QA_1-3-2013.pdf

Questions & Responses –Solicitation AG-3187-S-12-0164

Updated January 3, 2013

The above mentioned solicitation is hereby amended to incorporate the information below:

1. Is this a new or follow on requirement? If it is a follow on, please let us know the current contract number, contract value and incumbent name? Is it still eligible to bid as a prime for this contract?

The incumbent contractor is Management and Engineering Technologies, Inc.

(METI). The current contract number is AG-3187-C-12-0004, Overall Maximum

Value $21,500,000, and yes they are eligible to submit a proposal.

2. The formatting in B.4 and B.5 makes it difficult to discern what the Government is asking for and how to insert the required information in tabular form to make it easy to see and understand. Will the Government provide re-formatted versions of B.4 and B.5 to include a tabular presentation of proposed indirect costs that permits the contractor to provide proposed indirect rates for each contract performance year?

For the B.4, Indirect Cost Rates, please provide an attachment including all information requested in B.4 for the base and each option year. B.5, Ceiling on

Indirect Cost Rates, has been removed. The tab titled “Ceiling on Indirect Cost

Rates” found in the Budget Template, Attachment 1 is deleted.

3. In B.4 and B.5 the Government asks for Base of Application, Type of Rate, Period and only in B.4 asks for Source without providing definitions for what these terms mean and what the Government wants the contractor to provide. For example, would “Type of

Rate” be satisfied with General and Administrative Cost (G&A) as an entry? As for

“base of application”, is the Government wanting a general description of the cost base

(the denominator) used by the contractor in computing the proposed G&A rate or is the

Government wanting the contractor to provide the actual number used as the cost base for computing G&A rates? Is “Period” intended to mean the contractor’s fiscal year during which the indirect rate cost data is accumulated or does it correspond to the contract’s performance period? What definition is the Government using to determine contractor inputs to the term “Source” found only at B.4 and not B.5?

Per answer #2, B.5, Ceiling on Indirect Cost Rates, is removed. B.4, Indirect Costs, is the cost plus portion of the pricing to be provided. Information provided should be in alignment with the offeror’s approved cost and accounting practices. B.4 is revised. Definitions are now included in the solicitation.

4. B.9 (3) references “central management costs” which per the reference must be accounted for as indirect costs under the task orders. It’s not clear from this reference what the Government contemplates as the components of central management costs. Are these costs related to the employment of the Program Manager and Deputy Program

Manager (C.3.6)? Per FAR 31.202(a) “No final cost objective shall have allocated to it as a direct cost any cost, if other costs incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances have been included in any indirect cost pool to be allocated to that or any other final cost objective. Direct costs of the contract shall be charged directly to the contract. All costs specifically identified with other final cost objectives of the contractor are direct costs of those cost objectives and are not to be charged to the contract directly or indirectly.” Categorizing costs as indirect as required by B.9.3 if those costs are normally accounted for as direct costs in the standard application of the contractor’s accounting system may lead to DCAA questions about the certification of that accounting system, required by all Government cost type contracts. Will the Government consider withdrawing this requirement or provide clarification to ensure that application of B.9.3 is consistent with FAR 31.202(a)?

B.9 (a)(3) is removed from the solicitation. All costs of any kind must be proposed and invoiced in accordance with FAR Part 31, and must be allowable and allocable.

All proposed costs must adhere to the procedures of each contractor’s pre-approved and audited cost and accounting systems.

5. B.10 requires the submission of “fully burdened, government site, fixed hourly rates”.

By fully burdened does the Government mean hourly rates that include direct payment to the employee, the application of all indirect cost rates and the application of fee? If so is the fee to be used the fixed fee ceiling rate provided at B.6? Since these proposed rates at

B.10 will contain indirect billing rates subject to definitization at a future date, how is the

Government defining “fixed” in this context?

Guidance on how to calculate the fully burdened rate can be found on many web sites and a few are provided below for your convenience.

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/calculate-fully-burdened-labor-costs-33072.html http://www.ehow.com/how_6498796_calculate-burden-rate-salaries.html

Offerors should provide rates consistent with what they would submit on a GSA

Schedule contract. They should be fully burdened and include appropriate direct and indirect costs, profit/fee, etc. The fee in B.6 is not tied to B.10, the fully burdened labor category rates that will be used for fixed price task orders. B.6 applies only to cost plus actions. Offerors should determine if the fee in B.6 is the same or different from what it would include in their fully burdened labor rates.

6. Please be advised that the labor categories at B.10 total to 14 for each performance year while there are 15 labor categories found in Attachment 1, Contract Labor Categories worksheet. The difference is a Program Specialist Level 1 that appears on the attachment but not B.10. This appears to be quickly fixed by revising B.10 to include the Program

Specialist Level 1. This will ensure consistency and a complete proposal package.

Please use the labor categories provided in Attachment 1. B.10 is amended.

7. L.1.1, Factor 2, subfactor 2, addresses a transition plan as an evaluated factor for award.

Is there a defined time, i.e. a transition period, which the Government will provide during which transition activities may take place? For evaluation purposes the Government http://smallbusiness.chron.com/calculate-fully-burdened-labor-costs-33072.html http://www.ehow.com/how_6498796_calculate-burden-rate-salaries.html could instruct all offerors to assume a 30 day transition period beginning 30 days immediately prior to the start of full performance under the contract.

The requirement for a transition plan is deleted. L.2.4, 2. Technical Approach (g) has been added for offerors to address their approach, ability and experience in transitioning similar types of activities. A task order for a specific transition plan for all activities will be issued after award of the IDIQ.

8. B.7 requests offerors to propose a fixed fee escalation table for administrative services procured using the firm fixed price mechanism. Can the US Forest Service clarify whether the table included in this section will only be applied to fixed price mechanisms covering administrative services defined in C.3.4 or also to fixed price task orders for non-administrative services?

It will only be applied for administrative services/payment processing as described under C.3.4.

9. The Excel spreadsheet provided in Attachment 1 has a tab called Fixed Fee Ceiling. Can the US Forest Service clarify what types of activities this ceiling will apply to? Does this table apply to all task orders, only non-administrative fixed price task orders, or CPFF task orders?

The fixed fee ceiling tab is applicable to the cost-reimbursable fixed fee portions of the IDIQ, which is nearly all of Section C. It is not applicable to the administrative services/payment processing task (C.3.4) or the firm fixed price services tasks. Of the tasks listed, the Washington office support will be fixed price tasks using the fully burdened hourly labor rates in B.10 rather than a cost reimbursable task. FS reserves the right to use other fixed price tasks for services, but the fixed fee would apply to any cost reimbursable tasks, which FS anticipates will be the preponderance of overseas efforts.

10. In B.9 the RFP states that central management costs for the IDIQ are not directly billable.

Can the US Forestry Service clarify whether central office management costs associated with individual task orders are directly billable to their respective contracts?

Please see Question 4.

11. The activities in task 3 of the sample task order do not appear to fall under the activities defined in C.3.4. Can the US Forest Service confirm that offerors are not limited to the fees provided in the administrative services fixed fee table?

Task 3 does not fall under C.3.4. It falls under C.3.3 and requires use of the fully burdened labor hour pricing in B.10 to develop the firm fixed price for the task.

Fixed fee should not be part of the pricing for this task as it is not a cost-reimbursable task. Note that the Task 3 blue-shaded box noted the pricing model to be used is “FFP”.

12. Section M.3.5 indicates that US Forestry Service will be using the following evaluation criteria for the IDIQ cost.

The sample task order price/cost

A weighted percentage of the estimated labor hours times the fixed price blended labor category rate for the base and option years, A weighted percentage of the estimated administrative cost with the administrative fee ceiling, for the base and option years

A weighted percentage of the estimated cost reimbursement costs with the overheads/fee ceilings for the base and option years.

An evaluation based on a weighted percentage per criteria 2 does not appear to comply with FAR 15.405(b), in that it does not consider the price the government will actually pay and can produce a misleading result. The methodology does not take into account differences in cost allocation practices across firms, particularly where home-office backstopping are concerned since some firms charge such costs directly and some charge them indirectly. The methodology in the IDIQ RFP could cause firms that charge all of these costs directly (and thus do not have to absorb them within their FHRs) to appear less expensive in the IDIQ cost evaluation, even if they will not present a price advantage on actual task orders, because they will not have to account for the difference in the number of LOE days that would actually be budgeted relative to another offeror.

We have provided an example below to illustrate our concern. In scenario 1, Offeror A charges home-office backstopping directly to the contract, and has an indirect rate of 60 percent on labor. Offeror B charges such time indirectly, and has an indirect rate of 75 percent on labor that partly reflects the need to recover these costs indirectly. Both offerors price their FHRs with the same salary assumptions, their indirect rates, and a 10 percent fee. This could easily yield the following results:

Scenario

Assumed average expat salary

Indirect rate

Fee ceiling

Average

FHR

Evaluated cost of expat labor

(160 hours)

Total

Evaluated

Price of

Labor

Offeror

A

$50 60% 10% $88 $14,080 $14,080

Offeror

B

$50 75% 10% $96 $15,400 $15,400

In this scenario 1, assuming there is no significant difference in the cost of indirect rates applicable to ODCs, Offeror A would be evaluated more favorably than Offeror B.

However, in the pricing of task orders, the actual labor costs may more closely resemble scenario 2 below, due to the differences in how home-office labor is recovered. In scenario 2, Offeror B costs less on actual task orders, but may have been denied the IQC contract and the opportunity to compete on task orders based on the methodology provided above.

Scenario

Expatriate labor days exclusive of home-office

Illustrative home-office backstopping estimates

Total labor days

Cost of expat labor

(with above

FDRs and

HO time)

Total

Price of

Labor

Offeror

A

160 40 200 $17,600 $17,600

Offeror

B

160 0 160 $15,400 $15,400

Can US Forestry Service please clarify what the “weighted percentage of estimated” labor hours in criteria 2 in M.3.5 will be? Can the US Forestry Service also clarify whether criteria 2-4 in M.3.5 will be applied to the contract labor categories tab attachment 1 or rather to the sample task order?

The list on page 60 is removed. Offerors should refer to page 59 M.3.5 for information on price evaluation.

13. Can the US Forest Service provide a cost estimate for the sample task order? This will provide a framework for offerors and facilitate a level playing field for the evaluation of costs.

The Government will not provide a cost estimate for the sample task order. The task order has been revised to include level of effort for each task within the sample task order. Offerors shall use the scope of the sample task order to provide reasonable and realistic pricing based on the information provided.

14. On page 14 in Section C.3.4 Administrative Services/Payment Processing, it is clear that the Contractor will process payments for the Forest Service overseas. Can you please clarify that the Contractor will, in accordance with the rules and regulations and the contract, set up an office, procure services and equipment, hire staff, etc and will be reimbursed for these costs by the Forest Service? Are there other types of payments that the Contractor will not be involved with the procurement or selection process but the

Forest Service will expect the Contractor to pay on behalf of the Forest Service? Can you please give examples?

Through task orders, USFS will specify required activities such as setting up an office, procuring equipment, etc. Depending on the work, some of these activities may fall under the cost plus fixed fee portions of this solicitation. Other times, FS may direct the contractor to acquire similar items, but will use the payment processing fixed fee mechanism (B.7) and provide detailed direction to the contractor. In all circumstances, the contractor will be reimbursed for allowable and allocable costs. The method used will be determined by USFS on a task order basis.

15. On page 15 in Section C.3.5 Transition of Current Tasks, the RFP states, “The

Contractors shall work with USFS and the current Contractor to transfer existing efforts under new task orders…” If a new Contractor is selected, will there be any overlap between the new contract and the ending contract for a handover period? If so, how long?

Also, does USFS intend on the transition of current tasks to happen at the same time, such as transitioning all of the field offices immediately after award? Can you please provide more information about the anticipated timeframe?

FS anticipates an overlap period for transitioning the tasks. The length of that overlap period will be detailed in a task order issued for the transition services.

Currently, FS is only asking for offerors to demonstrate a thorough understanding and approach for transitioning the services under the IDIQ. Offerors should propose a time period that aligns with its transition plan.

16. On page 16, PS-3 in the table states, “Qualified staff members are available to USFS immediately upon task order award.” Can you please let us know what an acceptable range of immediate is? One day? A few days? Two weeks?

An acceptable range is within 10 calendar days. Exceptions may occur on a case by case basis.

17. In Attachment 7 Lebanon Reforestation Initiative Support Services PWS, Task 4 (page

9) states, “The Contractor shall deliver payment at the Forest Service’s request for items and services that may include the following: facilities, equipment, and interpretation and translation services for workshops and events, rent for office space, legal representation for the program, and salary for qualified local staff… The Forest Service will require up to 15 overseas payments not to exceed $2 million in total. The Forest Service will provide information to the Contractor about where and when to make individual payments.” Can you please clarify how this works? Does the USFS procure these items and services and the Contractor pays the invoices on behalf of USFS or is the Contractor responsible for the whole procurement process and payment and will be reimbursed for these items and services when it invoices USFS?

The contractor is responsible for making the administrative wire transfer to the entity listed in the currency requested and ensuring it is received by the intended source. The contractor is required to provide the funds for the wire transfer. The contractor would then invoice FS for the amount of the wire transfer and its fixed fee per B.7. See response to question 14 for additional clarification.

18. In Attachment 7 Lebanon Reforestation Initiative Support Services PWS under Section 8.

Period of Performance (page 11), USFS gives the anticipated contractor start date as

December 15, 2012. Since this is a sample task order, would USFS consider giving a date in 2013 so that potential contractors can have the opportunity to provide a start-up and transition plan that can better reflect reality? A project start up and transition occurring in

December would have to take into account the holidays and would look different than a transition and start up in early 2013.

The sample task order start date is amended to March 15, 2013.

19. Attachment 7 to the RFP AG-3187-S-12-0164 which is the Performance Work Statement

(PWS) for the sample Lebanon task at paragraph 5, Scope, Task 1 – Technical

Leadership and Management, does not provide a stated level of effort (LOE) as is provided for in the subsequent Tasks 2, Short Term Technical Consultants, and 3, DC

Based Project Support Specialist. Will the Government provide an estimated LOE for

Task 1 to enable bidders to provide complete, realistic price proposals?

Task 1 of Attachment 7 is amended to provide a LOE. Offerors should have all necessary information to provide complete and realistic price proposals. Offerors should note that short term targeted technical expertise is no longer required under

Task 1.

20. Similar to #9 above, Task 1 does not provide any requirements for travel, as do Tasks 2 and 3. Will the Government include travel requirements in task 1 or confirm that no travel is required as part of this effort under Task

If it is not listed, it is not required.

21. Would USAID consider a one week proposal extension given that the proposal period encompasses the US holiday season (Christmas and New Year’s Day), and many bidders’ personnel will be on leave?

The USFS extends the proposal delivery date to January 11, 2012 by 1700 EST.

22. As this solicitation is a total small business set-aside, would the awardee be required to conduct 51% of the work under each task order?

Yes.

23. Would the current IDIQ holder be eligible to bid on this RFP? If so, how would USFS evaluate the incumbent’s proposed “Transition Plan” as part of Volume 1 Technical

Approach, Factor 2 Management Approach, as compared to other bidders?

Yes. Please see Question 7.

24. What is the date of expiration of the current IDIQ? Would the various activities (task orders) that are currently being implemented under the current IDIQ, and are to be covered by the Transition Plan in the Technical Proposal, be expected to end at the same time as the current IDIQ expires? If not, could the USFS provide information on the period of performance of each task order to be covered by the Transition Plan, in particular the end date?

The contract expires 4/26/2013. The task orders have multiple end dates, but few extend past 5/31/2013. Individual dates will be provided to the awardee.

25. On page 15 of the Statement of Work under C.3.6. Key Personnel, USFS states that the

Project Manager and Deputy Project Manager must meet two criterion (1) demonstrated operational familiarity with the Offeror, etc., and (2) demonstrated senior- or mid- level management experience and technical leadership, etc. Does USFS require that each of the

Project Manager and Deputy Project Manager meet both criteria, or may the Offeror propose two candidates that meet these two requirements collectively though may not meet them individually?

The criterion applies to all listed key personnel.

26. Does USAID have preferred qualifications (education degree and type, specific certifications, number of years of relevant professional experience, overseas experience) of the Offerors’ Key Personnel beyond what is described under C.3.6 Key Personnel on page 15 of the Statement of Work? Furthermore, USFS mentions “senior—or mid— level management experience” for the two positions, approximately how many years of experience are required for senior- and mid-level positions, respectively?

As this is a performance-based acquisition, offerors should propose key personnel with appropriate experience, skills and abilities in relation to the Performance

Work Statement and C.3.6 requirements.

27. Could USFS provide numerical weights or scores for the Evaluation factors?

USFS will not use numerical scores or factors. The rating for this source selection is an adjectival scale. The adjectival scale is now provided on the amended Page 57.

28. In the hypothetical transition of contractor personnel from the current IDIQ holder to the successful bidder, would the new contractor be expected to retain and hire all current contractor staff as outlined in Attachment 2, or would there be allowances or expectations for possible personnel replacements?

Attachment 2 details contractor activities currently underway. Hiring of current staff would be at the discretion of the proposer/awardee. This information is provided to ensure that offerors understand the scope of transition activities that will be required and to enable offerors to reflect that understanding within their proposals.

29. May the Offeror include annexes and/or attachments to the Technical Proposal, which would not be counted against the prescribed page limits, and would the Evaluation

Committee review annexes/attachments if they were included?

The page limitations will be strictly enforced. Please see Page Limitations on page 44 of the RFP.

30. On page 51 of the Technical Proposal instructions for Volume 3, Factor 4 Past

Performance, the RFP instructs bidders to provide examples of past projects of

“currency,” where “‘Currency’ is defined as being performed within the last three (3) years of the date of the solicitation.” Small businesses may have relevant experience that is more than three years old. May the Offeror provide Past Performance Summaries in

Volume 3 of the Technical Proposal for contracts that are older than the past three (3) years –say five (5) years?

USFS will accept Past Performance for the past five years. Section L is updated accordingly on page 50.

31. Have there been any updates or modifications to the USFS Agreement with USAID, contained in Attachment 4, to reflect the USAID FORWARD Agenda and Agency

Implementation and Procurement Reform (geographic code, etc.)? And if so, could these updates/modifications be provided to potential bidders?

All applicable agreements that have been provided are current.

32. Could USFS make available the current annual budgets for USFS IP offices or projects overseas, or at least those that the future IDIQ holder would be expected to manage?

IP’s budget fluctuates, however at any time there may be 25 full time US based contractor employees, and up to 75 consultants fulltime, part time, and intermittent consultants.

33. Could USFS provide a budget range for the sample task order?

Please see Question 13.

34. L.1.0 of the solicitation specifies the use of 8.5X 11 inch paper, 1 inch margins and

Times New Roman 12 point font in text. As noted in the language at L.1.0 these requirements are excellent for the text of the proposal but do not permit the optimum presentation of figures, charts and graphics. Will the Government grant permission to use 10 point font in figures, charts and graphs by adding language such as the following:

“Illustrations (e.g., tables, charts, graphics, drawings, and diagrams) are allowable within the page limitations described above and shall be in portrait format or landscape format, with font colors other than black allowable and font size 10 and font types Times New

Roman, Courier, and Arial Narrow considered acceptable.”?

Yes, the requirement is for text only. Graphics may use other standards so long as they are easily readable and clearly legible.

35. B.4 provides a concise summary of billing rates and final indirect cost rates found at FAR

42.704 and .705 which provide for payment of indirect costs through the use of billing rates which then must be definitized following conclusion of the contractor’s applicable fiscal year(s) and collection of costs and revenues to be applied to the cost pool and base.

B.5 looks like it corresponds to the rate structure in B.4 and appears to ask for the contractor to propose ceilings for each of the rates proposed in B.4 which seems contrary to the definitization process described in FAR which assures the contractor recovery of all allowable, allocable fair and reasonable costs incurred during contract performance.

Is the Government requiring that all indirect billing rates proposed in B.4 have a corresponding cap applied to them in B.5? If so, will the Government consider an adjustment mechanism to permit the revision of caps in B.5 based on the potential volatility of certain costs accounted for as indirect costs, e.g. healthcare?

B.5 is removed.

36. M.3.5 indicates that the Government will calculate a contractor’s evaluated costs including weighted percentages of “estimated labor hours”, “estimated administrative cost with the administrative fee” and “estimated cost reimbursement costs with the overheads/fee ceilings”. Reference question #1 above, will the Government provide these estimates to the contractors so we can propose indirect rates and fee that fully reflect the volume of work estimated to be done under this contract and better understand how the Government intends to calculate the evaluated costs of our proposals?

M.3.5 is amended, please refer to Page 60.

37. Per Section B.10, fully burdened fixed hourly rates are required when a firm fixed price task order is requested. The tab titled “Vol 4 Sample Task Order” in attachment one, includes rows for indirect costs in the FFP detailed estimates. However, the FFP detailed estimates section of “Volume 4 Sample Task Order” does not include a row for fee.

Should this be added to the spreadsheet?

Indirect cost information was inadvertently included in the FFP detailed estimate template. The tab titled “Vol 4 Sample Task Order” is corrected and an updated

Budget Template is provided.

38. Pages 6-8 of Attachment 7 (the sample RFTOP) references the need for the short term technical consultants under Task 2 to take international trips from his/her home to

Lebanon, which implies that the candidates for these positions would be international/ US experts. Is there a geographic code for the sample RFTOP for purposes of procurement of goods and services? And may Offerors propose candidates for the short-term technical consultant positions that are Lebanese (host-country nationals) if they meet the technical requirements?

The geographic code is 937. Meeting the short-term technical requirements is at the discretion of the offeror.

39. How does IP plan to address the challenges in transitioning a live task order (Lebanon) that is converging on its final years? Has IP considered getting the incumbent to close out the task order?

The task order provided is a sample task order. Currently, FS is only asking offerors to demonstrate a thorough understanding and description of their capabilities to implement transition services under the IDIQ. A task order proposal request will have to be issued and a proposal evaluated before transition services would begin.

40. Could USFS please clarify whether both the Project Manager and Deputy Project

Manager must meet both of the key personnel criterion listed on page 15 or if the two key personnel may collectively meet the criterion?

Please see Question 25.

41. The Lebanon task order does not provide level of effort. How would you suggest bidders propose a realistic budget given that the incumbent is already in Lebanon?

Level of Effort is provided for Tasks 1, 2, 3 and 4 at the end of each task. Please note revisions in amended Attachment 7.

42. If the incumbent is already performing, how will you score its transition plan?

Please see Question 7.

43. Please define “operational familiarity”, page 15, C.3.6.

Operational familiarity implies that key personnel will be able to effectively and expeditiously execute the requirements of the IDIQ within the management structure of the contractor’s organization.

44. Does the small business prime need to perform 51% of the total contract or 51% of each task order?

The minimum percentage is 51% of each task order.

45. Would a firm participating as a subcontractor on this procurement impair their eligibility to do future work with the USFS if the IDIQ is awarded to their consortium?

No.

46. The five factors (four technical, one cost) considered in the overall evaluation of the proposal are clear, however, please clarify the weight of each factor relative to one another.

We will not use weighted factors. The rating for this source selection is adjectival.

The four technical factors are listed in descending order of importance in M.2.

47. Please provide clarification on “Evaluation factors other than price are equal in importance to price in the award decision.”

The technical evaluation is of equal importance to the price evaluation. Please see paragraph 1, page 56, Basis of Award, for additional clarification.

48. Does “contract” refer to the overall IDIQ or to individual task orders? From 52.219-14

Limitations on Subcontracting - “Services (except construction). At least 50 percent of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employee of this concern.”

The IDIQ is a basic ordering agreement, which is a binding contract. Individual task orders will also be binding contracts subject to all the terms and conditions of the base IDIQ. The minimum percentage for the small business is 51% of each task order.

49. The sample task order selected (Lebanon) is also one of the active task orders to be transitioned. This would seem to provide the incumbent firm a significant advantage given their intimate knowledge of the operating context. The staffing plan, cost issues, etc. Can the USFS please consider selecting a neutral country and project unrelated to existing task orders that would serve to level the competitive playing field?

The sample task order is not an active task order to be transitioned. This task order was developed as a sample only. The structure for the sample task order varies significantly from the existing requirement.

50. Does this Scope of Work fully encompass the incumbent contracts Scope of Work, or have additional requirements been added? If so please describe these additional requirements.

Please see Question 49.

51. Please clarify 52.219-14 Limitations on Subcontracting.(c) 1 to further explain whether

“contract” refers to the overall IDIQ or to individual task orders.

Please see Question 48.

52. Is the Executive Summary mentioned in L.1.1 excluded from the Volume 1 20 page limited?

The Executive Summary is counted in the page limit.

53. Is the Sample Task cost narrative required at L.2.4 Vol. 2 Factor 3 Subfactor Costs a) (ii) considered to be included in L.1.2 Vol. 2 Factor 3 Task Order Cost and hence excluded from the page limit?

Yes, this is excluded from the page limit.

54. Given the recent notification that the Q&A regarding USFS-IP IDIQ solicitation will be revised, would the USFS kindly reconsider a one-week extension of the proposal deadline until January 11, 2013? A one week extension would allow prospective bidders to more fully incorporate USFS feedback when preparing their proposal and, ultimately, result in more responsive and stronger proposals for USFS consideration. For planning purposes, we would appreciate notification regarding any extension as soon as possible.

Please see question 21.

55. A gentleman spoke after you at the meeting; this was a few minutes after 9:00 a.m. EST.

He provided information on US Forest Service. May I request for his notes? I am assuming he used Powerpoint in his presentation. Joining the meeting by phone, I missed some of the points he passed across. I would appreciate having the notes he used. Many thanks.

The PowerPoint presentation is attached to this amendment.

56. The formal due date for questions is Dec 18 and answers to be provided by Dec 21. This subsequently provides less than two weeks to respond to the proposal on January 4.

What is the likelihood of extending the deadline by at least 15 days, to allow optimum competition for this “wide open” contract.

Please see Question 21.

57. P. 44. Please confirm that you want only electronic files sent to you by the deadline.

The Government requires electronic submission to the email address listed on Page

44.

58. P. 44. Please confirm that we submit Volumes 1 through 4 in separate files.

59. P. 44. Do you and Vol 1, sample task order Technical & Management Approach, Vol 3, Vol 4 assumptions in Word or PDF?

Proposers may submit in either Word or PDF.

60. P. 44. What versions of Word, Excel, and PDF do you prefer?

No preference.

61. P. 44. May we use 9 or 10 pt Arial for charts, tables, graphics and illustrations?

Please see the response to question #34.

62. P. 46 & 50. Do you want to call Volume 3 Past Performance (page 46) or Technical

Proposal (page 50)?

Volume 3 is Past Performance, page 50 is amended.

63. P. 46. Do you require submission project descriptions in past performance on

Attachment 3?

Please see page L.2.4 Volume 3, Subfactor 1 (c).

64. P. 46. What is the “Past Performance summaries”? Attachment 3?

The past performance summaries should be submitted utilizing the Past

Performance Worksheet, Attachment 3.

65. P. 46. If so, please amend Page 46 to not limit our project summaries to 2 pages –

Attachment 3 is 3 pages.

Each past performance summary is limited to two pages. The template in

Attachment 3 provides three blank templates. Offerors are instructed to provide at least 3 past performance summaries, but not more than five (the page limit is 10).

Each blank template can be lengthened not to exceed two pages per past performance summary.

66. P. 46. Please clarify what you want submitted in Past Performance and what is in page count.

Is it Attachment 3, unlimited pages plus a narrative that confined to 2 pages?

Is it Attachment 3 alone?

Please see Question 65.

67. P. 46. What is limited to two pages in the past performance? The description of our projects or Attachment 3?

68. P. 48. What are numbers of the Sub Factors for Vol 2 & Vol 3?

There is only one subfactor for Volume Two and Volume Three. Please number accordingly.

69. P. 50. Please clarify whether the instructions contained in (ii) will be counted in the 15 pages.

Assumption are not counted in the page limit, please refer to L.1.2.

70. P. 51 Please clarify this statement: “At least 2 of the 3 past performance summaries must be those of the Offeror serving as a prime contractor.” Does this mean:

Offerors should provide at least two past performance summaries where the offeror is listed as the prime.

71. If XYZ Corporation can could only show 1 past project in which they were a subcontractor and 2 of which they were the prime? OR Or that XYZ Corp can only submit 2 projects and the other one should come from a subcontractor 123 Corp for AG-

3187-S-12-0164?

Offerors should note whether they were the prime or the subcontractor in the description of work performed in Attachment 3. Please see question 70. Please refer to the Past Performance Notice in L1.3 and M.2 regarding the evaluation of past performance for additional guidance. All three past performances can be from the offeror serving as the prime on the past performance summary referenced projects, but at least two past performance summaries must be provided where the offeror served as prime on the referenced projects.

72. P. 51. We’re unclear of the contents of Vol 3. Do want Attachment 3 (unlimited) for 3 projects and then Project Descriptions (10 pages) of those same projects?

73. P. 51. Do you have a definition of “performed” (page 51): like the project will by 85% completed?

No. Offerors may note the completion status of past performance summaries under the “contract dates” field of Attachment 3.

74. P. 51. Can we submit more than 3 projects in Past Performance? If so, what are the maximum projects we can have?

75. On page 12 of Attachment 7: Lebanon Sample Task Order, the document states that:

"The implementation of this task does not require key personnel to be designated at the task level." However, on page 49 of the RFP, bidders are instructed to include the following in Volume 2: Sample Task Order Proposal: "Detailed bios/resumes of the key personnel assigned to the task order." Please clarify if resumes are required for this particular task order as part of proposal Volume 2. In short, we know that two resumes are required in Volume 1 for both the Project Manager and Deputy Project Manager positions; but are additional resumes required that relate directly to the Lebanon Sample

Task Order?

Volume 2, Subfactor 3 is amended to reflect language on Page 12 of the Attachment

7 under Key Personnel. The Forest Service would like to review resumes of final candidates for all overseas and domestic long and short term positions described in the statement of work.

76. In Section M of the RFP, it states that the Sample Task Order is one of the evaluation criteria for the IDIQ proposal, and Section M.3.3 requires the Offeror to “provide detailed, practical and logical actions that will result in the successful accomplishment of the requirements.” Attachment 7, the sample task order project background describes the whole LRI project and its objectives, but does not state what it has achieved and the remaining activities to complete. The attachments to the RFP include the Branding

Implementation and Marking Plan for LRI and its draft logical framework and the draft performance measurement framework, but does not include any information on the current status of the project, its work plan, progress reports and where they are in implementation, such as whether they are meeting targets or are delayed in achieving the expected results. Since this LRI is in its third year, this information is important so that

Offerors can better provide a realistic transition plan for the technical activities, know where to pick up and meet the deliverables, assist with staffing and affects the cost side of the proposal. Since this is an active project that the incumbent is currently implementing, METI would have the advantage over other Offerors of using this information, knows USFS’s preferences for the future of the project and its experience with the project to satisfy the evaluation criteria- demonstrate a clear and thorough understanding of the objectives and work performed and more accurate detailed, practical and logical actions. Based on this information gap, would USFS consider providing additional information about LRI such as the annual work plans, quarterly or annual reports and the most recent progress report, as well as other information that would level the playing field for all bidders?

The Government is attaching a sample updated work-plan for offerors to consider.

Offerors should note that, as stated in section M 3.3, the sample task order is illustrative only and will not be implemented. Offerors will be evaluated solely on their response to the sample documents included as attachments in the solicitation.

77. Will the government require an Incurred Cost Submission Report for any cost plus task orders?

78. Will cost-plus submissions be subject to DCAA auditing procedures?

79. In section B.7, FFP pricing is prescribed for task orders or activities for services provided are exclusively administrative. However, the FFP labor categories in section

B.10 are largely professional and technical. Please clarify why these categories would be appropriate for administrative work.

Section B.7 is a fixed fee for task orders requiring assistance with payment processing while Section B.10 relates to task orders requesting labor.

Predominately, the B.10 labor categories and corresponding fully burdened hourly rates will be used for firm fixed price task orders for Washington, DC-based staff.

80. In order to propose a centralized management structure, as prescribed in section B.9.(3), bidding contractors should be informed of the aggregate annual LOE directly billed to task orders by the program manager and deputy program manager (or analogous positions) under the current IDIQ.

Section B.9 has been updated and section (3) has been removed. The number of task orders issued on a year to year basis varies based upon budget allocations.

Approximately 300 task orders were issued in FY12.

81. On page 12, paragraph 13 of Attachment 7, The Sample Task Order, it states that the

Key Personnel of the IDIQ are required for this task and that the resumes of other staff should be submitted for all overseas and domestic positions described in the this statement of work prior to fielding. This prompts the following questions:

a. In the case of the Sample Task Order, is it required to submit CVs with our proposal response for the soil conservation and tree nursery short-term experts and the DC-based Project Support Specialist?

Yes, please see the response to Question 75.

b. Since this task requires LOE of the Key Personnel, do you have labor estimates for this?

LOE is described for each task, please see Question 19, pertaining to amendments to add LOE for task 1.

c. The DC-based Project Support Specialist position has 1160 hours allocated for it.

Are we to assume that the position will be full-time and work on other USFS task orders or is this truly a part-time position?

Yes, the position will be full-time. The sample task order, Attachment 7, has be amended on page 9, Task 3.2.3 to read 2000 hours.

82. Attachment 2 describes the “Current Contractor Activities to Transition Under the New

IDIQ Contract.” Please provide additional information on each of the activities, including the start date and estimated end date of each activity, so that offerors can more precisely plan transition activities.

83. Is the current contractor legally registered in each country of office presence?

This is not an IP requirement in every country of office presence.

84. Under the Sample Task Order, is the current contractor using the FSN scale for consultants? If so, please provide the U.S. State Department FSN pay scale to all bidders, in order to assure equal access to relevant cost information.

Please reference H.1 for guidance on personnel compensation.

85. The RFP refers to “critical staff” in several places throughout the RFP (such as on page

49, where it mentions: “Capacity and availability of key personnel and critical staff to perform this project.” How does USFS define “critical staff,” and how are they different from “key personnel”?

Key Personnel are identified in C.3.6. Section M.3.2 outlines the Forest Service’s evaluation criteria regarding staffing. Critical staff is not defined by the

Government.

86. Please provide a current organization chart with reporting lines so that Offerors may better understand and plan for an appropriate staffing structure. For instance, how are personnel performance reviews conducted and by whom?

This is not a governmental function. The Contractor is responsible for managing its personnel to meet performance standards.

87. Section L.2.4 Volume 1 (Technical Proposal) Factor 2 (Management Approach)

Subfactor 1 b), instructs bidders to specify the number of consultants in their staffing plans. In section M.3.2, however, the corresponding evaluation criterion is “Whether the

Offeror’s staffing plan details an appropriate number of current staff members ... “Are staff and consultants viewed as interchangeable for evaluation purposes? If not, how will each be weighted?

M.3.2 b is amended to include consultants as well as current staff. Offerors will be evaluated based on their ability to respond to all elements outlined in M.3.2.

88. Please confirm that the incumbent is governed under the current contract by a

‘Transition Out’ clause that requires an orderly exit and full transfer or information to the new contractor.

89. Please consider providing a plug figure for transition costs to be used by all bidders, since the incumbent’s inherent costs advantages in this regard may affect other bidders’ ability to compete fairly on the basis of overall performance value.

90. In regards to the Sample Task Order, please clarify if USFS has an in-country staff person to manage the program or is this person to be provided through the Task Order.

This person is to be provided through the Task Order, per Task One.

91. How will the current contractor be evaluated under M.3.2.d, considering there would be no transition for the incumbent?

92. Offerors are being asked to pick up incumbent contractor staff on the project, or minimally to find equivalent staff. To eliminate bias in favor of the incumbent, can those labor costs be provided to all offerors? Minimally, please consider providing the labor categories, number of positions, and estimated level of effort to offerors so that we can provide a thorough and specific transition plan.

Please see question 15 and 25. Specific transitional activities will be executed by individual task orders under the new contract. Those task orders will contain specific requirements for labor categories.

93. RFP Section L.1.2 Volume 2: Sample Task Order Proposal instructs bidders to include in the technical response the Task Order Cost WITHOUT OVERHEADS AND FEES as part of Attachment 1. As cost considerations are not allowed in Technical, please advise what the Contractor should provide.

Volume 2 Sample Task Order, Factor 3, Subfactor 2 Costs is removed from the solicitation. Similarly, Attachment 1, Volume 2 Sample Task order is removed from the solicitation.

94. Section M states that part of evaluation includes a weighted percentage of the estimated labor hours times the fixed price blended labor category rate for the base and option years. Can USFS please provide the labor hours so that the Contactor can better understand how we will be evaluated?

This is removed from the solicitation.

95. Section M states that part of the evaluation includes a weighted percentage of the estimated administrative cost with the administrative fee ceiling, for the base and option years. Can USFS please provide the labor hours so that the Contractor can better

96. Section M states that part of the evaluation includes a weighted percentage of the estimated cost reimbursement costs with the overheads/fee ceilings for the base and option years. Can USFS please provide the labor hours so that the Contractor can better

97. Section M.3.2.b states, "Whether the Offeror’s staffing plan details an appropriate number of current staff members with relevant foreign language skills and technical expertise." What is the government's definition of an "appropriate number" of staff members in a five-year IDIQ contract. Please consider revising the evaluation criteria to evaluate how offerors demonstrate the capability to provide the appropriately skilled staff with the relevant foreign language skills and technical expertise. Requiring that they be "current" staff may inadvertently bias the evaluation excessively in favor of the incumbent, because its staffing level is already tailored to performance under this contract, thereby rendering the bidding uncompetitive.

Please see question 87.

98. Please provide the Task Order number and dates of performance for the sample Task

Order.

Please reference #8 (Page 11) of Attachment 7 for the period of performance. There is no task order number as this is a sample order.

99. The source code for commodities is 000; for professional services, can region technical experts not citizens of host countries or the US work on contract tasks?

100. Section M.3.2.c contains an incomplete sentence. Please confirm the full criteria.

Section M.3.2 (c) is amended.

101. Section L.2.4 (Technical Proposal) Factor 1, subfactor 2. f) Please clarify what is meant

(Instructions for Technical Proposal: 2. Technical Approach) by “f) Utilizing “best practices” and other methods in determining performance of deliverables.”

Page 48 is amended.

102. Please clarify what is meant (M.3.1 Technical Approach Factor) by “f) The adequacy and specificity of the Offeror’s approach to using “best practices” and other methods in the performance of deliverables.” Does this refer to a performance monitoring plan?

Page 57 is amended.

103. Evaluation criteria for M.3.2 (Management Approach) names “The Offeror’s thoroughness, specificity, quality and completeness of the draft Transition Plan and the feasibility of its execution” as the evaluation criteria for the Transition Plan. Without full disclosure of each of the incumbent’s task orders and details of the personnel, no competing Offeror can provide the thoroughness, specificity, and completeness level at the level of the incumbent given the incumbent's current work. Furthermore, the incumbent will have no transition to undertake, so does the absence of a transition result in full points, or no points, to the incumbent? Forest Service should consider removing the weight for the transition plan, since it skews the evaluation strongly in favor of the incumbent. This section makes the procurement vulnerable to concerns, complaints or even outright protest by several bidders.

104. Please clarify what travel will be approved. For example, will travel for transition activities will be reimbursable as direct costs to the contract?

All travel will be approved at the task order level and not at the IDIQ level.

105. On p.15…