Question and Answer Log FA701424R0021.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- AFNCR-IT Follow On Solicitation Amendment Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- Amendment001
About this file
This document contains a question and answer log for an Air Force National Capital Region Information and Technology Services follow-on solicitation. The solicitation seeks offers for information technology services and solutions to support the Air Force National Capital Region. Key details include clarification that the government will evaluate both subfactors under Factor 2 - Past Performance together as the total score for that factor. The document also provides answers to questions on pricing details in Section B, period of performance dates, application of commercial item procedures, required submission of consent letters and teaming agreements from subcontractors, and confirmation that private sector past performance will be evaluated differently than federal contracts given the absence of CPARs. Offerors are permitted to modify formulas and inputs within the pricing model attachments as needed so long as changes are annotated for the government.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| ATTCH 11 FA701424R0021__Section M___Evaluation_of_Offers_FINAL 02012024.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATTCH1 10 FA701424R0021__Section L__Instructions to Offerors_FINAL_02012024.docx | DOCX document | |
| Solicitation Amendment FA701424R00210001 SF 30.pdf | ||
| FA701424R0021___Appendix_H_Sample_Subcontractor_or_Team_Member_Consent_Letter.docx | DOCX document | |
| FA701424R0021_ATCH_7A_PrimePricingModel_JBB_DW.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation Amendment - FA701424R00210001 Conformed copy.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Air Force National Capital Region Information and Technology Services (AFNCR-ITS) FOLLOW-ON | |||||
| SOLICITATION - FA701424R0021 | |||||
| QUESTION/ANSWERS | |||||
| INDUSTRY QUESTION/COMMENTS | GOVERNMENT ANSWERS/COMMENTS | ||||
| No. | Solicitation File Name | Solicitation Section | Question | Response | |
| 1 | ATTCH 11, Section M Appendix B, Self-Rated Scoring Matrix | M-3.2.2.1.4, Pg 5 | In M-3.2.2.1.4 the evaluation says the government will “then” separately validate Subfactor 2- Past Performance. Please confirm the HTRO that the Government evaluates in Step 1 is the score for Subfactor 1 - Technical Experience. | The HTRO the Government will validate/evaluate in step 1 is the total score for Factor 2 - Past Experience. (subfactor 1 score + subfactor 2 score = total factor 2 score) | |
| 2 | Solicitation – FA701424R00021 | Section B, Page 3 | Section B schedule does not break out cost and award fee. | ||
| Please consider changing Section B Estimated Quantity/Lot from “12 Months” to “1 Lot”. | Updated CLINS Section B to reflect "Lot and not Months | ||||
| 3 | Solicitation – FA701424R00021 | Section B - Section F - ATCH 7A and ATCH 7B,Section B Pages 3-5; |
Section F Pages 7-9;
ATCH 7A - All Tabs;
ATCH 7B - All Tabs There is an inconsistency among RFP documents.
Section B (Prices) and Section F (Schedule) list the Program Years in one format while Attachments 7A & 7B (Pricing Models) show a different format. (Please refer to the Following Table):
Sections B & F Attach 7A & 7B Year 1 Base Year Year 2 Option year 1 Year 3 Option year 2 Year 4 Option year 3 Year 5 Option year 4
| Please amend so that there is one format to avoid confusion in costing, evaluation, and future contract exaction. | Updated Attach 7A and 7B to reflect Year 1 -5 instead of Bsase Year, Option Year 1 - 4 | ||||
| 4 | Solicitation – FA701424R00021 | Section F – Deliveries or Performance, Pages 8 -9 | Please verify the period of performance for CLIN 0009 runs concurrently in the last two months of the 12-month period of performance for CLINs 4001, 4002, and 4003. | Corrected PoP on CLIN 0009 from 05Jul2029 - 03Sep2029 to 05Jul2029 - 02Sep 2029; Phase out and Yr 4 PoP has two months runs concurrently | |
| 5 | Solicitation – FA701424R00021 | Section I, page 21 | We respectfully request the Government include FAR Clause 52.244-6 or FAR PART 12 to cover commercial purchases. | Clause Added | |
| 6 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-1.13; L-3.2.4; Page 4;19 | Please provide the referenced Appendix H Sample Subcontractor Consent Letter, as it was not provided with the final solicitation. | Appendix H Sample Subcontractor Consent Letter has been attached/provided. | |
| 7 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-2.3, Table 1, Page 5 | Table 1 indicates that there is a 2-page limit for the Self-Scoring Matrix. On a previous Q&A the government answered “Self-Scoring Matrix page limit is now set to “No Limit.” Please update Section L - Table 1 to reflect there is no page limit for the Self-Scoring Matrix. | Table 1 updated to reflect "No Limit" for Self-Scoring Matrix. | |
| 8 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-2.3, Table 1; L - 3.3, Page 5;20 | Table 1 references an Organization Structure Change History (limited to 1 page) is to be included in Volume IIB, Past Performance. However, there is no reference to this in Section 3.3 Volume IIB. | ||
| Please confirm an Organization Structure Change History is not required with proposal submission. | Organization Structure Change History has been removed | ||||
| 9 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-2.3, Table 1; L-3.2.1.3.b; L-3.2.4; Page 5;9;19 | Please verify that subcontractor teaming agreements and consent letters should be provided in “CompanyName_AFNCRIT_VolIIA_PTE.pdf”. | File name has been added for Subcontractor Teaming Agreement and Consent Letter. | |
| 10 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-3.3.1.4, Page 21 | During the DRFP Q&A phase, the Government responded to a question that Offerors could submit CPARs and/or PPQs. | ||
| Please confirm Offerors may forego PPQs if they are submitting CPARs. | If Offeror is submitting CPARs, then PPQs are not required. | ||||
| 11 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-3.3.1.4; L-3.3.1.6; Page 21;22 | As the RFP states CPARs for a contract are to be rated, please clarify how non-Federal (e.g., commercial contracts) will be evaluated as non-Federal contracts do not have CPARs. | Adjectival ratings provided via PPQs shall not be used for scoring in this factor, except for PPQs submitted for private sector (non-faderal) contracts where CPARs are not required. | |
| 12 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-3.4.3 and L-3.4.4; Page 24 | Please confirm the Government approves the consolidation of the Professional Employee Compensation Plan (PECP) described in Section 3.4.3 and the Employee Compensation Plan (ECP) described in Section 3.4.4 into one all-encompassing document. | PECP and ECP described in section 3.4.3 and 3.4.4 can be consolidated into one all-encompassing document. Document must clearly distinguish professional categories from Service Contract Labor Standards Statute Employees. | |
| 13 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-3.4.4; Page 24 | Proposal Adequacy Checklists are typically required for TCoPD acquisitions. | ||
| Please confirm the Proposal Adequacy Checklist is not required for proposal submission. | Proposal Adequacy Checklists are REQUIRED for proposal submission. | ||||
| 14 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-3.4.5; Page 24 | Section 2 references a Mission Essential Services Plan that is not referenced elsewhere in Section L. Please confirm the Mission Essential Services Plan is not required for proposal submission. | Mission Essential Services Plan has been added Section L and Section M. Mission Essential Services Plan is required for proposal submission. | |
| 15 | ATTCH 10, Section L | L-5.0; Page 27 | Please confirm it is acceptable to provide an exception statement in the transmittal cover letter. If not, where should the exception statement be provided in each volume? | Exceptions shall be provided on the first page of each applicable volume. | |
| 16 | ATTCH 11, Section M | ||||
| Appendix B, Self-Rated Scoring Matrix | M-3.2.2.1.4, Pg 5 | In M-3.2.2.1.4 the evaluation says the Government will “then” separately validate Subfactor 2 - Past Performance. | |||
| Please confirm that the HTRO the Government evaluates in Step 1 is the score for Subfactor 1 - Technical Experience. | The HTRO the Government will validate/evaluate in step 1 is the total score for Factor 2 - Past Experience. (subfactor 1 score + subfactor 2 score = total factor 2 score) | ||||
| 17 | ATCH 2, Award Fee Plan | Factor 3 Cost Performance; V-VI | The Cost Performance criteria are based on reductions compared to “contract estimated costs”. | ||
| Please confirm “contract estimated costs” refers to the agreed total contract value for each task order exclusive of fee. | Contract estimated costs is the agreed upon value for each task order exclusive of fee. | ||||
| 18 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | The RATES tab has a column for ‘Site’; however, the column is highlight with red fill. In addition, the TEAM HOURS sheet has a column for ‘Site’ with each row prepopulated with the word, “Contractor”. | ||
| Please clarify how Offerors should populate the column in both sheets. | Cells highlighted in "RED" are for Government use only. Offeror shall not populate nor delete. | ||||
| 19 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | The TEAM HOURS sheet has a column for ‘LOCATION’; however, the RATES sheet does not. | ||
| Please verify that ‘Location’ is a required field and if so, should it be added to the RATES sheet? | Cells highlighted in "RED" are for Government use only. Offeror shall not populate nor delete. | ||||
| 20 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | Although not highlighted in yellow, there are columns in the TEAM HOURS sheet for OT Hours. In the same sheet there is a column for OT hours under PRIME, which do not link back to the RATES sheet. | ||
| Please confirm that providing a rate and hours for OT is optional for Offerors. | OT Hours on TEAM HOURS sheet should NOT be used. | ||||
| 21 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | Column P in the TEAM HOURS sheet is highlighted in grey similar to other cells that contain a provided formula. Please confirm no formula(s) should be entered into that column. | Column P should NOT be used. | |
| 22 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | Many formulas in the RATES sheet use “SCA” in the formula. These calculations will not work given that SCA is referred to as SCLS elsewhere in the workbook. | ||
| Please clarify if Offerors are to update these formulas as needed. | Yes, Offeror may update formulas as needed. Please annotate all changes and raationale for change at the bottom of "CONTRACTOR DATA INPUT" sheet. | ||||
| 23 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | In the RATES sheet, direct labor rates are highlighted yellow; however, there are pre-populated formulas provided for escalation. | ||
| Please confirm Offerors may modify these formulas as needed. | Yes, Offeror may update formulas as needed. Please annotate all changes and raationale for change at the bottom of "CONTRACTOR DATA INPUT" sheet. | ||||
| 24 | ATCH_7A | Volume III | The INSTRUCTIONS sheet specifically states to “Populate ONLY those cells highlighted yellow”. | ||
| With the understanding Offerors may modify areas as needed, please confirm there are multiple areas within the workbook that require Offerors to populate that are not highlighted yellow | Yes, Offeror may modifiy areas and update formulas as needed. Please annotate all changes and rationale for change at the bottom of "CONTRACTOR DATA INPUT" sheet. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .