarify which CLIN/LIN offerors should use in their responses?

Answer: The LINs are corrected with this Amendment so that they match the RFP. Amendment 0002 captures the other line items (Travel and ODC). You may also fill in the spaces on the revised RFP document which is on page one.

8. The original RFP contemplated 8 projects per year on the SF1449 and Attachment 4 tables. Are the Not to Exceed amounts in the revised RFP for 8 projects per year? If so, how does the government desire offerors to reflect differing costs based on the size and complexity of the hospital to be assessed?

Answer: Eight projects a year is an estimation. Pricing is reflected in the business proposal, but the offeror is expected to break out pricing in detail.

9. Does the government still desire the pricing tables in Attachment 4 of the original RFP or should respondents include only a table of rates by staff level in the IDIQ and a proposed cost for the work outlined in the PWS for Task Order 1 in the Task Order 1 proposal?

Answer: Attachment 4 of the original RFP is the Past Performance Survey. A sample table is given in the Base Contract Pricing section of the RFP for the IDIQ. Interested vendors shall complete the pricing table in this amendment for Task Order 1 or provide a similar table. A breakout of pricing will be necessary (narrative) explaining your rationale in accordance with Section B. Task Order 1 Pricing.

10. Do offerors need to include a pricing table for the potential 6-month extension as originally requested in Attachment 4?

Answer: Yes, offerors shall include a pricing table for a possible 6-month extension for the IDIQ Contract.

11. In Question 19 from the Q&A, the government states that a QASP must be included in the technical proposal; however, attachment 3 of the original solicitation states that “A detailed QASP will be issued at the Task Order level for each project.” Does the government desire an acknowledgement of the QASP or does the government desire additional specific content related to a QASP in responses from offerors?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

12. Are we correct in the understanding that offerers other than small that exceed the HUD Small Business Subcontracting Goal of 25% will receive a greater credit? What is the amount of credit that the offerer will receive?

Answer: The RFP was amended. No, offerors other than small that exceed the HUD Small Business Subcontracting Goal of 25% will not receive greater credit.

13. IDIQ Solicitation, Page 3 of the RFP states “Individual Task Orders may be awarded on a Time and Material, Labor Hours, Fixed Price or Hybrid basis.” However, your Solicitation Q&As published on June 1, #55 states “No, HUD will not be amenable to fee arrangements such as fixed fee.” Please clarify this discrepancy.

Answer: The RFP has been revised to exclude fixed price. The solicitation does not mention the term ‘fixed fee’.

14. IDIQ Solicitation, Page 38 of the RFP states that proposals shall be “bound in a three-ring loose leaf binder”. However, your Solicitation Q&As published on June 1 #98 states “The Government has amended the solicitation to reflect email submissions only.” Please clarify this discrepancy.

Answer: The RFP has been amended for clarification.

15. IDIQ Solicitation, Section IV of the RFP refers to Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement (PWS) for the IDIQ and also the PWS for Task Order 1. Section 5 Specific Tasks differs between the IDIQ PWS and the Task Order 1 PWS. Which PWS should be included in the Technical Proposal?

Answer: Two separate technical proposals are required and both PWS’ are required, respectively. The RFP has been revised for clarity.

16. IDIQ Solicitation, Section IV of the RFP refers to Attachment 3 – Pricing Schedule. However, p. 43 of the RFP requests labor pricing by resource only for Task Order 1. Is the pricing schedule in Attachment 3 still required as part of the Business Proposal?

Answer: Yes, the pricing schedule in Attachment 3 is still required as part of the Business Proposal. For the IDIQ, you may use the sample provided on page 43 of the RFP. For Task Order 1 you may use the pricing schedule provided in the attachment referenced.

17. Task Order 1, Is the aggregate price proposal for Task Order 1 to be considered a “not to exceed” price, based on the hourly rates and resource levels proposed?

Answer: No, there is no not to exceed for Task Order One. The IDIQ base contract has ‘not to exceed’ amounts.

18. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 19, Page 3, The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal. Attachment 3 – HACS QASP, says, “A detailed QASP will be issued at the Task Order level for each project.” Page 14 of the TO1 PWS also states “HUD will develop a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan to be used to provide contract oversight.” A QASP from the government is typically several pages long. HUD has already provided a QASP in Attachment 3 and states in several instances that one will be issued for each TO. As an alternative, and given the 10-page limit, can offerors affirm in writing that we agree to comply with HUD's QASP at all levels?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include the QASP as an attachment.

19. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 19, Page 3; The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal. If a QASP should be included in Part I for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ, What is the page limit for it? And does this page limit count towards the limit for the Technical Approach?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

20. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 19, page 3, The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal. If a QASP should be included in Part I for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ, does the Government expect Offerors to use the language and format provided by the Government in “Attachment 3– Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan”, but update “Appendix 1 - Surveillance Matrix (SAMPLE)” to align with the items listed in “Section 6. Deliverables” of “Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement”?

Answer: HUD will develop a QASP to be used to provide contract oversight, not the contractor. The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

21. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 83, page 13; Proposals in response to Solicitation No 86615619R00018 shall be submitted via secured email. Please define what qualifies as a “secure email.” Will submission as an encrypted email suffice? Will HUD allow offerors to complete a test submission prior to the due date, to ensure receipt?

Answer: An Encrypted email will suffice but not required. OCPO will acknowledge receipt.

22. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 97, page 16, Question 97 Answer: The Proposal Matrix shall be a separate submission outside of addressing the evaluation factors and hence, should not be included in the factor(s) and is not included in the page count limitations. The answer to question 111 states that the proposal matrix should be within the technical proposal. Please clarify whether the proposal matrix should be within the TO1 technical approach response or submitted separately, as its own document.

Answer: The Proposal Matrix shall be a separate submission.

23. HACS Solicitation Q+As 86615619R00018.doc, Question 104, page 17. Will subcontractors with more than 20% of the contract value need 5 references in addition to the 5 references from Prime contractor? Answer: Yes, if more than 20% of the work is being completed by subcontractor(s), we will need their 5 references. This answer to question 129.c says that offerors are to submit no more than 5 surveys. Please confirm “their 5 references” refers to the past performance narrative, not the past performance survey.

Answer: Yes. Please refer to Factor C- Past Performance for details. Five (5) references that is referring to the past performance information chart in Attachment-5.

24. Revised RFP 86615619R00018, E. Proposal Submission Instructions 39 FACTOR A – Technical Approach (Shall not exceed 10 pages). As the government states that 2 sets of copies are required for submission are the IDIQ PROJECT SCHEDULE AND THE to Tech approach each limited to 10 pages, or is the technical approach for both the IDIQ & TO limited to 10 pages combined?

Answer: The RFP has been amended for clarity. The technical approach and project schedule for the IDIQ Contract is limited to 10 pages. The technical approach for Task Order 1 is limited to 10 pages.

25. Revised RFP 86615619R00018. 52.212-2 Evaluation—Commercial Items (Oct 2014), Factor A-Technical Approach, Page 44. The Government’s evaluation of the Offeror’s Technical Approach will include an evaluation of the following sub-factors: Project Schedule for IDIQ Contract: Page 39 of the revised RFP states that Factor A – Technical Approach should have two parts: project schedule for the IDIQ and technical approach to the task order. Yet on page 44, the technical approach for the task order is not mentioned as an evaluation criterion. How will the task order technical approach be evaluated?

Answer: The RFP has been amended to include the evaluation criterion for task order technical approach.

26. Revised RFP 86615619R00018. B. Task Order 1 Pricing. Page 43. The Offeror shall clearly identify what the total proposed price for task order 1 is and shall provide sufficient supporting documentation to show the derivation of the total proposed price, by each task identified in the task order PWS. Will Task Order One be awarded alongside the IDIQ award or is it a sample task order?

Answer: Task Order One will be awarded alongside the IDIQ base contract.

27. Revised RFP 86615619R00018 B. Proposal Preparation Instructions. PAGE 38. As part of the proposal submission, offerors shall submit a Proposal Matrix using the table below or similar format, which maps what page of the proposal addresses each Performance Work Statement requirement identified under Technical Approach, and which page of the proposal fully addresses each Evaluation Factor. Is a proposal matrix required in both the project schedule for the IDIQ and the TO technical response?

Answer: Yes, the IDIQ and Task Order One need to be referenced in the Proposal Matrix.

28. 2452.237-70 Key Personnel. (FEB 2006) - Page 17 of 48 of the Revised RFP, the listed key personnel "Contract / Project Manager" is listed as 100% dedicated in the percentage of effort column. Is the 100% requirement for the entire duration of the IDIQ or just for the specific period of performance for each task order?

Answer: Yes, the entire duration of the IDIQ.

29. Budget Information - Pages 1-2 of 48 of the Revised RFP, based on the funding allotted to the performance of work, how many task orders are planned to be issued on a per year basis?

Answer: The estimated number is approximately 8 projects per year.

30. C. Submission Address (pg. 39)– Please confirm based on the copies section that we are to submit four separate volumes: technical and business volumes for the IDIQ and separate technical and business volumes for Task Order 1.

Answer: Confirmed, the RFP has been amended for clarity. Please see question #3.

Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One o If so, do you intend that the TO technical volume only contain the distinctive technical approach for TO and does not require a separate management plan, etc.? Please see the response above.

o Similarly, would the TO business volume only be price and not include reps & certs, etc.?

Answer: to the RFP was amended to read email submissions only. Task Order One requires a management plan narrative, there is language to that refers to Task Order 1 in the Management Plan under Key personnel. The Task Order Business part is price only. In addition to that, see Task Order 1 Pricing for more instructions.

31. Within the amended RFP document, page 39 of 48, E. Proposal Submission Instructions section, factor A states (shall not exceed 10 pages). Please clarify if the 10 pages includes the overall RFP response, plus Task order 1? Or if Task Order 1 is a separate page count?

Answer: The RFP has been amended for clarity. The technical approach and project schedule for the IDIQ Contract is limited to 10 pages. The technical approach for Task Order 1 is limited to 10 pages.

32. Regarding past performance surveys required to be delivered directly to the HUD contacts, prior to the submission dates. Can you confirm that any forms submitted prior to release of the revised SOW are sufficient and that the references do not need to resubmit them?

Answer: HUD is confirming that forms submitted prior to the release of the revised PWS are sufficient and that the references do not need to be resubmitted.

33. Within the amended RFP document, page 43 of 48, Factor E- Price, section B, regarding travel to Task order 1, it states … the offeror shall identify its total proposed ceiling price for estimated travel costs. Can you clarify how you would like travel broken out for Task Order 1, and provide location details, if travel is to be required as part of Task order 1.

Answer: We understand the importance of hospital demographic information to appropriately scope and price the project. We must weigh this request against our obligation to protect the anonymity of our portfolio hospitals. To that end, the facility in question is in the southern region of the US.

34. In SECTION VI – Evaluation Factors – Socioeconomic Participation states the following however the revised small business goal in now 25%. Shouldn’t the below factors be re-adjusted accordingly?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity.

35. Amendment 0003. TO1. Please clarify: what is the solicitation number for the IDIQ, and what is the solicitation number for task order 1. Do they share the same solicitation number?

Answer: The IDIQ and Task Order 1 share the same solicitation number, 86615619R00018.

36. Updated Solicitation 86615619R0008 Amendment 0002. Solicitation, page 42. Factor E states "The proposal form (Standard Form 1449) must be fully executed and used as the cover sheet of this volume." Does this apply to both the IDIQ submission and the task order #1 submission?

Answer: Yes, this applies to both the IDIQ submission and Task Order 1 submission. Please use the SF 1449 as a separate cover sheet for both.

37. Updated Solicitation 86615619R0008 Amendment 0002. Solicitation, page 42 Factor E states "The proposal form (Standard Form 1449) must be fully executed and used as the cover sheet of this volume." A standard Form 1449 was not provided in the solicitation materials for Task Order #1. Do we use the SF 1449 from the IDIQ solicitation? The period of performance is different, as well as the quantity and unit. Or do we complete a new, blank SF 1449 for task order 1?

Answer: Yes, this applies to both the IDIQ submission and Task Order 1 submission. Please use the SF 1449 and amendments as a separate cover sheet for both.

38. Updated Solicitation 86615619R0008 Amendment 0002. Solicitation. Page 42. Factor E states "All amendments to the solicitation must be acknowledged on the signed SF1449 Page 1 or on additional pages immediately following the signed SF1449 page if necessary." What is the definition of "additional pages"? Do we create a statement of acknowledgement on blank pages?

Answer: The reference is to the SF 1449 and all amendments to it. Offerors must acknowledge the SF1449 and each SF30 as well.

39. Updated Solicitation 86615619R0008 Amendment 0003. Solicitation on page 39. Offerors shall indicate whether each team member is major, lead, or support. What are the definitions of Major, Lead, and Support?

Answer: The definitions are: Major: greater in dignity, rank, importance, or interest. Lead: To be in charge. Support: Give assistance to, enable to function or act.

40. Are the "Not to Exceed Amounts" listed in the tables for the Base year and Options periods for the total IDIQ to be shared by the multiple winning firms or are the amounts for each firm's IDIQ award? Revised RFP, page 1, Pricing Table.

Answer: The Not to Exceed Amounts are values that the Government will not go beyond.

41. "The contract maximum for the entire period of performance, including any options, shall be for the placement of orders totaling a maximum of $8,546,591.00." - Does this mean per each firm's IDIQ contract or for total contracts that HUD can award task orders during the base year and option periods? Revised RFP, page 3, Sec. 2.2 Contract Type.

Answer: The maximum contract value is for that amount listed, not per each firm’s IDIQ contract.

42. Please provide an explanation of the word “hybrid” in the following statement: "The Government contemplates award of a hybrid labor hour contract resulting from this solicitation". Revised RFP, page 35, 52.216-1 Type Of Contract. (APR 1984) Answer: Hybrid is referring to the fact that task orders can be either labor hour or time and materials or a combination depending on the situation.

43. Can font in tables be size 10 pitch? Revised RFP, page 38, Page Limitations and Format

Answer: Font size shall be no less than 12 pitch.

44. Should the 10-page limit for the IDIQ Technical Approach also include the Technical Approach for Task Order #1, or is this separate? Revised RFP, page 39, Technical Approach for Task Order #1.

Answer: It is separate. The RFP was amended for clarity.

45. "The offeror shall submit a Technical Approach for task order 1 that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the requirements (including any Section 508 requirements) described in the Performance Work Statement Section 5.1 through 5.3 and meeting the performance objectives outlined within the solicitation." - The PWS for Task Order #1 only lists Section 5.1 and is missing 5.2 and 5.3. Please clarify if this was intentional or an oversight. Revised RFP, page 39, Technical Approach for Task Order #1.

Take a look at the pws.

"...The strength of the Offeror’s key methodologies, integration strategies, and organizational considerations." Please describe what the Government means by “key methodologies.” Factor A Technical approach.

Answer: Key Methodologies is referring to areas of expertise.

46. Are Offeror’s permitted an additional 10 pages to respond to the Task Order #1? Factor A, technical approach.

Answer: Yes. The RFP was amended for clarity.

47. Is Past Performance information encouraged, as opposed to required, of subcontractors performing less than 20% TCV? Factor C - Past Performance: page 40.

Answer: No, Past Performance would not be required at that point.

48. The response to Question #19 states that QASP must be included in the proposal response. Is this same document dated 11/16/2018 (Version 1.0) that was issued with the Original Solicitation? PWS, page 12, Sec. 4.7.1 Quality Control Plan

Answer: The QASP will not need to be included in the proposal response.

49. Does the Offeror need to re-write the QASP to submit with the Offeror's response? Q&A, Response to Question 19, page 3 Answer: No, the Offeror does not need to re-write the QASP to submit with the Offeror’s response.

50. The response to Question #87 states that “The Contractor’s QCP shall be delivered to the COR within thirty (30) days after contract award (or with the Contractor’s proposal if it is an evaluated factor). Is the QCP requirement, in fact, an Evaluation Factor and should be submitted with Offeror's Response? TO1 PWS; page 13, Sec. Quality Control Plan, Factor B – Management Plan; Q&A, Response to Question 87, page 14; Revised RFP, page 45

Answer: No, the QCP requirement is not an evaluation factor in this RFP.

51. If Offeror is subcontracting less than 20% and the past performance is not required, is the past performance for the subcontractor allowed to be included? Q&A, Response to Question 101, page 17.

Answer: If the contractor is subcontracting less 20% of the contract, it is not required. The contractor will not be penalized for including the information if it is included in the page count.

52. “Magnitude will be measured by the required number of combined audits, inspections, and reviews conducted on a weekly basis.” – Would the Government consider allowing an additional one (1) page and a table to be included with the Past Performance section to list all other projects performed in the last 3 years and number of audits/inspections/reviews performed for each? Q&A, Response to Question 130, C, page 23 Answer: What the Offeror provides in reference to magnitude must be included within the stated page count or risk the information not being considered.

53. The requirements for Task Order One are somewhat confusing as they seem to overlap with the requirements for the IDIQ proposal and are merged in with the IDIQ requirements. It is not quite clear which requirements are to go in the IDIQ proposal, which ones go in the Task Order One proposal, and which ones go in both. QUESTION: Would the Government please separate the requirements for Task Order One so it is clear which requirements are required in each proposal?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity. Please see Proposal Preparation Instructions.

54. There are no Evaluation Factors listed for Task Order One. Would the Government please list the evaluation factors for Task Order One?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include the information about how offerors will be evaluated for Task Order One.

55. RFP page 39 of 48, E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH, Technical Approach for Task Order 1 “The offeror shall submit a technical approach for task order 1 that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the requirements (including any Section 508 requirements) described in the Performance Work Statement Section 5.1 through 5.3 and meeting the performance objectives outlined within the solicitation.”There are no Section 508 compliance requirements mentioned in the RFP, the IDIQ PWS, the Task Order 1 PWS, or the QASP. QUESTION: Would the Government please clarify if Section 508 compliance is required for any IDIQ proposal requirements or Task Order 1 proposal requirements?

Answer: Yes, the proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant.

56. Q&A #48: Does the proposal submission need to be submitted in a 508 compliant format? Answer: Yes, the proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant format. Section 508 compliance was not in the original RFP requirements. This is a highly unusual requirement for a proposal submission. There is a long checklist of requirements/actions to be performed and additional written supplements in the text to be Section 508 compliant. FAR Subpart 39.2 talks to contractor deliverables or performance, not to pre-award proposal submissions. QUESTION: Due to the limited page count and response time, would the Government please remove the requirement for the proposal submission to be Section 508 compliant?

Answer: ,No, the proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant format.

57. Page 38 of 48, A. General Instructions, Page Limitations and Format: “Font size shall be no less than 12 pitch or a maximum 10 characters per inch spacing.”Q&A # 95: “Page Limitations and Format. Font size shall be no less than 12 pitch or a maximum 10 characters per inch spacing. Are we permitted to use fonts smaller than 12-point in headers/footers, graphics, and associated captions?”Answer: “Fonts less than 12 pitch will not be permitted.”“Pitch” and “Point” are very different. Fixed fonts are measured in “pitch” (characters per inch), where each character has the same width (an “i” takes up the same space as an “m”) and makes the document considerably longer due to the extra space around the characters (Fixed Font example: Courier). Proportional fonts are measured in “points” (height of the characters—a point is defined as 1/72 inch high), where an “i” takes up less space than an “m” (Proportional Font examples: Times New Roman, Calibri, Arial). QUESTION: Is it the Government’s intent to have the proposal submission in a fixed font (pitch) (such as Courier), or can a modern proportional font (point) be used (such as Times New Roman, Calibri, or Arial)? If a fixed font (pitch) is required, will the Government please allow additional pages for the response due to the nature of fixed fonts taking up considerably more room?

Answer: The font type is the contractor’s preference. Proposal content shall not exceed the stated page limitations.

58. RFP Section V – Solicitation Provisions, Instructions, and Evaluation Criteria52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items (DEVIATION 2018-O0013) (Oct 2018) p. 38 of 48; B. Proposal Preparation Instructions“… The response shall consist of TWO (2) separate parts; Part I – Technical Proposal and Part II – Business Proposal. …” QUESTION: Would the Government please clarify which Factors and other criteria go in Part 1 and in Part 2? Also, would the Government please clarify if 2 additional documents are required for Task Order 1?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity. The IDIQ must contain a technical part and business part and Task Order 1 must have a technical part and business part for a total of four separate parts.

59. Related to Q6 above, on IDIQ Page 39 of 42, Section C. Submission Address specifies that copies to be included in responses include: Part I and Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ and Part I and Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One. RFP page 42 of 48, FACTOR E – PRICE, A. Base Contract Price and B. Task Order 1 Price. Q&A #80: “Page 50 paragraph 1 mentions sections A and B. Only section A. Base Contract Pricing is present, section B is not listed.” Answer: “The language for Sections A and B have been removed from the solicitation. Volume I will be the Technical Proposal and Volume II will be the Business Proposal.”The exact same language for FACTOR E – PRICE and A. Base Contract Price from the original RFP is still in the document. Section B. Task Order 1 Price has been added. QUESTION: Will the Government please clarify the Volume/Part names and the requirements for:

· IDIQ Volume/Part I and Volume/Part II, and

· Task Order Volume/Part I and Volume/Part II?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity. The IDIQ must contain a technical part and business part and Task Order 1 must have a technical part and business part for a total of four separate parts.

60. RFP page 39 of 48: E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH, “Schedule for IDIQ Contract” and “Technical Approach for Task Order 1.”

Schedule for IDIQ Contract: “The offeror shall submit a project schedule for the IDIQ that demonstrates a clear understanding of the required contract operations and HUD requirements with realistic timeframes for performing all tasks.”

Q&As # 16, 17, 18, and 23 indicate the Project Schedule is to be in Task Order1, but the RFP still has the requirement listed under the IDIQ requirements. QUESTION: Will the Government please clarify in which proposal submission (IDIQ and/or Task Order 1) the Project Schedule should be.

Answer: Please see response #59.

61. RFP Section V – Solicitation Provisions, Instructions, and Evaluation Criteria 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items (DEVIATION 2018-O0013) (Oct 2018) p. 38 of 48; B. Proposal Preparation Instructions “… The proposals shall be accompanied by a transmittal letter, signed by an individual who is authorized to bind the company on contractual issues. ”QUESTION: Would the Government please clarify in which Part(s) (I, II, or both I and II) the Transmittal Letter should be? And where in the Part(s) will it go (before the cover, as an attachment, etc.)? And is it required in those Parts in both the IDIQ and Task Order responses Answer: The Transmittal letter can be a cover to the Business Proposal.

62. Regarding fee models, RFP Section II, page 3 of 48 states “Individual Task Orders may be awarded on a Time and Materials basis, Labor Hours, Fixed Price or Hybrid basis.” And the answer to Q82 states “Government will have the flexibility to issue time and material and/or fixed prices Task Orders”. However, the answer to Q55 states that “HUD will not be amenable to fee arrangements such as fixed fee”. Question, Will the Government please clarify if fixed fee arrangements may be requested on specific Task Orders?

Answer: The Government anticipates an award of a hybrid labor hour contract resulting from this solicitation. The RFP does not reference ‘fixed fee.’

63. The answer to Q19 states that “The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal.” The QASP is referenced only in the Task Order, not in the IDIQ. It appears the QASP is required in the Task Order Technical Proposal. Will the Government please clarify if the QASP is required to be part of both the Task Order Technical Proposal and the IDIQ Technical Proposal?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

64. IDIQ Page 39 under Technical Approach for Task Order 1 states “Offerors shall further indicate whether each subcontractor/team member is considered “major”, and whether the subcontractor/team member will serve in a “lead” or “support” role.”QUESTION: Will the Government please define a “major” subcontractor/team member, a “lead role” and a “support role”?

Answer: Please see the response to question 39.

65. We understand from Q109 that commercial past performance is acceptable if it meets the four components – recency, relevancy (including “scope, value, and magnitude”), quality, and sufficiency. And that “Value” is defined in Q99 as the dollar value of the contract. Revenue paid by our clients is confidential information and cannot be disclosed. QUESTION: Will the Government consider determining relevancy based on scope and magnitude only? And/or is there other criterion we might be able to provide to support the relevancy of our Past Performance?

Answer: Relevancy would encompass a combination of the scope, value, and magnitude. Past Performance is a criterion. No other criteria will be substituted for it.

66. The answer to Q94 refers to page 37 of the IDIQ, Page Limitations and Format section, which states “The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronyms do not count against page count limitations. Additionally, resumes submitted for key personnel do not count against the page count limitation, but each resume shall be limited to 3 pages in length. Proposal contents that exceed the stated page limitations will be removed from the proposal by the Contracting Officer, prior to turning the proposal over to the Government evaluation teams, and will not be considered in the evaluation.” The answer to Q95 states “In accordance with the solicitation, only the items identified under “Page Limitations and Format” can be omitted from the page count limitations.” The answers to Q97 and Q111 also specify that the Proposal Matrix is not included in the page count limitations. However, the answers to Q105 and Q108 state that “The cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronyms do not count against page count limitations. All other items count towards the page limit. The answer to Q86 also states that Offerors shall provide details related to an OCI in the Technical Proposals. QUESTION: Will the Government please confirm that resumes for key personnel (up to 3 pages each), the Proposal Matrix, and the OCI information do not count towards the page limits?

Answer: It is confirmed that the cover letter, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables and glossary of abbreviations & acronyms, and proposal matrix do not count against page count limitations. Additionally, resumes submitted for key personnel do not count against the page count limitation, but each resume shall be limited to 3 pages in length. OCI information is counted in the page count.

67. An extension of 21 days was given with the release of the first round of Q&As and an additional requirement of a second proposal submission of Task Order 1. This is not a lot of time to review and address clarifications and new requirements, and prepare two compelling, compliant proposal submissions. QUESTION: Would the Government please consider an extension of 4 weeks following the release of the next Amendment and Q&As?

Answer: The CO will determine extensions when or if applicable.

68. HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018 (page 39). Found in Technical Approach for Task Order 01 Instructions. Does the Government mean “proposed team” rather than “proposal team” in the following sentence within the Technical Approach for Task Order 01 instructions? “The offeror shall also identify its proposal team (prime and all subcontractors /team members) and discuss the role that each member will have in accomplishing the specific requirements of the overarching IDIQ contract PWS and the task order 1 PWS.”

Answer: Yes, the RFP was revised for clarity.

69. HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018 (page 39). Technical Approach for Task Order 01 Instructions. Please confirm that Factor A – Technical Approach for the IDIQ has a 10-page limit, and that we are to submit Factor A – Technical Approach for Task Order 01 as a separate document with a 10-page limit.

Answer: The RFP has been amended for clarity. The technical approach and project schedule for the IDIQ Contract is limited to 10 pages. The technical approach for Task Order 1 is limited to 10 pages.

70. Answers to questions, Question #48 (pages 7 & 8). 508 Compliance Requirement. Due to the additional text needed within the page-limited Technical Proposals and the time required to make documents 508 compliant, will the Government consider removing the 508 compliance proposal submission requirement? Does the Proposal submission need to be submitted in a 508 compliant format? Answer: Yes, the proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant format.

Answer: The proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant format.

71. Answers to questions, Question #48 (pages 7 & 8). 508 Compliance Requirement. If the Government continues to require 508 compliance for the Technical Proposals, please confirm that summaries describing the content of tables are not required.

Answer: 508 is required and provide the summaries describing the content of tables according to instructions.

72. Answers to questions, Question #48 (pages 7 & 8). 508 Compliance Requirement. If the Government continues to require 508 compliance for the Technical Proposals, are the Business Proposals required to be 508 compliant as well?

Answer: Yes, the proposal submission needs to be in a 508 Compliance format.

73. Answers to questions, Question #48 (pages 7 & 8). 508 Compliance Requirement. If the Government decides to keep the 508 compliance requirement for proposal submission, will the Government extend the submission deadline? Answers to questions, Question #19 (page 3). QASP. Can the Government please clarify its answer to the below question regarding the QASP. Considering the Technical Proposal is a part of the Proposal Response, what does the Government mean by “the QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal”? Will including the QASP as an appendix or attachment to the IDIQ Technical Proposal suffice? 19. In the introduction area of the QASP. This plan sets forth the procedures and guidelines HUD will use in ensuring the required performance standards or service levels are achieved by the Contractor. A detailed QASP will be issued at the Task Order level for each project. Please confirm that the QASP is a post-award requirement/deliverable. If not, should a response to the QASP be included in the response? If so, in which part of the proposal should it be included?

Answer: The QASP must be included in the proposal response and must be included in the technical proposal.

Answer: The RFP was amended to include it as an attachment.

74. HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018, Evaluation Criteria – Past Performance (page 46). Past Performance. Because the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) expired in the beginning of 2019, will CPARS ratings suffice?

Answer: Yes, CPARS is a resource for performance evaluations.

75. Answers to questions, Question #95 (page 16). Question & Answers, Page Limitations & Format. In answer to question 95… “Fonts less than 12 pitch will not be permitted.” Will the Government consider allowing a smaller font size and type for graphics and tables? Or will the Government consider increasing the page count to accommodate for the graphic and table 12-point font requirements?

Answer: No, the Government will not consider allowing a smaller font size or an increase in the page count. The RFP was amended for about page counts.

76. HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018 (page 39). Technical Approach for Task Order 01 Instructions. Can the Government please provide the Section 508 requirements referenced in the Task Order 1 instructions below? “The offeror shall submit a technical approach for task order 1 that demonstrates logical and feasible methods for meeting the requirements (including any Section 508 requirements) described in the Performance Work Statement Section 5.1 through 5.3 and meeting the performance objectives outlined within the solicitation.”

Answer: The proposal submission needs to be submitted in a 508 compliant format.

77. 52.2121 Instructions to Offerors, C. Submission Address. The instructions in this section state: “Copies:

Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One” Does the government want offerors to submit Part I and Part II for the IDIQ and Task Order 1 separately? Does the 10 page limits for Part I Technical apply to the IDIQ and Task Order 1 combined (10 page total) or does the Government allow up to 10 pages for each Part I (IDIQ and Task Order 1) for a total of 20 pages?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity.

78. E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH, 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items, Factor A – Technical Approach. In section E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH, the sub-sections ask for “Project Schedule for IDIQ Contract” and “Technical Approach for Task Order 1”. In section 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items, Factor A – Technical Approach the evaluation factors only list “Project Schedule for IDIQ Contract”. Will the government clarify: Does the government require a technical narrative to address the six PWS tasks detailed in Attachment 1 – Performance Work Statement? Or should the technical narrative only address the tasks in Attachment 6 – Request for Proposal for Task Order One? Should the project schedule included in the Technical Approach address the six PWS tasks in Attachment 1 (IDIQ level) or the tasks in Attachment 6 – Request for Proposal for Task Order One?

Answer: Yes, a technical narrative is required for the IDIQ contract and Task order 1. The IDIQ and Task Order have their own specific instructions. The RFP was amended for clarity.

79. E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH 52.212- 2 Evaluation – Commercial Items, Factor A – Technical Approach, In section E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH, the sub-sections ask for “Project Schedule for IDIQ Contract” and “Technical Approach for Task Order 1”. In section 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items, Factor A – Technical Approach the evaluation factors only list “Project Schedule for IDIQ Contract”. Will the government clarify: Does the Government intend for the project schedule to be developed for the IDIQ or Task Order 1? If IDIQ, is this supposed to be the activities and duration for delivering these services at an average sized Hospital, or what assumptions should be made in order to accurately depict timelines (as this can vary based on size)?

Answer: The RFP was amended to include the evaluation criterion for Task Order One. The RFP states that the Project Schedule is for the IDIQ Contract.

80. E. Proposal Submission Instructions, FACTOR A – TECHNICAL APPROACH. What form does the Government want to see the project schedule (WBS, MS Project Plan, etc.)? Should this be included as a PDF in the 10-page response or as a separate attachment?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity.

81. Section VI – Evaluation Factors, Factor B – Management Plan. The section states: “How well the proposal supports the achievement of the Government’s objectives and requirements outlined in the solicitation regarding: Key Personnel and responsibilities; subcontracting arrangements and reporting relationships of all subcontractors; successful communication and coordination between the contractor and the government personnel/roles; schedules of all tasks and subtasks, meetings, and deliverables.”Will the government clarify if the tasks and subtasks, meetings, deliverables in the request schedule are different than those contained in the project schedule in Factor A?

Answer: Yes, the factors are different.

82. Q&A, #26, Page 4. In order to provide the pricing transparency required for the task order price, which HUD has indicated needs to include details on both labor hours and travel, offerors typically provide assumptions. For example, a location is not provided in the sample task, so an assumption must be made on location for travel costs. However, HUD has indicated in Q&A #26 that assumptions are not permitted. How should offerors communicate these assumptions used in the price build up? Can these details be included in the business volume?

Answer: An assumption is acceptable since the specifics are not provided.

83. Q&A #83 and Instructions to Offerors, Section A General Instructions, Q&A page 13 and RFP page 38; The Q&A indicates that email submission is preferred, however, page 38 of 48 of the RFP, Instructions to Offerors, General instructions, item A references CDs and Binders. Will HUD remove this language to clarify that only email submission is required?

Answer: The RFP has been amended for clarity.

84. Revised RFP, Section E, proposal submission instructions, and Factor D - Socio Economic participation; Page 39 and Page 41; Per Factor A, Proposal Submission Instructions, offerors are instructed not to include pricing information in the technical proposal. However, the fill in table in section e, Proposal submission instruction, section D Socio economic criteria includes a table that requires dollar values. Should this table be submitted with the technical proposal but exclude the dollar values? Or should the entire table be submitted in the business volume to include pricing details in the last column?

Answer: The Socioeconomic table shall be filled out completely and shall be included in the technical portion.

85. Revised RFP, Instructions to Offerors, and Evaluation - Commercial Items. Page 39 and Page 41. We note that the submission instructions changed to accommodate the task order response. However, the technical approach evaluation criteria references the previous PWS and does not mention criteria for the sample task response. Can HUD Provide criteria for evaluation of the technical approach for the revised PWS?

Answer: The RFP has been revised for clarity.

86. Revised RFP, Instructions to Offerors, and Evaluation - Commercial Items. Page 39 and Page 41. We note that HUD provided a revised PWS for response in the technical approach. Can HUD please confirm that there is no requirement to respond to the previous PWS except in the form of an IDIQ project schedule?

Answer: Confirmed.

87. Revised RFP, Instructions to Offerors, Section A General Instructions Section C submission Address and section E Proposal Submission Instructions. Page 39 to 41. This section indicates that 4 documents are required: Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for the IDIQ and Part I & Part II for the Request for Proposals for Task Order One. However, Section E in the instructions indicates that there should be one 10 page technical volume with sub sections for IDIQ and Task Order 1, and one price volume with 2 sections, A&B for IDIQ and Task Order 1 pricing. Can HUD please clarify if two documents or four documents are required?

Answer: The RFP was amended for clarity.

88. Part E: Proposal Submission Instructions, Factor E Price, A: Base Contract Pricing: Page 42. Can the government please confirm that contractors are responsible to develop the level of effort/hours for the task order 1 pricing as all information provided has been listed as “example”?

Answer: Please follow Task Order One Pricing instructions because a narrative is required. Additionally, the offeror shall use the spreadsheet provided in the attachments or a similar spreadsheet.

89. Part E: Proposal Submission Instructions, Factor E Price: Page 42. Could the government please confirm that contractors are required to submit two Excel pricing submission files – the first being “4Price+Schedule” for the IDIQ with labor categories and rates only and the second being the sample task order file with LOE developed by the contractor?

Answer: Yes, confirmed.

Technical Questions and Answers

1. Section 5.1 and page 17 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) state that the government may deduct 50-100% of the CLIN payments for unacceptable deliverables of various types, and Section 6.2 also describes the 5-day revision process for unacceptable deliverables. While we would certainly anticipate all of our deliverables being accepted, does the government have further definition of “acceptable” for the Final Presentation and Final Report deliverables?

Answer: The Final Presentation and Final Report will be deemed acceptable when all of the Government’s comments have been addressed.

2. What is the approximate bed size, net patient service revenue, and medical staff size for the hospital covered by Task Order 1?

Answer: We understand the importance of hospital demographic information to appropriately scope and price the project. We must weigh this request against our obligation to protect the anonymity of our portfolio hospitals. To that end, the facility in question has less than 200 beds and is a not-for-profit community hospital in the southern region of the United States.

3. Task Order 1, In order to scope and staff the project appropriately, please provide a description of the subject hospital with the following information:

a. Net patient services revenue…