responsestoquestions.docx

DOCX document 19 KB Posted

Attached to
Hospital Assessment Consulting Services
Solicitation number
86615619R00018
Issued by

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
00056Independent Review of a Southern Hospital QASP 06032020.doc DOC document
00055REVISED TO1 task order pws Hosp Assmt Indept Review of a Southern Hospital PWS - 2020-07-01.doc DOC document
00057ContractingandTechnicalQuestions_7.8.20.docx DOCX document
00054Copy of TO1 Hospital Assessment Consulting Svcs - Price Schedule 2020-06-25.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
00053Hospital Assessment Consulting Services QASP 03042020.doc DOC document
00051downloadForm.pdf PDF
00052HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018June30.docx DOCX document
downloadFormamendment.pdf PDF
HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018June5.docx DOCX document
HACS - Solicitation Q As 86615619R00018.doc DOC document
HACS - Revised RFP 86615619R00018.docx DOCX document
Amendment2SF 30.pdf PDF
TO1 task order pws Hospital Assessment Independent Review of a Southern Hospital PWS.doc DOC document
Copy of TO1 Hospital Assessment Consulting Svcs - Price Schedule 2020-05-20.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
SF 30.pdf PDF
1Sol_86615619R000181.pdf PDF
6Attachment 5 - Past Performance Information.docx DOCX document
2Hospital Assessment Consulting ServicesPWS.doc DOC document
4Price Schedule.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
5Attachment 4 - Past Performance Survey.docx DOCX document
3Hospital Assessment Consulting Services QASP.doc DOC document
Show all 21

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Solicitation No. 86615619R00018

Questions and Responses

1. 52.212-2 Evaluation -- Commercial Items (Oct 2014) - Factor C - Past Performance.

"Of those determined to be recent, HUD will assess the degree of similarity in scope, value and magnitude the past performance efforts submitted have to the solicitation requirements to determine relevancy. For this solicitation, magnitude is defined as the average combined number of audits, inspections and reviews conducted on a weekly basis;"

Please clarify the intended meaning of "audits, inspections, and reviews" in the definition of magnitude.

Answer: Please quantify the numbers of projects you have recently conducted, which are similar to the tasks detailed in the PWS.

2. 52.212-2 Evaluation -- Commercial Items (Oct 2014) - Factor D - Socioeconomic Participation Page 28.

"The government will evaluate this factor as follows:

(1) Offerors who propose to perform more than 50% of the total cost of labor with prime contractor workforce will be considered acceptable and will then be evaluated under element (2). Offerors proposing to subcontract 50% or more of the total cost of labor will be considered unacceptable and will not be evaluated further.

(2) Offerors who submit letters of commitment compliant with the requirements associated with this factor in the instructions to offerors will be considered acceptable and will then be evaluated under element (3). Offerors who fail to provide commitment letters in accordance with the instructions will be considered unacceptable and will not be evaluated further.

(3) Offerors proposing the greatest small business participation will receive higher ratings than those who propose less..."

Because offerors do not have insight into the specific task orders and the associated skillsets needed under the IDIQ, it is impossible to identify individual subcontractors and the dollar value of the labor to be performed for subcontractors across the entire IDIQ. As an alternative, please confirm that the Government will allow the offeror to submit socioeconomic goals in terms of a percentage only and by specific designation (SDVOSB, WOSB, etc.) instead of specific dollar and percentage amounts by specific named subcontractor.

Answer: In the amendment we posted on June 1, we attached the first Task Order PWS, now one should be able to gain insight on the percentage of the total cost of labor.

3. 52.212-2 Evaluation -- Commercial Items (Oct 2014) page 29.

"Evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance"

Please confirm that this language is correct about relative importance when compared to the language at the bottom of the page that states "The non-price Factors A, B, C and D are considered equally important…"

Answer: We are deleting the sentence “The non-price Factors A, B, C and D are considered equally important, while Factor E is considered less important.”

4. Attachment 4 -- Past Performance Survey.docx

"Summarize the services acquired here"

"The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is procuring the services described in the box below."

Please clarify whether the survey should describe the services related to this IDIQ as indicated by the referenced text, or whether the survey should describe the services provided by offerors to the survey respondents.

Answer: Yes, the Past Performance Survey must describe similar services related to this IDIQ.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .