Finalized_Amendment_001_6-30-2015_SNAP_Benefits_Trafficking.pdf

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 or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT 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 your 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.

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

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

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

CHECK ONE 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 FORTH IN 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)

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.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

ASHLEY T OWENS, Contracting Officer

The purpose of this amendment is to extend the solicitation closing date, incorporate solicitation changes, and provide Government responses to Offeror questions.

The solicitation closing date is hereby extended to July 20, 2015 at 10 am EDT.

USDA, Food and Nutrition Service Contract Management Branch, Rm 228 3101 Park Center Drive Alexandria, VA 22302

USDA, Food and Nutrition Service Contract Management Branch, Rm 228 3101 Park Center Drive Alexandria, VA 22302

AG-3198-S-15-0038

1 6

See Block 16c

06/30/2015

06/30/2015

EXTENT of SNAP BENEFITS TRAFFICKING

Solicitation AG-3198-S-15-0038

Page 27 of the RFP under “Technical Proposal” is hereby amended to read:

The Technical Proposal shall not exceed 50 pages in length, double spacing, 12 point font, one inch margins; resumes and other business information, Past Performances and Staffing) are excluded from the page limit.

Page 32, located under Section 7. Evaluation Commercial Items, Factor 2, Management Approach is hereby changed from:

The management approach shall be evaluated to determine if and how well it demonstrates the Offeror’s plan and procedures used to ensure quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction and other product/service control standards are achieved. The Offeror shall be evaluated to determine if and how well the proposed management approach describes the qualifications of all key personnel in relation to their proposed roles. The Offeror shall be evaluated to determine if and how well the Key Personnel proposed demonstrates they possess the qualifications and experience needed to meet the requirements of the PWS. The resumes for Key Personnel shall also be considered in the determination.

To

The management approach shall be evaluated to determine if and how well it demonstrates the Offeror’s plan and procedures used to ensure quality, timeliness, responsiveness, customer satisfaction and other product/service control standards are achieved. The Offeror shall be evaluated to determine if and how well the proposed management approach describes the qualifications of all key personnel in relation to their proposed roles. The Offeror shall be evaluated to determine if and how well the Key Personnel proposed demonstrates they possess the qualifications and experience needed to meet the requirements of the PWS. The resumes for Key Personnel shall also be considered in the determination. The Offeror (including subcontractors) shall be evaluated to determine whether and how well the Quality Control Plan demonstrates appropriate and sufficient procedures, facilities and staff to meet the performance requirement outlined in the PWS.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO OFFEROR QUESTIONS

Question 1-Has FNS collected any data in the past from a random sample of investigated retailers?

Government Answer to Question 1: FNS does not have current data from a random-sample of investigated retailers.

Question 2-The RFP describes two regressions approaches, but does not express whether FNS has any preference as to which one would satisfy CLIN#2. Does FNS have a preference? If not, should offerors pick the one they believe best? Or, is exploration of both required?

Government Answer to Question 2: Objective #3 (CLIN#2) for this study is to develop a regression-based method for calculating retailer-level SNAP trafficking estimates. The offerors should propose the method they feel is most suited to achieve the Agency’s objective. The technical proposal should justify why the contractor feels their proposed methodology is most suited to achieve the Agency’s objective.

Question 3-Page 6 of the Performance Work Statement (Attachment I) includes a quote from the TWG report that mentions data sources, including EBT data and State maintained records. Does FNS anticipate that these sources will be used in the regression analyses?

Government Answer to Question 3: Objective #3 (CLIN#2) for this study is to develop a regression-based method for calculating retailer-level SNAP trafficking estimates. To create the regression-based methodology, the selected contractor shall use the data sources they feel will best achieve this goal. It should be noted that FNS does not hold state maintained records.

Availability of state maintained records cannot be guaranteed. If the use of state maintained records is proposed to be included in the regression-based methodology for calculating retailer-level SNAP trafficking estimates, it shall be the responsibility of the selected contractor to get the records from all states.

If yes:

Does “EBT data” refer to individual transactions data (i.e., recipient purchases) or aggregated data (e.g., monthly redemption totals of stores) or something else (such as the count of suspicious transaction patterns)?

Government Response: If the offeror chooses to use EBT data, FNS will provide at least EBT data from the ALERT system as described in the RFP. A need for additional data should be stated and justified in the technical proposal. A final determination about what EBT data will be released will be based upon an evaluation of the winning contractor’s request after award.

Question 4: Will FNS provide State maintained records to the winning bidder or must the bidder budget for acquiring these records?

Government Answer to Question 4: FNS does not hold state maintained records. Availability of state maintained records cannot be guaranteed. If the use of state maintained records is proposed to be included in the regression-based methodology for calculating retailer-level SNAP trafficking estimates, it shall be the responsibility of the selected contractor to get the records from all states.

Question 5: The urbanization variable used in previous studies used estimates from the 2010 data. This estimate is outside the range of dates for this study, and is not consistent with the statement made in the Performance Work Statement about concurrency of data (page 12).

Because more recent data are not yet available, should offerors assume that using the 2010 estimates in this case will be satisfactory? If not, what data does FNS want offerors to use?

Government Answer to Question 5: For the recalculation of the 2009-2011 estimates using the regression-based trafficking estimation methodology, the selected contractor shall use US Census data that matches the data used to create the Urbanicity and Poverty Level variables for the 2009-2011 estimates using the ‘current’ methodology. For the estimates from the 2012-2014 study period using either the current methodology or the regression-based methodology, the most recently released US Census data should be used.

Question 6: In Attachment I, the Performance Work Statement, page 2 states that “For the purposes of this study, trafficking refers to a retailer buying benefits from a SNAP participant for cash, which is part of Section 4.” Can FNS please clarify what “Section 4” is referring to?

Government Answer to Question 6: Page 2 of the solicitation is hereby changed to, “For the purposes of this study, trafficking refers to a retailer buying benefits from a SNAP participant for cash, which is part of Section 1“. “Section 1” refers to: The buying, selling, stealing, or otherwise effecting an exchange of SNAP benefits issued and accessed via Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers and personal identification numbers (PINs), or by manual voucher and signature, for cash or consideration other than eligible food, either directly, indirectly, in complicity or collusion with others, or acting alone.

Question 7: May we consider members of the Technical Working Group convened during the last contract as possibilities for the “two experts” to peer-review the methodology, per page 12 of the RFP, or does FNS consider them to be “involved in the design of the [regression-based] methodology” (and, hence, not allowed to be considered for these expert positions)?

Government Answer to Question 7: Members of the Technical Working Group may serve as “two expert” to peer-review the methodology. However, as “peer reviewers” they may not be involved in another part of the project.

Question 8: Page 27 of the RFQ states: “The Technical Proposal shall not exceed 30 pages in length, double spacing, 12 point font, one inch margins; resumes and other business information, Past Performances and Staffing are excluded from the page limit.”

Government Answer to Question 8: Correct, the technical proposal page limit is hereby revised to “not to exceed” 50 pages.

Question 9: Can FNS clarify whether the “other business information such as Past Performances and Staffing” refer to the contents of Tab B (Management Approach) and Tab C (Past Performance), as described on pages 28? In other words, is the 30-page limit only applicable to Tab A?

Government Answer to Question 9: There is no page limit for Past Performance and Pricing proposal. The entire technical proposal shall not exceed 50 pages. Past Performance is excluded from the page limit. See Attachment II Past Performance Questionnaire.

Question 10: The RFP discusses a Quality Control Plan on page 5, but this plan is not mentioned in the proposal instructions section on pages 26-28. Should this plan be incorporated as part of Tab B of the Technical Proposal, and included in the 30-page limit?

Government Answer to Question 10: The Quality Control Plan shall be submitted under Tab B Management Approach. It is not subject to the page count.

Question 11: The RFP describes a post-award conference (orientation meeting) on page 12, but this meeting is not mentioned in either the proposal instructions section or the PWS. Should we discuss our approach to the orientation meeting as part of Tab A of the Technical Proposal (within the 30-page limit)?

Government Answer to Question 11: The orientation meeting is not part of the PWS. No approach is needed for the post-award conference.

Question 12: The Technical Proposal instructions (page 27) mention that the font should be no smaller than “11 point pitch” and “12 point font”. Please clarify.

Government Answer to Question 12: 11 point pitch shall be utilized if offerors are using a typewriter.

Question 13-Should a staff allocation table, indicating hours bid for each staff person, be included in Tab B (and included in the 30-page limit)? Should the Tab B text (and 30-page limit) include a project schedule?

Government Answer to Question 13: The price proposal has no page limit.

Question 14: By what date should the past performance questionnaire be returned to FNS?

Government Answer to Question 14: Before the closing date of the RFP.

Question 15: What is the anticipated date of contract award?

Government Answer to Question 15: Award is anticipated prior to FY 15 ending on 9/30/2015.

Question 16: Could you please provide the incumbent contract number?

If not, is this a new requirement?

Government Answer to Question 16: There is no current incumbent. This is a new requirement.