RFP 95476723R1000 Q_A.pdf

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. Name and Title of Signer (Type or Print) 16A. Name and title of Contracting Officer (Type or Print)

Bruce Falk

Contracting Officer bfalk@ushmm.org / (202) 314-7828

15B. Contractor/Offeror 15C. Date Signed 16B. United States of America

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. Date Signed

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITIONS UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. Contract ID Code Page of Pages

1 7

2. Amendment/Modification No. 3. Effective Date 4. Requisition/Purchase Req. No. 5. Project No. (if applicable)

0001 08/18/2022

6. Issued By Code USHMM 7. Administered By (If other than Item 6) Code

UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM

OFFICE OF FINANCE, DIV. OF PROCUREMENT

100 RAOUL WALLENBERG PL, SW

WASHINGTON, DC 20024

BRUCE FALK, CONTRACTING OFFICER bfalk@ushmm.org

8. Name and Address of Contractor (No., Street, County, and Zip Code) (X)

X

9A. Amendment of Solicitation No.

USHMM RFP 95476723R1000

9B. Date (See Item 11)

07/22/2022 10A. Modification of Contract/Order No.

10B. Date (See Item 13)

Code Facility Code

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers x is extended is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDG-

MENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT

IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. Accounting and Appropriation Data (if required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACT/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(x) A. This change order is issued pursuant to: (Specify authority) The changes set forth in item 14 are made in the Contract Order No. in item 10A.

B. The above numbered Contract/Order is modified to reflect the administrative changes (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

Set fourth item 14, pursuant to the authority of FAR 43.103 (b)

C. This supplemental agreement is entered into pursuant to authority of:

D. Other (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. Description of Amendment/Modification (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

This contains the full questions and answers for this RFP and all remaining attachments.

35564

08/18/2022

RFP 95476723R1000 Q&A

USHMM RFP 95476723R1000 (Varied Support Services) Q&A

Q&A # Reference Document and Section Page # Question Answer

RFP L.4(b) - Contract

Definitization

We request USHMM to adjust the due date for proposals to at least 10 business days after the responses to vendor questions are provided.

Confirmed. The new submission deadline for proposals is hereby changed to: September 1, 2022, 5:00 PM ET

RFP, Section B.1.2 and, RFP, Section C.1.3 and, Please identify who the incumbent contractor(s) are for this opportunity, including company name, contract number, and which scope areas each incumbent contractor is currently performing.

Currently, all scope areas of the present RFP are being fulfilled on a T&M basis either via staffing augmentation or on a project basis, a situation that the present RFP hopes to redress:

SERVICE FIRST CONSULTING, LLC

2306 GLEBE ROAD

ARLINGTON, VA 22207

Historically, contracts for these services include: AC-9531-16-0011 (CRM Support), AP-9531-17-0001 (Travel Services), AC-9531-19-0037 (Budget Support, Reporting, and Architecture), and 444 (Purchase Card Administration). However, since the expiration of the Museum's federal contracts with this supplier the end of March, 2022, all scope areas have been extended and supported via donated funds against the Museum's standard terms and conditions for non-appropriated contracts as 525 (Finance Help Desk), 700 (Shared Services Analytics, Operations & Maintenance), and 785 (Travel Services).

Exhibit I Performance

Work Statement

Please specify whether there have been any changes in the scope of this RFP from the scope of the incumbent contract(s).

Yes, each scope area has been rewritten and consolidated for clarity, concision, address and oversight via measurable QAs, and to foster responsive firm, fixed price solutions.

USHMM wishes to emphasize that we are seeking a managed services solution, not a temp staffing or just-in-time staffing service provider. Museum will be more favorably disposed to suppliers with demonstrated organic capability and experience working on behalf of like entities to fulfill our requirements as part of a managed services environment.

4 General -- What is the annual historical incumbent contractor employee turnover rate for USHMM?

On the Shared Services O&M Task: Average Turnover for core team members is one FTE annually on average. However, the average time on contract is around 2.75 years. There has been no turnover among the Purchase Card support team. USHMM does not have metrics for the other support tasks listed on the RFP.

RFP, Section B.2 Pricing

Structure

In order for offerors to develop a firm-fixed price, please provide some information on the historical level of effort, i.e., total number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) per labor category and/or PWS Task Area. Can USHMM provide its internal cost estimate (if any) for this requirement?

PWS Task 4 - Purchase Card Administration - We estimate that level of effort to complete this task may be 1/4 of a FTE, however offerrors should review the PWS and propose a solution that they feel will fully provide all required services.

Shared Services currently deploys 6 FTEs: 3 analysts, 1 project manager, 1 project associate, and a donation specialist to meet operational requirements. Other associated tasks are allocated by need and there are between 10 - 15 individuals who support that work at smaller allocations of time and material needs. We are open to other iterations of staffing to meet requirements necessary.

RFP, Section B.2 Pricing

Structure

To facilitate development of a firm-fixed price, please provide the average number of travelers and travel authorizations per month/year.

Please see the attached sheet. The comparison between years will not be ‘apples to apples’ because on December 28, 2021 we transitioned from Spiceworks to ManageEngine. As a result, more tickets are created due to automated notices - in Spiceworks, these emails were retained in an Inbox but did not create a new ticket. In the new system, the emails create a ticket but are automatically closed by the Manage Engine ticketing system. This is to allow us to access these emails, as needed, because we no longer have direct access to the help desk inbox. The end result is an increase in overall travel ‘ticket’ volume when we moved to Manage Engine.

These metrics may not be reliable in any case as we are still not back at pre-pandemic levels of travel. We are at about 60% of our pre-pandemic travel levels when you compare the last 30 days.

RFP, Section B.2 Pricing

Structure

To facilitate development of a firm-fixed price, please provide the total number of system users.

Travel and Finance Help is currently supported by a team of 4. For the Shared Services Task, the total number of system users would be 12-

15. Regardless, staffing support should be predicated not on historic usage, but the quantity of staff needed to manage the work volume effectively.

RFP, Section B.2 Pricing

Structure

To facilitate development of a firm-fixed price, please provide the average number of help desk tickets per month/year.

Travel desk ticket information has been provided on a separate sheet.

Note the caveats placed on the applicability of that information to the post-pandemic environment.

Finance Help Desk Tickets: 3,500+ tickets per year. For tickets per month please use and average as they tend to vary based upon Museum needs. That said, although ticket response is considered an important part of overall support, Museum expects the Finance Support Center to be more than just a ticket response help desk.

Tickets were only started in May 2021 to facilitate the work of Accounts Payable.

Shared Services Task: Average number of 500+ Tickets per year. For tickets per month please use an average as they tend to vary based upon Museum needs. Complexity varies based on the type of ticket from a full report request to recognition of receipt and processing of a donation via personal check.

RFP, Exhibit 1 PWS, Section 5 Shared Services, O&M

31-34 Please clarify the workflow/FTE requirements estimated as necessary to fulfill this requirement so this may be bid as firm, fixed price

Museum is willing to entertain any T&M solution to this requirement that attaches financial incentives to one or more performance outcomes (e.g., timeliness of satisfactory issue resolution and any other of the QAs described in Exhibit IV). Offerors presenting T&M solutions must distinguish G&A, overhead, and markup in all blended rates. Consistent with the Museum's response to Q40 above, Offerors shall include full itemizations and realistic total price of performance estimates for each contract year by Task Area regardless of pricing approach.

10 General -- Will the USHMM provide an organizational chart showing the staffing levels by labor category/position for each of the departments/divisions supported?

See diagrams at the bottom of this table for our most recent support levels. Note that the Museum's travel load is likely to increase post-pandemic.

RFP, Section B.3 Labor Categories and Rates

This section references “anticipated optional services”.

a) Please specify what optional services there may be.

b) Does USHMM anticipate pricing for the optional services will be fixed-price or if other, please specify.

(a) "Anticipated optional services" here references work not otherwise explicitly included in the scope of work as defined in the solicitation and Contractor's Proposal, but which is of a similar or complementary nature. Examples might include future support for new technology deployments within the existing task suite, or specialized staffing/assistance as necessary to backfill Museum vacancies in these tasks. For example, the Museum has recently lost a pair of Accounts Payable technicians and a payroll administrator, attrition which could theoretically spike the burden placed on the Finance Support Center beyond customary levels. We would like the convenience of having option(s) to describe appropriately tailored solutions as an alternative to simply scaling the support staff, assuming fulfillment remains consistent with the core competencies of the awardee.

(b) USHMM reserves the right to request either firm, fixed quotes for optional services or to pursue a T&M approach when scope is open-ended, contingent, or otherwise as appropriate.

RFP, Section H.1 Contract Terms & Conditions and, RFP, Section B.4 Pricing Warranty and, Section H.1 states, “Offeror’s may submit proposals utilizing the contract terms of their GSA schedule or similar contract”. Section B.4 requires offerors to warrant that its pricing does not exceed the Offeror’s most favorable customer pricing. Please confirm that the requirement in Section B.4 applies only if the offeror submits a proposal utilizing its GSA Schedule.

USHMM seeks most favored nations terms for pricing, regardless of the contract vehicle selected.

13 RFP, Section F.1.2 3

Please clarify the base period and any option periods of the period of performance. In other words, is the total period of performance 20 months. i.e., 8-month base period with one 12-month option period?

Or, is the period of performance a base period of 20 months with no option periods unless USHMM decides to exercise FAR 52.217-8 Option To Extend Services (Nov 1999) (Reference 17.208) or FAR 52.217-9 Option To Extend The Term Of The Contract (Mar 2000) (Reference 17.208).

Neither is the case. USHMM has an administrative need to establish contracts whose start and end dates do not coincide with the fiscal year. Therefore, and as stated, USHMM anticipates award of up to an initial 20 month base year with up to four (4) 12-month annual option

(s) to follow.

Reference Section F (Sub-

Section F.2.2)

When should a new awardee expect to have joint discussions with the incumbent about orderly transition planning prior to contract award?

Immediately following contract award and publication

Reference Section F (Sub-

Section F.2.2)

For transition schedule planning, when will USHMM allow the offeror to begin discussions with incumbent personnel about transitioning to the new contract?

Immediately following contract award and publication

16 F.2.3 4 Can the Government verify that each FTE is 1920 hours per year? Yes

17 RFP, Section F.2.4 Policy 4

The policy stated in this section does not really apply to a fixed-price contract, where the contractor performs the services and provides the deliverables within a fixed price and has the discretion to adjust the level of effort as needed to meet the performance objectives or deliverables. We recommend USHMM to remove this section.

The section will remain to the extent applicable to options and other work fulfilled on a time-and-materials basis.

RFP, Section H.3 Travel and Expense

Does USHMM anticipate any travel will be needed under this contract?

If so, please specify.

The Finance Support Center and Travel Services will not require travel if the team is based in the DC Metro area. If the team is based outside of the DC Metro area there may be a need to travel 1 to 2 times a year for approximately 2 days for team meetings. Purchase Card task does not require travel. Travel for the Shared Services Operations task will be as needed throughout the year, and twice a year for operational planning averaging 2 days.

Section I, CLAUSES

INCORPORATED BY

REFERENCE

9 Please provide the full text version of all FAR clauses listed in the RFP.

That information is too voluminous to be copied and pasted into this Q&A, and may be referenced electronically or downloaded from https:

//www.acquisition.gov/browse/index/far

20 General --

a) Please clarify the place(s) of performance.

b) Will the primary place of performance be the Government site or contractor’s site.

c) What is the telework policy?

Telework policy is only applicable to Museum employees. Contractor staff are subject to the policies of their employer, who will be responsible for fulfilling the Museum's requirements in a manner consistent with the contract. Thus, the Accounting Operations team will be asked to be onsite 2 days a week when we return to the office.

The Finance Support Center and Travel Service staff may be asked periodically to come into the office for team, planning, and training meetings, approximately once per month if based locally to ensure we have good collaboration. At a minimum, larger team meetings will require onsite attendance once per quarter. For the Shared Services Operations task, only donation reconciliation support requires onsite presence. All efforts other than these can be performed remotely.

21 General -- Will there be any Government furnished property (e.g., computers/laptops, workstations, etc.)?

Yes - typically this would entail computer hardware to access our networks, with equipment issued on an as-needed basis. For example, security concerns necessitate issuance and use of an USHMM laptop for Purchase Card support.

22 General -- Will all USHMM data be stored on the Government’s server/network, or will data need to be stored on the contractor’s server/network?

The government will own all data and storage will remain on the Museum's server systems.

RFP, FAR 52.245-9 Use and Charges (Apr 2012)

a) Does USHMM anticipate providing any Government property that will require rental fees/charges?

b) If so, please provide information on the specific property and associated rental fees/charges.

c) Will offerors be able to incorporate these rental charges in its pricing, e.g., as ODCs?

USHMM does not anticipate providing GFPs that entail rental fees/charges.

FAR 52.246-17 Warranty of Supplies of a

Noncomplex Nature (Jun 2003)

Per this clause, please specify the specific time period in which notice shall be given to the Contractor of any breach of warranties in paragraph (b)(1) of this clause, e.g.,"45 days of the last delivery under this contract," or "45 days after discovery of the defect".

The duration of warranties under this clause shall be for the commercially standard warranty term or else for the life of the contract, whichever is greater. The time period for acceptable written notice regarding defective supplies delivered pursuant to the Contract is any time during the extant warranty period or the life of the Contract plus an additional 12 months thereafter, whichever is greater. The Contractor shall place no limitations on any implicit warranties (e.g., warranty of merchantability), notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary.

RFP, FAR 52.246-20

Warranty of Services (May 2001)

Per this clause, please specify the specific time period in which notice shall be given to the Contractor of any defect or nonconformance.

The time period for acceptable written notice is any time during the life of the Contract and for an additional 12 months thereafter.

26 RFP, Section L.2.1 17

This section states, “Supplemental and not inconsistent with the instructions provided in the clause integrated by reference hereto, Offerors are generally advised that USHMM is hereby soliciting – in the manner described in RFP Section L.4(b), below a comprehensive set of operational support services anticipating retention of exercisable, unpriced option(s) including optional support years for the remainder of the work.”

This paragraph appears very confusing. Please explain/clarify what this means.

This is a catch-all statement that reiterates the intent of the solicitation.

27 RFP, Section L.2.1 17

a) Please clarify what USHMM means by “exercisable, unpriced option

(s) including optional support years for the remainder of the work”.

b) What are the option years referenced above in terms of the period of performance of the contract?

These are thoroughly spelled out elsewhere in the RFP. See, e.g., par.

B.2, B.2, F.1.2, and L.7.2.1, as well as Q&A 11, above

28 RFP, Section L.2.2 17-18

This section states, “USHMM reserves the right to make one award for the full set of requirements or multiple awards that separate performance of the entire service package into its respective components as Offerors may respectively itemize. Offerors are not required to bid the entire requirement to be considered eligible for award, provided that they address any constituent requirement in full….”

Would a proposal that adequately addresses the full PWS (i.e., all PWS Task Areas) be evaluated more favorably than a proposal that only addresses component(s) of the PWS?

USHMM will make its award(s) on the best value basis described in Section M.

29 RFP, Section L.6.1 18 Please clarify whether the “USHMM time/date stamp” means the date/time of the email is sent by the offeror.

It means the date/time of receipt in USHMM servers, although USHMM reserves the right to forgive delays outside of an offeror's forseeability and control to otherwise demonstratively timely submissions.

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.1

Past Performance, subsection (1)

20 Is there a maximum limit of past performances offerors shall provide? No

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.1

Past Performance, subsection (1)

As the scope of this contract covers a broad list of services (consistent with the “Varied Support Services” title of the RFP), will USHMM allow offerors to provide past performances that collectively address all of the PWS requirements.

Yes

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.1

Past Performance, subsection (1)

Will the Government allow past performances provided from the proposed subcontractor?

Yes, provided that the relationship and identities of the parties are made clear and the Offeror indicates whether the subcontractor performed under contract to the Offeror as prime contractor or otherwise.

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.1

Past Performance, subsection (2)

Please clarify how this information will be used for the purpose of proposal evaluations.

For due diligence review at USHMM's discretion

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.1

Past Performance, subsection (2)

Shall offerors provide a list of contracts awarded or only those where the scope of work is relevant to the USHMM requirement?

This requirement calls for a complete chronological list, whether relevant or not.

Exhibit III Qualifications and Skills Base

Shall offerors complete this matrix based on corporate experience, proposed personnel experience, or a combination of both?

A combination of both; Offerors are encouraged to distinguish whenever relevant

Exhibit III Qualifications and Skills Base

Will offerors be able to incorporate subcontractor’s corporate experience for this matrix?

Yes, where Offerors will be relying on the work of such subcontractor to fulfill the requirement. Offerors are encouraged to identify Key Personnel when relying on the expertise of subcontractors.

Exhibit III Qualifications and Skills Base, Column D

The instructions states “responses to be clarified through L.7.1.2 narrative”. RFP Section L.7.1.2 is Offeror Suitability. Should Column D instead reference RFP Section L.7.1.2.2 Staffing Plan/Capability?

Yes

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.2

Staffing Plan/Capability, subsection (1)

This section references the offeror’s general qualifications. As this requirement falls under the proposal Staffing Plan/Capability, please clarify whether USHMM is referring to the qualifications of the offeror’ s proposed staff.

It can be applied to both corporate and individual qualifications.

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.2

Staffing Plan/Capability, subsection (1)

a) Please specify how USHMM will evaluate the offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, e.g., on a pass/fail basis.

b) How will USHMM determine acceptability of the Plan?

USHMM will make qualitative judgements based on an exercise of reasonable discretion to ensure compliance and competitiveness, and manage risk.

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.2

Staffing Plan/Capability, subsection (3)

This RFP was published as a "Small Business Set-Aside," yet this section states, “Large Business Firms selected for award shall be required to submit an acceptable Small Business Subcontract Plan, upon request from the Contracting Officer.” These seem inconsistent. Can the government please explain what it means by “partial small business set aside?” Please also clarify whether a Small Business Subcontract Plan is required to be submitted with the proposal or upon request.

The "large-business" language is an artifact of the template used to draft this solicitation. No large-businesses are eligible for award, although large businesses may be employed as subcontractors.

To be considered eligible for award, the Offeror (prime contractor) must be a qualifying small business directly attributable for 51% or more of billables on the contract vehicle and (whose personnel are) responsible for performing and fulfilling 51% or more of the contracted services.

RFP, Section L.7.1.2.2

Staffing Plan/Capability, subsection (4)

This section references minimum qualifications of key personnel labor categories in Section M. Can USHMM please provide this information as it appears it is not provided in Section M or other sections of the

RFP.

Reference here is to M.2.4, and by extension to the qualifications established in Exhibit III. Where no minimum qualifications are explicitly stated in the RFP, the qualifications of Key Personnel will be considered in the context of overall best value.

42 RFP, Section L.8.1 23 Will USHMM allow all offerors in the competitive range to provide “Revised Proposals” if USHMM requires clarifications and modifications?

Not necessarily. USHMM reserves the right to exercise reasonable discretion by first reducing the field to a subset of best value finalists.

For purposes of clarifications and discussions, this subset may be defined by establishing a competitive range from comparative review of both or either of the technical briefs and the business proposals.

RFP, FAR 52.207-2 Notice of Streamlined Competition

Can USHMM provide some information on whether it is considering public reimbursable performance, and specify which agencies are being considered?

USHMM will make a final determination informed by the proposals it receives. No specific agencies or agency programs are under consideration at this time for reimbursable fulfillment.

RFP, Section M.1 Method

RFP, Section M.3.1.1 and, Section M.1 specifies “best overall value”, however Section M.3.1.1 states “USHMM shall evaluate pricing consistently with inverse correlation to cost such that the lowest price yields the highest rating.”

Based on language in Section M.3.1.1, it appears USHMM is evaluating proposals based on lowest-price technically acceptable (LPTA).

Please clarify whether the Government will evaluate proposals based on best value or LPTA. We recommend USHMM consider not using an LPTA source selection process as it would deny USHMM from the benefits of receiving innovative solutions to meeting the requirements as well as the loss of benefits of cost and technical tradeoffs in the source selection process per FY19 NDAA Section 880.

The question is based on a faulty premise; USHMM is evaluating proposals based on best value. What the RFP language indicates is the truism that where the technical merits of two offerors' proposals are deemed to be equivalent, the lower-priced proposal presents better value. Assuming cost reasonableness and responsiveness, any bid with comparably lower pricing offers financial trade-offs to another, more expensive bid.

RFP, Section M.1 Method and, RFP, Section M.4 Weight and, Section M.1 states, “USHMM intends, but is not obligated, to use a qualitative evaluation method for its review.” Section M.4 explains that the criteria and subcriteria will be weighted, which appears to imply numerical weighting.

Please provide more information to clarify how USHMM intends to rate proposals so that offerors can have a clear understanding of how their proposals will be rated and compared to other proposals.

The question misstates the language of M.4, which states that the business proposal and technical proposal "shall receive equal emphasis" in the Museum's considerations. This is inherent in any best value trade-off process and wholly consistent with the Museum's qualitative approach to assessing the elements of the technical brief (approach, responsiveness, past performance, and corporate/staffing capabilities).

46 RFP, Section M.3.1.1 25

Please provide more information on whether lowest-priced proposals will be given priority during evaluations. For example, will USHMM select the lowest priced proposal first and then evaluate the technical proposal to determine technical acceptability? Or, will the Government rate the technical proposals first, and then choose the lowest priced proposal among the highest rated technical proposals (i.

e., competitive range).

The Museum's process is highly dependent on the volume of proposals received and the way in which pricing is clustered. For example, USHMM may choose to focus its initial review solely on those proposals priced within a competitive range of the internal government estimate and set aside outliers that are materially low or high in price, as such pricing is an indication of inadequate understanding of the requirement. However, such a preliminary cut would likely be considered unnecessary should USHMM only receive a handful of bids.

47 RFP, Section M.3.1.3 25

a) Please provide more information on what offerors are expected to provide for “completeness” of pricing. For example, shall offerors provide the firm-fixed price per Task Area with unit pricing (e.g., price per month)? Shall offerors provide a breakdown of level of effort per Task Area?

b) Can the USHMM provide a pricing template?

Offerors must itemize their pricing by Task Area, since USHMM is contemplating severable awards. Otherwise, pricing methodology remains contingent on each Offeror's proposed approach. Pricing should be transparent and clearly tied to level of effort. USHMM declines to dictate a specific methodology.

48 RFP, Section M.5.2 25

This section states, “Functional requirements … are meant to be comprehensive but not all inclusive. Thus, if USHMM may have omitted a key operational component of a required system that would normally be expected to be included, the Offeror bears the burden of demonstrating the omitted capability.”

This requirement of offerors to demonstrate capability in the omitted, required system appears to be unreasonable and favors the incumbent contractor, as only the incumbent contractor would have knowledge of the omitted system or components of the system. We recommend USHMM to remove this requirement from the RFP.

This question misinterprets the statement, which relies on the expertise of industry to ensure fulfillment of Museum's published service requirements, which are not precisely articulable as a universal specification. Without a shared understanding of the need and solution, there can be no meeting of the minds. Offerors bear the sole burden in all cases of demonstrating their capabilities and expertise, matching these to an effective technical approach that addresses Museum's service tasks.

RFP, Exhibit 1 PWS, Section 2 Travel Help Desk

26-29 Please identify the current travel system in use by USHMM.

Current travel system is E2. However, the Museum hopes to convert to Concur in the next two fiscal years.

50 General -- Can past performance experience be a combination of both prime and subcontractor?

Yes

51 General -- Is it permissible to have multiple subcontractors? Yes

52 General -- Is the current contract Firm Fixed Price?

Historically, these services have been fulfilled through a variety of contract vehicles, most billed on a time and materials basis.

Finance Support Center & Travel Center are the same staff:

Vouchers approved in E2

Domestic trip departures

(CONUS)

International trip departures

(OCONUS)

Tickets Opened* Tickets Closed*

FY 19 1337 1246 447 2227 2231

FY 20 744 562 212 996 1072

FY 21 19 11 24 231 146

FY 22 Through 7/31 226 195 104 3054 2702

*The comparison between years will not be ‘apples to apples’ because on December 28, 2021 we transitioned from Spiceworks to ManageEngine. As a result, more tickets are created due to automated notices - in Spiceworks, these emails were retained in an Inbox but did not create a new ticket. In the new system, the emails create a ticket but are automatically closed by the Manage Engine ticketing system. This is to allow us to access these emails, as needed, because we no longer have direct access to the help desk inbox. The end result is an increase in overall travel ‘ticket’ volume when we moved to Manage Engine.

SpiceWorks Managed Engine Total

Tickets Opened 242 2812 3054

Tickets Closed 99 2603 2702

We are at about 60% of our pre-pandemic travel levels when you compare the last 30 days:

Trips approved between 7/15/2022 - 8/15/2022: 40 Trips approved between 7/15/2019 - 8/15/2019: 66