Questions and Answers for COOP RFQ.docx
DOCX document 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- COOP Management Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 95332420Q0020
- Issued by
- Millennium Challenge Corporation
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 95332420Q00200001_US.pdf | ||
| 95332420Q0020 FBO.pdf | ||
| COOP Management Services 2-6-20.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
95332420Q0020 - COOP Management Services Questions and Answers
| General |
| The RFP contains Reps and Certs for offerors to complete, as well as the Standard Form 1449. Typically, these would be attached to the Price Volume, but in this case, the Price Volume is limited to 2 pages. |
Please confirm that Reps & Certs and SF1449 may be attached as appendices to the Price Volume and will not count against the page limit? Alternately, please specify how these may be provided in a compliant manner.
Answer: The Reps and Certs may be attached as appendices.
| General |
| Please confirm that reference materials to aid Government evaluators—such as tables of contents, glossaries, and compliance matrices—do not count against page limits? |
Answer: Page limits are fixed at the values set in the RFQ.
| Section L – Volume Overview Table |
| The “Page Limit and Submission Process” field for the Management section is an accidental duplication of the Past Performance section (it says “maximum of three pages for each [project] experience,” which does not apply to the Management Section. |
Please specify the page limit for the Management section (Evaluation Factor 2). In addition, please specify whether the Draft Quality Control Plan counts against the overall Management Section page limit.
Answer: To ensure a quality Draft Quality Control Plan, please ensure that the page count does not exceed three (3) pages as outlined on page 17 of the RFQ. After negotiations and award, “the final Quality Control Plan is due 30 calendar days after Task Order award.” This version will be the primary Quality Control Plan for the award.
| Section L – Volume Overview Table |
| Page limits for resumes are discussed in the Technical row of this table. However, per the instructions, Resumes are discussed in the Management Section. Either way, they have a separate page count of 3 pages per resume. |
To ensure compliance and allow for easier page counting, we intend to provide the Key Personnel Resume(s) as an Appendix to the proposal document. Please confirm that the Government considers this is an acceptable approach.
Answer: Yes, providing Key Personnel Resume (s) as an Appendix is acceptable.
| Section L – Volume Overview Table; MCC 52.204-72 Cover Letter… |
| The table refers to a required “Cover Page,” but no directions are given for what it should contain. Later in the RFP, instructions are given for a Cover Letter, which is not discussed elsewhere. |
Please confirm that the “Cover Page” and the “Cover Letter” refer to the same document, and that the instructions in MCC 52.204-72 indicate what should be included in it.
Answer: Yes, the cover page and cover letter are synonymous.
| L.3 – Past Performance |
| The instructions specify a minimum number of project experience references that may be provided, but not a maximum. Is there a maximum limit to how many projects may be provided? |
Answer: Please ensure a “maximum of three pages for each [project] experience” not to exceed three (3) relevant projects.
| L.3 – Past Performance |
| No Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) template or instructions are provided, but there is a single reference to “information obtained from questionnaire.” Given the tight schedule for this proposal and the lack of other references to PPQs, this seems to be an error. Please confirm that PPQs are not required for this proposal? |
Answer: On page 50 of the RFQ, MCC states that “sources for Past Performance information includes among other things: information provided by the offeror, information obtained from questionnaire and information from any other sources available to the Government, to include but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting Assessment (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers. In the case of an offeror for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror will be evaluated neither favorably nor unfavorably on past performance. Failure to provide any portion of the information required may adversely affect the offeror's past performance rating.” A PPQ template is not required, which is why it was not submitted due to the many other options of providing relevant Past Performance.
| Section L |
| The instructions specify 12-point Times New Roman font. Many RFPs allow for a reduced font size (e.g. 10 point) for graphics, tables, and headers/footers. Will the Government allow a reduced font size for graphics, tables, and headers/footers? |
Answer: Yes, 10-point Times New Roman font is only acceptable for graphics, tables, charts, and headers/footers.
| Section L |
| Section L (at the top of page 49) states that |
“a minimum of three (3) electronic documents shall be submitted for this RFP:
A – Cover Page (First Page of Technical Volume) B – Technical Volume… C – Price Volume…”
These instructions appear self-contradictory: if the Cover Page is part of the Technical Volume, then it seems there should only be TWO files: the Technical Volume and the Price Volume. Please confirm there are only TWO files required?
Answer: Yes, the are only two volumes (technical and price). However, the cover page is a separate paper should be its own separate entity within the Technical Volume. There was an additional update of the RFQ posted on February 7th, 2020, which removes the “draft” marks and updated several aspects therein.
| General |
| The RFP pages contain a “DRAFT” watermark. Please confirm that, despite the “DRAFT” watermark, the RFP is in fact considered a FINAL RFP. |
Answer: Yes, the are only two volumes (technical and price). However, the cover page is a separate paper should be its own separate entity within the Technical Volume. There was an additional update of the RFQ posted on February 7th, 2020, which removes the “draft” marks and updated several aspects therein.
| General |
| Given the ambiguities in the RFP, including the missing page limit for the Management Section, will the Government consider extending the deadline to allow Offerors time to react to Q&A responses? |
Answer: No. The Government is not considering extending the deadline.
| C.3.3 and L.2 |
| Section C.3.3 states that “contractor employee(s) providing services under this contract must be able to obtain a Moderate Risk Public Trust clearance.” However, in discussing resume requirements, L.2 states that “Offerors shall have current Moderate Risk Public Trust Security Clearances.” |
Please clarify this apparent contradiction: are proposed employees required to already hold a current clearance, or only to be able to obtain one?
Answer: The proposed employees must be able to obtain a Moderate Risk Public Trust clearance. However, employees having this clearance will greatly expedite their onboarding, if the contractor is selected for award.
| L.1 – Technical Approach and Capabilities |
| L.1 instructs offerors to discuss capability to perform the tasks in “sections C.2 and C.3.” This appears to be a typo, as it would have offerors discuss the Background section of the SOW (C.2) but not the actual Tasks (C.4). Please confirm this reference should be to C.3 and C.4, NOT C.2 and C.3. |
Answer: Yes, the range should be C.3 to C.4.
| L.2 – Management Capability |
| L.2 instructs offerors to discuss C.4 through C.14 in the Management Section. As discussed in the questions above, C.4 seems to belong in the Technical Section, not the Management Section. Please confirm this reference should be to C.5 through C.14, not C.4 through C.14. |
Answer: Yes, the range should be C.5 to C.13.
| L.2 |
| In discussing resumes, L.2 states that “Candidates will be evaluated using the factors provided within the Statement of Work located in Section C.” |
Section C does not contain any personnel requirements/evaluation factors. Please confirm that this statement should instead read “Candidates will be evaluated based on their expected ability to perform the work described in the Statement of Work located in Section C.”
Answer: The Contractor shall manage and provide qualified personnel that can perform defined tasks listed in the Statement of Work (Section C) to aid the Program Office.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .