RFP_Questions_and_Answers_23_June_2017.docx

National Geospatial Services Request for Proposal (RFP) AG-84JC-S-17-0002 RFP Questions and Answers As of 23 June 2017

Q: Section L, Paragraph 1.16, Cross-Referencing: The last sentence of section 1.16 states that the cross referencing matrix shall be included in Volume 3 - Technical Approach/Risk. Should this be Volume 1?

A: Yes

Q: Section L, Paragraph 2.3.1.3: Please clarify: do you require only one resume for the proposal (for the Program Manager) or do you require resumes for all key personnel, including the Program Manager?

A: The resume requested is for the Program Manager only however, the Government is planning to amend the solicitation to remove the requirement for this resume.

Q: Section L, Paragraph 2.3.1.4: Staffing Plan asks for staffing and skill mix necessary to meet PWS requirements. This information appears to exist in the PWS. What additional information is needed that is not in the PWS?

A: The PWS identifies key personnel positions that are required under this contract but does not dictate the contractor’s approach to staffing, the number of personnel required, or the assignment of staff to the various work areas identified in the PWS. The offeror’s distinct response should include all the information requested in paragraph 2.3.1.4.

Q: Section L, Paragraph 2.3.1.3: Key Manager/Personnel: Should there be minimum qualifications and duties and responsibilities for the Project Manager position? This position is not currently described in the PWS.

A: The paragraph referenced requests a resume for the Program Manager. A Project Manager is not referenced in this paragraph. Reference also the Performance Work Statement (PWS), paragraph 4.1 for responsibilities that fall under Program Management. The key personnel identified in the PWS section 4.1.11 require unique capabilities, higher education (usually of a scientific nature), and/or minimum experience requirements. The Offeror’s distinct response to program management should include all the information requested in Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.

The Government has not identified minimum qualifications for the Project Manager position as stated in Schedule B. Historically, one of the key personnel positions have concurrently fulfilled the role of the project lead if one was proposed by the awardee however, some potential offerors have expressed interest in having a designated labor category for Project Manager. We do not anticipate that a Project Manager would be proposed for every task order but it is up to the awardee to determine their approach to meet the task order requirements.

Q: Key Personnel Question: Several key personnel in technical areas have experience requirements that appear excessive. Many years of experience (6-8) is not necessarily a good thing when trying to be innovative since fresh skill sets come from universities and recent technical training. Can experience requirements be reduced in some cases?

A: The Government reviewed the minimum requirements for key personnel and believe they are appropriate for the respective positions. The experience requirements are consistent with same/similar positions published on salary surveys.

Q: Please clarify whether or not the Service Contract Act, FAR 52.222-41 applies to this task order. If so, please provide the applicable Wage Determination.

A: No. This is a professional services contract as stated throughout the solicitation.

Q: Solicitation Text: “2.3.4 Sub-factor D-Sample Task: Provide your approach and philosophy”. Is the government requesting a price quote for the sample task order or just the approach and philosophy?

A: No pricing is requested for the Sample Task. Responses to the Sample Task are considered under Factor 1 – Technical Approach/Risk. The Government intends to issue a solicitation amendment to remove any reference to cost from Section M, para. 2.2.4.

Q: Solicitation Text: “4.1.4 Government Labor Estimate: The Offeror should consider the Labor Estimate in Section B of the RFP as a baseline. The Labor Estimate is an analysis of the annual labor hours by labor category that the Government reasonably believes are required to accomplish the orders under this contract. Labor hours are variable and dependent on individual orders, Offerors proposed strategies, and other factors. Do not propose staffing only to this estimate. All requirements in the PWS are required and must be met. The Labor Estimate only includes the technical expertise required to meet the PWS requirements and does not include administrative or business segment labor (e.g. finance managers, human resource managers, contract administrators, buyers, supervisors, program managers, etc.) nor does it account for Offeror methodologies for meeting the requirements (e.g. cross-range utilization of resources, reapportionment of labor hours, or reduced staffing).” It is unclear how the government can expect labor estimates beyond what is provided in the baseline estimate as the requirements in the PWS provide high level descriptions but do not provide any specific requirements for which estimates can be developed. As noted labor hours are variable and dependent on individual orders, Offerors proposed strategies, and other factors. Given there are no individual orders beyond the sample task order how does the government expect Offerors to provide additional estimates regarding technical level of effort required beyond the government baseline?

A: This section is a caveat that the hours provided in Schedule B are estimates only based on historical averages. During contract performance, should the actual hours vary, the awardee is expected to be able to staff and perform to the actual awarded amounts under individual task orders. The estimated hours are not “ceiling” amounts. The Government anticipates removal of the sentence “Do not propose staffing only to this estimate” in a solicitation amendment.

Q: How many awards does the government anticipate making?

A: 2 – see Section M, paragraph 1.3.

Q: Is it appropriate to provide more that 1 person for the Key Personnel positions?

A: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Staffing Plan – see Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.4 and Section M, paragraph 2.2.1. The Government does not intend on directing offerors what their staffing plan is/should be.

Q: We want to provide an inclusive team for this project. Can resumes be excluded from the 100-page limit of Volume 1?

A: No – only one resume is requested (Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.3) however, the Government intends to remove the resume request in a solicitation amendment.

Q: It mentions in PWS 4.1.20.1 that “The contractor shall develop, maintain, and deliver an End of Contract Transition Plan to ensure an orderly transition period and minimize any impact on open task orders and FS programs.” Should the End of Contract Transition Plan be included in the proposal? If so, in which volume and under which Sub-factor should it be located?

A: No, this is not a requirement of Section L. It will be a deliverable under the contract.

Q: It mentions in PWS 4.1.2.1 “The contractor shall establish and maintain a comprehensive Quality Control Plan (QCP).” Should the Quality Control Plan be included in the Proposal? If so, in which volume and under which Sub-factor should it be located?

A: No, this is not a requirement of Section L. However, offerors should note Section L, paragraph 5.3.6 does request a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan with the proposal.

Q: The RFP recommends that the contractor bids its basis of estimate for resources based on its proposed solution and yet the government provides quantities in the solicitation. Are the amounts published reflecting the LOE for existing incumbent contracts?

A: Section L, paragraph 4.2.3 includes the following: “Basis of Estimate (BoE): Provide a BoE to support all proposed rates, costs, or prices (e.g. forward pricing rate agreements, fringe, O/H, G&A, Material Handling, and Facilities Capital Cost of Money). Discuss any deviations from standard business systems. Ambiguous or unrealistic assumptions regarding increased productivity are not acceptable.” The Government will remove “or prices” from this section to provide clarification that the BoE does not apply to proposed hours. The estimated hours in Schedule B were independently derived by the Government program office based upon historical information.

Q: If the contractor has requested PPQs in the last six (6) months from the same government customer do we need to re-request from them or can we use the earlier submission?

A: All requirements of the solicitation must be met and any exceptions to solicitation requirements must be identified in the proposal submission. Offeror should refer back to Section L, paragraph 3.3.

Q: We understand the QASP is a government document, although there is a requirement for one from the contractor. Would the government provide a copy for the existing one(s) for the present two incumbent contracts?

A: Section L, para. 5.3.6 refers the offeror back to FAR Sub-Part 37.604. The offeror must submit a Freedom of Information Act request for copies of government contract documents.

Q: In the RFP, 1,750 hours is used for some labor categories. Is that the USFS usual Full Time Equivalent (FTE) as many agencies use either 1,880 or 1,920 hours for a FTE?

A: The Government considers 1,880 as a FTE. The estimate of hours provided represent recent (twelve months) actuals.

Q: Reference is made to performance at contractor’s facility. Will USFS provide hardware and software as GFE?

A: The contractor needs to have VPN to access Forest Service networks. The Government (GTAC) will issue five (5) laptops per awardee at contract award for performance of technical services. The laptops are Forest Service imaged so that the contractor will have access to file resources. Any additional hardware/software required to perform must be identified at the task order level or requested by the contractor in their task order proposal.

Q: Can all contractor personnel have VPN access?

A: Yes, but we would probably want to know why the requested individual(s) require access.

Q: Some labor estimates indicate only 150 hours annually. Is this still correct?

A: The estimate of hours provided represent recent (twelve months) actuals.

Q: What location requirements exist for an external contractor facility? How many miles from government offices must the contractor facility be? Can you post specific software solutions required to be compliant with the USFS mission?

A: Government issued laptops must be taken into a Forest Service office monthly for hard-wire issued updates. The Government does not have a location requirement for the basic contract however, there may be additional restriction/requirements at the task order level. Historically contractors have been located within two (2) commuting hours from a Forest Service office in order to receive regular software updates.

Q: If performance is at a remote site what data and product delivery methods are anticipated?

A: This is up to the Forest Service unit to identify at the task order level. Requirements tend to evolve with changes in technology.

Q: With industry day on June 21st and proposal submittals realistically due before the July 4th holiday weekend we respectfully request an extension of 3 weeks to produce a best value technical and cost proposal to the USFS. This extension will give us time to thoroughly review Q and A’s from the industry day which could well change our proposal response.

A: The Government is anticipating release of a solicitation amendment to make minor corrections to the RFP. The RFP response date will be extended at that time.

Q: Would the Government please list the various office and field locations where they have assigned contract staff under the current contracts.

A: Not all task order projects are recurring work which require utilizing staff in the same locations as what was provided under historical task orders. Several projects are stand-alone or “one-off” situations. Regions that have been historically using this contract vehicle include Regions 1-6, 8-10, GTAC, and Washington Office (WO). Some regions have historically issued task orders where all of the work could be performed remotely (e.g. Nez Perce- Clearwater National Forests). Recent recurring on-site efforts have occurred at GTAC (e.g. on-site support for geospatial application and tool development) and at WO (on-site GIS web programming and GIS services for the Enterprise Data Warehouse). Region 6 utilized on-site work in the past but not of recent years (since ~2009). Field work typically is non-recurring and includes site work on National Forest Systems and/or private land and occasionally travel to support activities such as training. Historical orders may not be indicative, or all-encompassing, of future requirements.

Q: Does the Government anticipate international travel under this contract?

A: There is a possibility for international travel in support of the Forest Service International Programs Office (e.g. remote sensing and GIS use for resource management/monitoring initiatives) however, it is anticipated to be minimal (i.e. less than yearly).

Q: The model contract requires several fill-ins throughout the document, will the Government provide all Offerors with a Microsoft Word version? If not, will the Government allow the Offeror to save the RFP in an editable format to compete the fill-ins?

A: We will not provide a Word version of this document but offerors may save the RFP in an editable format or complete the fill-ins by hand.

Q: Please confirm clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan and 52.219-16, Liquidated Damages – Subcontracting Plan, is removed given this solicitation is a small business set-aside.

A: We will remove these clauses from the solicitation in an amendment.

Q: FAR 52.245-2 Government Property Installation Operations Services, Paragraph (b) reads, “…If any or all of the Government property is lost or becomes no longer usable, the Contractor shall be responsible for replacement of the property at Contractor expense.” Is the Contractor responsible for replacement of Government property due to normal wear and tear?

A: No

Q: Section K.1(c) (xvi) 52.222-57, Representation Regarding Compliance with Labor Laws (Executive Order 13673), President Trump revoked this Executive Order on March 27, 2017 and this Order is no longer effective. We request the Government remove this reference/requirement from this solicitation.

A: We will remove this clause from the solicitation in an amendment.

Q: The proposal validity date is not specified in Section A as indicated in the instructions, please confirm the proposal validity date?

A: Section A, block 11 states “60 CALENDAR DAYS UNLESS OFFEROR INSERTS A DIFFERENT PERIOD”. The Government may extend this in a solicitation amendment.

Q: Section L.1.13 states "..[] Each page shall be counted except the following; cover pages, tables of contents, glossaries, tabs, work breakdown structures, and the Cross Reference Matrix." Will the Government consider excluding the Program Manager Resume and the Professional Employee Compensation Plan (Section L 2.3.2.2)?

A: No. The Government chose the page number limitation to discourage extraneous material and company advertisements in the technical volume.

Q: Section L2.3.1.3 states “Provide a contract-wide organizational structure showing lines of authority, roles and responsibilities of key managers/personnel to meet PWS requirements for each functional area. For each key manager/personnel position identified provide: 1) The rationale for the position being designated as key manager/personnel; 2) The roles and responsibilities of the position; 3) The minimum qualifications for each position.”

Does the Government want the Offeror to designate/determine which managers/personnel are key? If so, should the positions identified in PWS Section 4.1.11, Key Personnel, be included?

A: No we do not consider corporate management among the key personnel positions listed in PWS section 4.1.11 which require unique capabilities, higher education (usually of a scientific nature), and/or minimum experience requirements.

Q: Section L.2.3.3 states “…*+Provide a narrative that explains your approach to implement functional requirements identified in the PWS.” Is the assumption that the functional requirements are only Sections and subsections under 4.2 and 4.3?

A: That is correct.

Q: Section M.3.1 states "…[] If conducted, the results will be assessed under the applicable and will be used to validate and confirm the Offeror's written proposal." Is there a missing word following applicable?

A: Yes, it appears to be missing “evaluation factor”. The solicitation will be corrected in an amendment.

Q: Section L.1.21 states “…[]Any reference within the body of the proposal volume that refers the reader to another location within the referring document shall be hyperlinked in the manner described above. A hyperlinking reference between different filenames is not necessary. Volume 4 does not need to be hyperlinked. All hyperlinked pages shall be counted against the page limitations in Section L, paragraph 1.12.” Per the Government’s instructions, references are to be hyperlinked. However, the Government instructs hyperlinks will be counted against page limitations. If an Offeror references a page-counted section, will a hyperlink cause that section to be counted twice toward page limit?

A: Hyperlinked documents in a proposal volume that contains a page limitation will be counted toward the page limitation. If the same hyperlinked document is referenced more than once, it will only be counted once.

Q: Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices – The Government states, “Provide your wrap-rate (e.g. labor, fringe, overhead, G&A, etc.) for each labor category” will the Government confirm industry is to use NATIONAL AVERAGE for all rates, to include At Origin and At Destination, Federal Facility and Contractor Facility?

A: The Government is not dictating the rates the offeror must use. As stated in the PWS Section 2, “Individual task orders under the National Geospatial Services contract are varied and may be issued by multiple FS units, be of varying size and complexity, and performed at geographically separate locations. The level of effort may change from year-to-year based on government funding levels and program priorities. The contractor must respond to workload changes, unanticipated workload surges or decreases in Agency ordering, and/or multiple reprioritizations of workload.” How the offeror proposes pricing in order to meet the solicitation requirements is considered part of the offeror’s overall approach.

Q: SECTION L - 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION AND INSTRUCTIONS, 1.14.1 Regular Pages – will the Government allow 10 pt font for graphics?

A: See Section L, paragraph 1.14.2, “The text size for charts, tables, graphs, or diagrams shall be 10 point.”

Q: SECTION L - 3.3 Questionnaires – The Government states, “Any questionnaires received following the RFP due date will be considered late and may not be considered.” Will the Government confirm that a questionnaire not submitted and subsequently not considered will receive a neutral performance rating (neither negative or positive)?

A: Section L, Paragraph 3.3 is a requirement of the solicitation. Per Section L, Para 1.1, “Nonconformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in a determination of nonresponsiveness or an unfavorable proposal evaluation.” It is the offeror’s responsibility to ensure a complete proposal package is submitted by the response due date.

Q: SECTION L - 4.2.4 Section 4-Fixed Labor Rates – The Government states, “If you propose a labor category that is not listed [in Schedule B], provide a basis of estimate for the direct labor rate.” Will the Government confirm that the addition of “not listed labor categories” will not be used to replace “listed labor categories”? If a vendor is to add additional labor categories, how will the Government ensure uniformity of price evaluation?

A: The Government anticipates removal of the sentence, “If you propose a labor category that is not listed, provide a basis of estimate for the direct labor rate” in a solicitation amendment.

Q: RFP requests we name employees to participate in performance of the PWS. Can you clarify that specifically naming on-site staff is or is not required?

A: The offeror must follow the instructions in Section L, Para. 2.3.1.4 to “Provide a Staffing Plan that appropriately identifies, allocates, and assigns the staffing and skill mix necessary to satisfactorily meet all PWS requirements.” The Government considers the requirement as a potential discriminator and key to demonstrating how the offeror will have key personnel in place by contract award. The Government does not intend on directing offerors what their staffing plan is/should be.

Q: ATTACHMENT L-3: SAMPLE TASK, Assumptions – In order to not provide the incumbent an unfair advantage and maximize competition, will the Government provide actual same fire-level geospatial output data products currently provided by the current MTBS project?

A: Fire-level data products for all MTBS fires are available from the MTBS project website at http://mtbs.gov/data/customquery.html. The Government will provide examples of the fire-level geospatial data/products for a sample MTBS fire in a solicitation amendment. These products include:

• 30 meter pre-fire Landsat TM/ETM/OLI reflectance imagery GeoTiff subset to bounding box 3km beyond the map extent of the burn area boundary.

• 30 meter post-fire Landsat TM/ETM/OLI reflectance imagery GeoTiff subset to bounding box 3km beyond the map extent of the burn area boundary.

• 30 meter continuous burn severity indices (Normalized Burn Ratio [NBR], differenced Normalized Burn Ratio [dNBR] and Relativized Normalized Burn Ratio [RdNBR]) as GeoTiff images with the dNBR and RdNBR indices subset to bounding box 3km beyond the map extent of the burn area boundary.

• 30 meter thematic burn severity classification GeoTiff based on dNBR stratified into six classes (unburned to low burn severity, low burn severity, moderate burn severity and high burn severity, increased greenness and non-processing area mask) and clipped to the burn area boundary.

• Burned area boundary delineation based on interpretation/analysis of imagery and burn severity indices in shapefile format.

• Non-processing mask area delineation of clouds, shadows, large water bodies, other features on the landscape or satellite imagery anomalies that may negatively affect the burn severity classification in shapefile format.

Q: ATTACHMENT L-3: SAMPLE TASK, Objectives/ Deliverables – To standardize the evaluation and not give the incumbent an unfair advantage, would the Government provide a list of USFS applications associated with MTBS (if the listing provided in SAMPLE TASK SOO is not comprehensive)? Also, would the Government provide a functional description and high level technical architecture of these systems?

A: The Government currently utilizes commercial and open source geospatial software applications (ERDAS Imagine, ArcGIS and GDAL/QGIS) in a desktop PC environment with network attached storage to support routine MTBS fire mapping and data production. A menu-driven user interface is currently used to execute customized Python scripts to conduct specific steps in the mapping process using these applications and store mapping parameters/metadata in a MySQL database. The Government utilizes one or a combination of these desktop geospatial applications in its current MTBS mapping framework to conduct the following steps from the Scope section in an automated or semi-automated fashion – Steps 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.

Q: Ref. Atch J-1 - Natl Geospatial Services PWS.pdf, 3.4. Publications, Reference Documents, National Standards and AG-84JC-S-17-0002.pdf.pdf, ATTACHMENT L-3: SAMPLE TASK, Scope – The Government states, “10) Document and maintain all relevant data and mapping/processing parameters for each fire for metadata”. Will the Government provide the applicable metadata standards? Will the Government make these standards available for developing the sample task?

A: The Government currently compiles a single metadata file for each mapped MTBS fire and the generated geospatial data products. The Government will provide an example of a completed metadata file for a fire which will provide a reference for the minimum metadata parameters to be collected/documented for this SOO. The file will be included in a solicitation amendment.

Q: Section L; 4.2.4 Section 4-Fixed Labor Rates (page 40) - While the deliverables to USFS would be non-commercial, the labor category rates and qualifications themselves would be consistent with commercial rates available to other customers. Since many small business do not have either a FPRA or FPRP in place, would the Forest Service consider accepting commercial rates with documentation supporting reasonableness (e.g. existing rate schedules in place with the government that have previously been validated, such as GSA, GSA STARS II, etc)?

A: The FPRA and FPRP were provided as examples. The instructions request offerors provide the supporting documentation and basis for the proposed rates. Commercial rate documentation would be acceptable supporting documentation.

Q: Section L, 1.12 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits: (page 35) - Is there page limit to each of the 5 Past Performance requested (e.g. 5 page limit each)?

A: No. All the page count specifications are in Section L, para. 1.12 and 1.13.

Q: PDF Section L; page 36 - 2.3.1.3 and pages 16-30 of SOW 4.1.11. Key Personnel Is there a page length guidance on the single key personnel resume?

A: No. All the page count specifications are in Section L, para. 1.12 and 1.13.

Q: PDF Section L; 2.3.2 Sub-factor B-Compensation, Recruitment, and Retention (page 38) - Is a professional employee compensation plan required for Prime only or also major subcontractors?

A: Refer back to Section L, para 2.3.2.2, “A Professional Employee Compensation Plan (see FAR provision 52.222-46) that discusses compensation, recruitment, and retention for employees who will work under the contract (to include teammates and subcontractors)…”.

Q: Why are you asking for DCMA/DCAA offices?

A: The Government may need to coordinate with the cognizant DCMA/DCAA representative to perform analysis on submitted rates or supporting documentation (Section M, para. 2.4), obtain additional past performance information (see Section L, para. 2.3.2) or request a Pre-Award Survey (see Section M, para. 3.3).

Q: PDF Section L; 5.3.2 Government Offices (page 41) - If the small business does not have a DCAA/DCMA administrator as they have not been audited, only independently reviewed, please advise on how to reply in compliance.

A: The offeror may obtain information on their cognizant DCMA representative on their website (www.dcma.mil) under the “Customer” and “Contract Management Team” navigation links. The offeror may obtain information on their cognizant DCAA office on their website (www.dcaa.mil) under the “Locator” navigation link. This is the information requested in Section L, para. 5.3.2.

The offeror may submit information outside of DCMA/DCAA audits in order to support other Section L instructions, such as that in para. 4.2.3 Section 3-Estimating Methodology. The offeror is still required to submit the information requested in Section L, para. 5.3.2 even if they use other than DCMA/DCAA audits to support their cost/price volume.

Q: Pre-Proposal Conference - Will this be in person only or will phone be allowable for team members that cannot be onsite?

A: We did not have a teleconference option for this event. Industry day attendance is encouraged however it is optional and is not required in order to submit a proposal response. The PowerPoint presentation, list of attendees, and questions/answers will be added to the FBO posting.

Q: What suites are on the lap-tops that are being provided to contractors on the basic contract? Suites such as eCognition and ArcGis have expensive (~25k) license agreements. Will the technology suites that are required to perform the technical requirements be included on these lap-tops?

A: The laptops come with the basic suite of programs including MS Office. ArcGIS and other needed licenses are available and will be provided through the Forest Service licensing agreements. Any additional programs beyond the Forest Service licensing agreements may need to be supplied or negotiated between the task ordering office and the contractor.

Q: If work is performed at a non-government facility/location, are there any software suites that the contractor would be responsible to obtain license agreements for?

A: The laptops come with the basic suite of programs including MS Office. ArcGIS and other needed licenses are available and will be provided through the Forest Service licensing agreements. Any additional programs beyond the Forest Service licensing agreements may need to be supplied or negotiated between the task ordering office and the contractor.

Q: Is the requirement that a small business complete at least 50% of the work under the contract calculated on an annual or contract-wide basis?

A: The Government intends to monitor compliance with FAR clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting on an annual (base plus each option period) basis. This will be addressed in the Government’s Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.

Offerors may also reference also the SBA final rule, effective 30 June 2016 for recent changes to subcontracting limits. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/05/31/2016-12494/small-business-government-contracting-and-national-defense-authorization-act-of-2013-amendments?utm_campaign=subscription+mailing+list&utm_medium=email&utm_source=federalregister.gov

Q: What information needs to be included in the labor rate buildup?

A: Everything that goes into the rate, e.g. salary to the employee, fringe rate, overhead, General and Administrative, profit, etc.

Q: Does this FBO posting replace the notice number AG-84JC-S-17-0001 or AG-84M8-S-16-0005?

A: No, this requirement is separate from the two identified FBO postings.

Q: Which Forest Services offices/units are using this contract vehicle?

A: Regions that have been historically using this contract vehicle include Regions 1-6, 8-10, GTAC, and Washington Office (WO). Historic use may not be indicative of future use as the current effort has expanded scope of work from the previous contracts and the Government has taken measures to remove barriers that previously hindered use.

Q: Is the Program Manager position an overhead position? There is not a key personnel position listed or a rate asked for in the RFP. If so, why is the Program Manager an overhead position when there is so much emphasis on program management in the solicitation?

A: Program management is considered overhead. The program management provided by the contractor applies to the basic contract as a whole and is expected to be spread across a number of task orders. Whereas a Project Manager may be a dedicated direct charge to a task order if the project warrants such support due to the magnitude.

Q: Are you expecting a transition of incumbent personnel from the current contract to the new contract?

A: It is up to the offeror to develop their Staffing Plan. Note that the performance end date for task orders under the current contract is not necessarily the same as end date of the basic contract.

Q: Do you anticipate an impact to operations when GTAC moves in 2018?

A: The Government has a plan in place for transfer of GTAC operations and to eliminate/reduce risk of downtime. No impact to this contract or contractors is anticipated.

Q: Are you anticipating different overhead rate structures for personnel working on a federal facility versus an “off-site” facility?

A: Yes, and that is accounted for in the list of personnel categories in Schedule B.

Q: Has the historical contract ever hit the $25M ceiling?

A: No. The last 5 year contract only used approximately $11M. There were barriers identified by Forest Service units that stymied the use of the contract vehicle including: 1) The contract was inappropriately established as an Architect and Engineering (A&E) type contract and very few Forest Service contract specialists have A&E warrant authority; 2) Customers have complained that the labor rates under the historical contract have been cost prohibitive; 3) The Forest Service has struggled with effective internal communication and has not been able to promote the availability of the contract vehicle to all intended audiences. The Government is taking measures to reduce these barriers for wider use in the future.

Q: What current contract issues do you have that you want to resolve with the new contract?

A: The RFP evaluation criteria was selected to ensure proposals provided the information that is of primary concern to the Government.

Q: Is the Government interested in learning of potential synergies with agencies outside of the Forest Service?

Yes.

Q: In the PowerPoint presentation, the Government provided its estimated “worst case scenario” for award schedule. What is the “best case scenario”?

A: By the end of August 2017.

Q: The Sample Task provided in Section L looks like it may have been a task order under another GTAC contract. Would a GTAC contractor have a competitive advantage?

The MTBS mapping work identified in the Sample Task is a type of work that has previously been performed under another GTAC contract, Remote Sensing and Geospatial Technology Support Services, however; this Sample Task is not an actual task that has been awarded or performed by the contractor under that contract. The scope of work under the current National Geospatial Services contract has been expanded from the historical National GIS Services contract and it now includes expanded work areas such as remote sensing and geospatial help desk support. The Government wanted to select a Sample Task that was meaningful to the evaluation and potentially prove to be a distinguishing factor in the offeror’s approach and philosophy to this new area of work. It was written specifically for the National Geospatial Services contract.

Q: Could there be more than 2 contract awards?

A: No.

Q: Are new ideas/innovative approaches more important to the Government than institutional knowledge?

A: This is subjective depending on who you ask (i.e. project manager) and can vary depending on the technical work area.

Q: Do you have preference on whether you want the offeror to capture incumbent personnel?

A: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Staffing Plan – see Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.4 and Section M, paragraph 2.2.1. The Government does not intend on directing offerors what their staffing plan is/should be. The evaluation factors were written with the intention to provide discrimination.

Q: Is there a usage fee charged to Forest Service units/offices in order to use this contract vehicle?

A: No.

Q: How should we bid staffing? What are current staffing levels?

A: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Staffing Plan – see Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.4 and Section M, paragraph 2.2.1. The Government does not intend on directing offerors what their staffing plan is/should be. The evaluation factors were written with the intention to provide discrimination.

Q: Does this work include Alaska?

A: Yes

Q: Are there security/background requirements for onboarding personnel?

A: Reference the PWS, para. 4.1.4 Security.

Q: Is there a top-down initiative to use this “enterprise level” contract?

Q: We believe so however, the Forest Service has struggled with effective internal communication and has not been able to promote the availability of the contract vehicle to all intended audiences. The Government is taking measures to reduce this barrier in the future.

Q: Do you want to see “letters of intent” for proposed personnel in the proposal submission?

A: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s Staffing Plan – see Section L, paragraph 2.3.1.4 and Section M, paragraph 2.2.1. The Government does not intend on directing offerors what their staffing plan is/should be or what should be included to support the Staffing Plan. The evaluation factors were written with the intention to provide discrimination.

Q: The Government has requested a fixed rate for labor categories for work that could be potentially performed at any OCONUS location. This introduces risk of high priced solutions since offerors are likely to propose rates based on high cost of living locations. Additionally, the Government has only provided a labor category for an entry level position and a senior level position. If a solution requires more than a junior level, it forces the awardee to propose the senior level position, even if that level is greater than what is necessary to perform the task. Would the Government consider addition of a mid-level position for the labor categories?

A: The Government is considering the addition of mid-level positions and may incorporate these into a solicitation amendment. Additionally on the amendment, the labor rates will be converted from a fixed rate to a fixed ceiling rate to allow awardees the ability to propose a rate lower than the ceiling rate, if applicable to the task order.

Q: Other government offices include provisions that new labor categories/rates may be added after contract award. Would you consider that?

A: This solicitation does not allow for on-boarding of new labor categories. The Government will comply with the Competition in Contracting Act when considering any future contract modifications.

Q: Section M, para. 5.1.1 references completion of the Standard Form (SF) 33 however the SF 1447 was provided.

A. The offeror should complete the SF 1447. The Government will correct the reference in an amendment.

Q: What is the total number of contracts the offeror is required to provide to evidence past performance?

A: This will vary depending on the Offeror Team organizational structure. Reference Section L, para. 3.2.2, “Submit information on three (3) recent contracts that are relevant in demonstrating the Prime past performance in the technical areas of the PWS. Submit information on two (2) recent contracts performed by each joint or teaming partner and significant subcontractors…”.

Q: What was the rationale for selecting a small business set-aside for this contract?

A: This decision was based upon market research results including responses to sources sought synopsis and other requests for information. The Government determined there to be at least two qualified and capable small businesses who were likely to respond to the solicitation. SBA reviewed the market research results and agreed with this conclusion.

Page | 15