Attachment 6 RFQ 8246 QA Responses.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 91 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ENTERPRISE PROGRAM, PROJECT, INTEGRATION SERVICES (EPPIS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- RFQ-8246
About this file
This document provides questions and answers related to a solicitation for Enterprise Program, Project, Integration Services (EPPIS) issued by the Internal Revenue Service within the Department of the Treasury. The solicitation seeks proposals for a best-in-class Blanket Purchase Agreement to provide a full range of program and project management support services, including transition management, engineering, testing, cybersecurity, cloud services, and operations. Offerors must submit proposals by December 7, 2023 to be considered for one of four total awards, with two set aside for small businesses. The technical evaluation will consider past performance, management approach, technical approach, and a small business participation plan. Pricing will be evaluated based on labor rates within an attachment providing standardized labor categories and hours.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 5 BPA Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan QASP.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 Attach 1 BPA Performance Work Statement corrected PWS.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 3 BPA Provisions and Clauses.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 7 Past Performance Questionnaire PPQ.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter Ammendment 1.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 2 BPA PWS Deliverable List.docx | DOCX document | |
| RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.doc | DOC document | |
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 4 Pricing corrected Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing corrected Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFQ 8246 Attachment 6 Small Business Participation Plan SBPP.docx | DOCX document |
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
Questions RFQ 8246 Enterprise Program Project Integration Services (EPPIS) Questions and Answers November 7, 2023
| # | Bidder Questions | Document Reference | Section/Page Reference | Government Response | |
| 1 | Is the page limit for mandatory criteria 5 pages or 7 pages? Table in the cover letter (page 3) shows 5 pages and factor 1 in page 4 shows 7 pages. | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 3 | Page limit for mandatory criteria is 7 pages | |
| 2 | Mandatory Criteria: Most of our contracts are 5 years PoP. Unless we show multiple contracts supporting client, we will not be able to meet the 7 or 8-year experience criteria. Can we use multiple contracts to meet the number of years requirement? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | Vendor can show multiple contracts supporting client to meet the requirements for Years | |
| 3 | If we show multiple contracts, how many contracts can we vendor use to support mandatory criteria? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | There is no limit to number of contracts that can be used to support mandatory criteria as long as number is years requirements are met and number of years should not be same years for contracts used | |
| 4 | Can we use contracts from private or commercial sector? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | No, vendors cannot use contracts from private or commercial sector | |
| 5 | Towards the end of page 5, past performance instructions are provided. Should they be part of the past performance? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | The contracts does not have to be part of the past performance; however, if the contract(s) is submitted as part of the past performance, factor 5 can be assessed more positively for that factor | |
| 6 | Do we need to make sure the contracts described in the mandatory criteria are the same for past performance (factor 5)? Or can they be different? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | The contracts described in mandatory criteria used can be different than past performance; however, if the contract(s) is submitted as part of the past performance, factor 5 can be assessed more positively for that factor | |
| 7 | Would the government consider removing specificity of the contract information and scope area alignment from factor 1? This appears to be duplicative of factor 5. | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | Government would like to make no changes to the factor 1 | |
| 8 | If the government plans to keep the contract information and scope area alignment within factor 1, can the page count be increased to 30? The reason being we have 20 task areas to cover for each contract while meeting the 4 mandatory criteria. 5 or 7 page limit is not enough. | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 4 | The page count will remain the same as this criteria will determine if the quotes will be considered in next phase of the evaluation. Factor 2 is where the vendor can provide details on how their quote will meet the requirements for the task areas. This selection criteria was used successfully in awarding other BPAs with the IRS | |
| 9 | Factor 1: Mandatory Criteria: Is the Government looking for a description of our experience supporting a client or multiple clients as part of one or more contracts as long as the support meets the timelines (7 years or 8 years)? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 5 | Government is looking for a description of our experience supporting a client or multiple clients as part of one or more contracts as long as the support meets the timelines Please refer to earlier questions | |
| 10 | SB plan: Is the factor 4 applicable to small businesses responding to the RFP? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 7 | Yes Small Business must respond to the RFQ | |
| 11 | Factor 5: The RFP states "The Evaluation of Past Performance will be based on information contained in the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)". Does this mean the Government is looking for vendor to submit CPARS only or is this in addition to vendor provided information? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 7 | Government prefers vendor to submit CPARS and if CPARS are not available then Government expects the Past Performance submitted to the CO | |
| 12 | Factor 5: The RFP states "The Evaluation of Past Performance will be based on information contained in the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS)". Does this mean we can’t use any commercial past performance? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 7 | Government prefers vendor to submit CPARS and if CPARS are not available then Government expects the Past Performance submitted to the CO | |
| 13 | Labor Category Crosswalk: Can you be more specific about what information is needed to provide this cross walk? Is this the GSA schedule mapping of proposed labor categories? | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 6 | This is the GSA schedule of vendor mapping to the proposed labor categories | |
| 14 | Please confirm that resumes are not included in the management approach page limit. | EPISS Cover Letter | Page 7 | Resumes are not included in the management approach page limit | |
| 15 | The "Submittal Format" does not specify a font type for illustrations, drawings, and tables. Please confirm the offerors can utilize Times New Roman or Arial type font for illustrations, drawings, and tables. | Cover Letter | Page 2 | Page 2 states, "All narrative shall be typed in Times New Roman 12-point font size" | |
| 16 | Please permit a font size of 9 point for illustrations, drawings, and tables, which is typical for government solicitations and to allow offerors to convey our solutions in an easily consumable fashion. | Cover Letter | Page 2 | Font size of 10 point will be allowed for illustrations, drawings, and tables | |
| 17 | Please confirm that the cover page, table of contents, compliance matrix, and acronym list for each volume are excluded from the page count limitations. | Cover Letter | General, Page 2 | Cover page, table of contents, compliance matrix, and acronym list are excluded for page count as long as they are not larger than 2 pages each | |
| 18 | The first paragraph on this page states "Task orders with only project scheduling scope, only Risk management scope, only configuration and change management scope will all be automatically competed between the small business BPA’s. All other Task orders will be competed between all BPA’s." This is very limiting to the IRS and does not help support the agency's increased use of Small Businesses. Additionally, on the incumbent IT-EPMSS BPA, many task orders that covered almost every scope area of the EPMSS and EPPIS task areas were set aside for small businesses and those small businesses proved, through their CPAR ratings, that they can successfully perform work at the IRS covering any task area on this BPA. Thus, please adjust this language to allow the IRS to set aside any task order it deems appropriate for small businesses. This will provide the IRS more flexibility to achieve their small business goals and the contract vehicle to be in alignment with the IRS small business strategy. | Cover Letter | Page 3 | The EPPIS BPA requires 40% allocation of requirements to small business for large businesses to submit small business plan which exceeds the IRS small business goals. | |
| 19 | The table in the "EVALUATION PROCEDURES/METHOD OF AWARD" section states the Mandatory Requirements are not to exceed 5 pages. In the "EVALUATION OF OFFERS" on page 4 it states the Mandatory Requirements have a 7 page limit. Please confirm that the 7 page limit is correct and update the solicitation accordingly. | Cover Letter | Pages 3 & 4 | Mandatory Requirements is 7 Pages. Corrected in Amendment | |
| 20 | The instructions to Factor 2 - Technical Approach, states that the Labor Category Crosswalk (LCC) (attachment 4) is limited to 5 pages. Attachment 4 is the Pricing Spreadsheet, which includes a tab for "Labor CAT Description" and "Offeror Proposed Labor CAT", but no tab labeled "Labor Category Crosswalk". Please specify whether the LCC should be: a) a table in Volume 2: Technical Approach listing the EPPIS LCAT and corresponding Offeror Schedule LCAT or b) please specify which tab in the Pricing Spreadsheet (Attachment 4) the IRS is referring to as the Labor Category Crosswalk and how will the IRS count the 5 pages of the spreadsheet (e.g., is it just one tab or multiple tabs in the spreadsheet). | Cover Letter & Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix | page 6 | Attachment 4 is part Volume 2: Technical Approach listing the EPPIS LCAT and corresponding Offeror Schedule LCAT. All the tabs in attachment 4 need to be completed. | |
| 21 | Factor 3 - Management Approach states that "The Offeror shall also address in their management approach, each deliverable requirement identified throughout the PWS." Please provide more detail on what the government is looking for when it states "each deliverable requirement identified throughout the PWS". | Cover Letter | Page 6 | The deliverables such as Key deliverables mentioned in the PWS for each task area | |
| 22 | Under "FACTOR 4 – Small Business Participant Plan (Volume 4): " it does not explicitly specify if Small Business prime offerors are required to provide a SBPP, but implies that only Large Businesses receive a rating. Please confirm that Small Business prime offerors are NOT required to submit a SBPP with our offer. | Cover Letter | Page 7 | Small Business is required to submit a SBPP. Will be corrected in Amendment 1. | |
| 23 | The page limit for the Technical Approach is 20 pages. There are 26 pages of requirements in the PWS for these 20 Task Areas. While we understand the IRS desires a streamlined proposal evaluation, the 20 pages is not enough to convey an approach and expertise for each of the 20 task areas. Thus, please increase the Tech Approach page limitation to 30 pages so the IRS will be better able to differentiate the Technical Approach of each offeror. | Cover Letter | Page 6 | IRS will stick to 20 pages as it provides IRS with streamlined and best approach to assess the proposals | |
| 24 | FACTOR 6 – Price Quote (Volume 6) states "Subcontracted labor must be identified separately in the price quote by individual subcontractor". In the Pricing Matrix (Attachment 4) section it states rates in the pricing tables will apply to subcontractors. Thus, there is no need to identify subcontractor rates individually in the price quote. Please remove this requirement or specify how offerors are to comply with this requirement. | Cover Letter | Page 8 | Subcontractor's labor costs should be listed in the attachment 4 based on how the contracting agreement between prime and small businesses | |
| 25 | In the "Total Offeror Price" tab within the Pricing Matrix, there are two entries for each Task Area (e.g., FFP and L-H). There are no instructions that associate the hours in the "IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates" to the L-H (Labor Hour) task areas. Thus, please provide instructions on how to associate the hours in the "IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates" tab to each of the task areas in the "Total Offeror Price" tab or just remove the "Total Offeror Price" tab, as it does not seem to make sense based upon the pricing instructions in the Cover Letter. | Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix | Government will modify by issuing amendment 1 | ||
| 26 | Within the Pricing Matrix "IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates" tab, the "Total Hours" column contains hours that have multiple decimals. Would the government modify the hours to have them be whole numbers? | Pricing Matrix | Government will modify by issuing amendment 1 | ||
| 27 | The deliverables (name and numbering) do not match between the PWS, QASP, and attachment 2 Deliverable list. There are 68 deliverables in the PWS and 65 in the QASP. Additionally, the numbering is not consistent, as deliverable 65 in the PWS is the Quality Control Plan and deliverables 65 in the QASP is the Cloud Implementation Plan. Please adjust these documents and make the deliverables consistent. | PWS, QASP, attachment 2 Deliverable list | Multiple | Updated the Deliverables in PWS | |
| 28 | Please confirm that the prime offeror must have at least 7 years remaining on their GSA MAS Schedule (e.g., current 5 year period and options) to be able to respond to the BPA. On the incumbent EPMSS BPA, a few of the vendors BPAs expired and were prohibited from responding to new Task Orders on the BPA. This is even more important on EPPIS where there are only going to be 4 total awardees (2 small business and 2 other than small businesses) to maintain adequate competition throughout the contract life. | Cover Letter | General | PWS 3.1 | GSA Schedule Contract Requirements |
Schedule contractors must have an active GSA Schedule contract before a BPA, or a Task Order can be awarded. A contractor may be awarded a BPA that extends beyond the current term of its GSA Schedule contract if there are option periods in the GSA Schedule contract that, if exercised, will cover the BPA's period of performance. If there is any instance where a Schedule contract has expired, the contractor will no longer be eligible for award of subsequent Task Orders under his BPA.
All Task Orders are subject to the terms and conditions of the contractor’s GSA contract and the BPA. If there is a conflict between the terms and conditions of the GSA contract and the additional terms and conditions of the BPA, the GSA contract shall take precedence. If both the GSA contract and the BPA are silent in the event of a conflict, the Task Order shall take precedence.
Contractors shall notify the Contracting Officer (CO) of any changes made by GSA to their applicable Schedule and shall resubmit the updated Schedule within 30 days of receipt of the modification.
| 29 | Is available CPARS mandatory for the past performance? | Cover Letter | Factor 5, page 7 | CPARS or Past Performance Questionnaire need to be submitted or Vendor should provide access to CPARS for past performance |
| 30 | Does the past performance have to be from the prime? | Cover Letter | Factor 5, page 7 | Past performance does not have to be from the prime. |
| 31 | Section 6.1 of the PWS states: “The Contractor shall submit resume for identified PM for review and qualifications verification.” The guidance in the cover letter states that resumes should be “2 Pages maximum per Key Personnel.” Is the actual requirement to submit one resume for each of the six KP positions as identified in the PWS? | RFQ 8246 Attachment 1 BPA Performance Work Statement PWS | Section 6, Page 28 | The actual requirement is not to submit one resume for each of the six KP positions as identified in the PWS. The requirements is to submit resume for identified PM |
| 32 | Factor 6 instructions say, "The Offeror shall submit prices for all contract line items for the task order (this includes a detailed price/cost breakdown for each line item) to be considered responsive/eligible for task order award." However, Attachment 4 is not organized by CLIN, Task Orders are given in the Total Price tab, not CLIN. Will the Government please provide the CLINs required to price? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter 1699395344218 | Page 8 | Revised Price Sheet |
| 33 | How should offerors map the LCATs that are required to be priced to the Task Orders listed on the Total Offeror Price tab? For instance, how many of the given 342k hours would go to each task, and how will the hours be broken out between the FFP and LH tasks? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Total Offeror Price Tab | Offerors should map the LCATs to the offeror's LCATs to determine price for each Labor Category and the price sheet has been revised to provide more clarity. Total Offeror Price tab has task areas and hours associated with them to calculate total price for FFP costs and LCATS has number of hours for each LCAT to determine the price for each LCAT and total price for FFP. |
| 34 | As this is a commercial GSA solicitation, what detailed supporting data beyond GSA rate mapping and discounts are required? We recommend removing from the Factor 6 instructions all references to "supporting data" as the rates are already reasonable by virtue of being on the schedule. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter 1699395344218 | Page 8 | No other information is needed |
| 35 | The instructions for Volume 6 seem to be at odds with the Attachment 4 pricing matrix. Volume 6 is requesting data that would not be shown in Attachment 4. Would the Government please update the instructions to match the required Attachment 4 submission document? For instance, the Volume 6 instructions require subcontractor rate information. However, the BPA rates may or may not be subcontracted in Task Orders, therefore the rates proposed may not solely be related to subcontractor rates. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter 1699395344218 | Page 8 | Attachments Revised |
| 36 | Would the Government please provide more specific instructions as to what is required in Volume 6? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter 1699395344218 | Page 8 | Revised Price Sheet |
| 37 | Is the intent of the "Offeror Proposed Labor CAT" tab to provide rates to the BPA that are beyond the given LCATs in the IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates and Labor CAT Description tabs? For example, LCATs the offeror may deem necessary for future task orders, like additional levels (Jr., Mid, Sr.) or additional LCATs not listed in Attachment 4 that would be useful for future task orders? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Offeror Proposed Labor CAT | Revised Price Sheet |
| 38 | Please provide instructions for the completion of this tab. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Offeror Proposed Labor CAT | Revised Price Sheet |
| 39 | Please provide specific instructions for the completion of this tab, especially what is required for the "Descriptive Narrative" column. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Labor CAT Description Tab | Revised Price Sheet |
| 40 | Tasks 9-18 are duplicated. Is this meant to be LH/FFP like the other tasks? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Total Offeror Price Tab | Revised Price Sheet |
| 41 | How do offerors segregate the given hours between FFP and LH tasks on the Total Offeror Price tab? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Attachment 4 Pricing Matrix 1699395627899 | Total Offeror Price Tab | Revised Price Sheet |
| 42 | Please confirm that offerors may use fonts other than Times New Roman for illustrations, drawings, and tables, provided they adhere to the 10 point font size requirement. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | page 2 | Revised Price Sheet |
| 43 | Please clarify which page limitation is correct for Factor 1 - Mandatory Requirements Experience (items 1-4, pages 5-6). The table on page 3 cites a 5-page limit. The instructions on page 4 cite a 7-page limit. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 3 through 6 | Revised Price Sheet |
| 44 | Please verify that the instructions and reference on page 4 to Attachment 3 for completion of clauses and provisions is correct as opposed to the reference on page 6 to Attachment 2 for completion of all fill-in provisions. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 4 and 6 | Revised the attachment |
| 45 | Please confirm that the instructions and bulleted requirements listed on the bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 for each contract cited only applies to projects cited under Mandatory Requirements Experience, 4. Program/Project Management Support. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 5 and 6 | Government confirms that the instructions and bulleted requirements listed on the bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 for each contract cited not only applies to projects cited under Mandatory Requirements Experience, it also applies to any additional projects that vendor would like to propose to strengthen their proposal |
| 46 | Does the government intend for the instructions and bulleted requirements listed on the bottom of page 5 and top of page 6 for each contract cited to apply to all projects cited under Mandatory Requirements Experience, #s 1-4? If so, please confirm the offerors may provide a consolidated section/list of experience in order to avoid having to cite the same contract details under multiple items (1-4) as may be applicable. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 5 and 6 | Government confirms the offerors may provide a consolidated section/list which shows in details the dates, experience, and others |
| 47 | Please indicate which tabs of Attachment 4 should be completed and included in the 5-page submission for the Labor Category Crosswalk. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 3 and 6 | All tabs except "Offeror Proposed Labor" tab needs to be completed. The "Offeror Proposed Labor" tab needs to completed if the offeror want to propose LCATs that are not listed. |
| 48 | Please clarify if offerors are to complete and submit the 5-page Labor Category Crosswalk in the provided Excel format and using the Calibri 10 point font set in the template or if offerors are expected to provide the information in a table in a Word document, adhering to the font type and size requirements cited on page 2. | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | pages 2, 3, and 6 | Offerors are to complete and submit the Labor Category Crosswalk in the provided Excel format and using the Calibri 10 point font set in the template |
| 49 | Please deconflict the RFQ's name and definition of the EPPIS acronym; the "S" in EPPIS is portrayed as both "System" and "Services" across solicitation documents. | Cover letter, PWS, Attachments | Cover letter one occurrence corrected from system to services. PWS is correct. Question header corrected. | |
| 50 | Per the cover letter: "All information identifying the Offeror and its points of contact shall be removed from the redacted copy of the quotation." Does 'identifying information' include contract numbers, project names, teaming partner names, and/or personnel names (on resumes or other referenced individuals)? Please clarify regarding the extent of redaction anticipated/required by the Government. | Cover letter | Pg. 2 | No please include this information |
| 51 | Will the Government consider reverting back to the two-phased approach where respondents must meet Phase 1 respondents and are then down-selected for Phase 2 requiring other volumes? | Cover letter | Pg. 3 | Government is planning to continue in the current approach. |
| 52 | Please confirm the page limit for Factor 1 - Mandatory Requirements (Volume 1) is 7 pages - the Cover Letter table shown on page 3 still shows "5 pages". | Cover letter | Pg. 3 | 7 pages |
| 53 | Please clarify if the Government is expecting key personnel resumes for Task Order-level key personnel with Volume 3 proposal submission or only the KP at the BPA level. | Cover letter | Pg. 4 | Government is not expecting key personnel resumes for Task Order-level key personnel with Volume 3 proposal submission, it is only expecting KP at the BPA level. |
| 54 | For Task Order-level key personnel, is it sufficient to provide only proposed labor category for the listed positions of: Project Manager, Agile Coach, Technical Writer, Technical Architect, 508 Developer/Test - or are names and resumes required? | PWS | Pg. 27 - 28 | Names and Resumes are not required. labor category is enough. |
| 55 | Please clarify the expectation (approach, methodology) the Government has for apportioning hours and costs between FFP and LH at the BPA task level? Is the Government looking to offerors to make the determination of whether each BPA task area should be one, or the other, or a combination of both? | Attachment 4 - Pricing Matrix | Correlation between Tabs 1 (FFP & LH Price), Tab 2 (Hours) | Document Corrected |
| 56 | Please confirm that Offerors that are small business (and/or disadvantaged or other socio-economic business) are exempt from submitting Attachment 6 and corresponding Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP). | Attachment 6 - SBPP | Correlation between Tabs 1 (FFP & LH Price), Tab 2 (Hours) | No all business must compete attachment 6 |
| 57 | The section discusses CPRAS for assessing past performances. What about the past performance references that do not have any CPARS? | FACTOR 5 – Past Performance (Volume 5): | 8 | CPARS is no longer a factor. Past Performance Questionnaires will be evaluated. |
| 58 | Are we permitted to utilize landscape orientation for corporate experience tables or any matrix, taking into account page limitations and the substantial content? | Submittal Format | 2 | It is permitted to utilize landscape orientation for corporate experience tables |
| 59 | Mandatory requirements experience states that "Experience that has an estimated/actual annual value greater than $2,500,000.00 will be considered. " Can the experience of a subcontract be used to meet this requirement? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | Mandatory Requirements Experience - Page 6 | Experience of a subcontract can be used to meet this requirement |
| 60 | Mandatory requirements page limit is 5 or 7. Government states that it is "5 pages" in page 3 within the table and on page 4 the page limit is mentioned as "7 pages". Can you please clarify? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | EVALUATION PROCEDURES/METHOD OF AWARD - Pages 3 and 4. | 7 pages |
| 61 | Volume 4 – Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) – Adjectival Rating - is this applicable only to Large businesses? Can small businesses not include this Volume in their response to the government? Can you please clarify? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | FACTOR 4 – Small Business Participant Plan (Volume 4): - Page 7 | All business are required to submit a SBPP |
| 62 | Government states that "Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS); however, the Government reserves the right to use other past performance information obtained from sources other than those retrieved from the CPARS". If CPARS is not available for past performance, can a past performance questionnaire be submitted by the government person where the work was done? Can you please clarify the format ? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | FACTOR 5 – Past Performance (Volume 5): - Page 7 | CPARS is no longer a factor. Past Performance Questionnaires will be evaluated. |
| 63 | For Mandatory requirements to meet the "annual value greater than $2,500,000.00" for every experience, can we use the experience of a sub contractor? | RFQ 8246 EPPIS Cover Letter.1699395344218 | Mandatory Requirements Experience - Page 6 | You can use the experience of a sub contractor |
| 64 | Section 3.2 says" Awardees on Enterprise Development Operations Services(EDOS) will not be able to compete on the task orders under EPPIS and vice-versa for the same scope of work". Is it safe to assume that this is not true for subcontractors on the EDOS contract? | RFP8246 Performance Work Statement | 3.2(task orders)/Page 3 | It is safe to assume that this is not true for subcontractors on the EDOS contract |
| 65 | There is Mention of ELC and Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), however there is no mention of OneSDLC. Should we not reference OneSDLC in our responses? | RFP8246 Performance Work Statement | 5.4 ELC/ Page 10 | Vendors can reference OneSDLC in the responses |
| 66 | Should requirements management assume the use of ELC instead of OneSDLC? | RFP8246 Performance Work Statement | 5.8 Requirements Engineering /Page 16 | Requirements management can assume the use of ELC or OneSDLC |
| 67 | The PWS states that the contractor shall provide "system administration support ". Is there a specific cloud provider that we should address or should it be generic? | RFP8246 Performance Work Statement | 5.18 Cloud Services / Page 25 | This is specific to cloud services and should address it |
| 68 | In Factor 5 - Past Performance, the solicitation does not require that either of the two Past Performances must be from the Prime offeror. In order for the government to assess the experience, expertise, and history of performance of the Prime offeror, please modify the solicitation to require that at least one of the two Past Performances be from the Prime offeror, or in the case of a Joint Venture, from the protege company. | Cover Letter | Page 7 | CPARS is no longer a factor. Past Performance Questionnaires will be evaluated. |
| 69 | Under Submittal Format, it states, "Responses shall be forwarded as separate files (contract documentation, technical, and price)", which can be interpreted to mean bidders' submissions will be in 3 separate files. But this seems to contradict the statement under Evaluation Procedures/Methods of Award that discusses 6 volumes: "The Quotation Package shall consist of six (6) sections; Volume 1, Mandatory Requirements, Volume 2, Technical Approach, Volume 3, Management Approach, Volume 4, Small Business Participation Plan, Volume 5, Past Performance, and Volume 6, Pricing Information." Please clarify if bidders may only submit 3 files total, with Volumes 2-5 being rolled into one file. Or is the requirement for each Volume/Factor to be a separate file, for a total of 6 separate files. | Cover Letter | Page 2 & 3 | Volumes were changed to 3 Volumes. |
| 70 | Submittal Format states, "Offerors shall submit one (1) original copy and one (1) redacted copy of Volume 1, Volume 2, Volume 3, and Volume 4. Technical." Please confirm that bidders are to submit redacted versions of only Volumes 1, 2, 3, and 4, and that bidders do not need to submit redacted versions of their Volume 5, Past Performance and Volume 6, Pricing. | Cover Letter | Page 2 | Redacted versions of Volume 1 and 2 only. |
| 71 | Please confirm that the completed "Provisions" on page 6 should be submitted as part of the Volume 6, Contractors Price Quote, and not as part of Volume 1, Mandatory Requirements. | Cover Letter | Page 6 | Provisions is now part of Volume 3 |
| 72 | Please confirm that the "Re-Certification of Business Size" should be submitted as part of Volume 6, Contractors Price Quote, and not as part of Volume 1, Mandatory Requirements. | Cover Letter | Page 6 | Recertification is part of Volume 3 |
| 73 | Please confirm that bidders do not need to submit Attachment 1 - PWS, Attachment 2 - PWS Deliverables List, or Attachment 5 - QASP with their quotes, as these documents are for bidders' information only, and there is nothing for bidders to add to each. | Cover Letter | Page 14 | Not required |
| 74 | Attachment 6 SBPP implies that small business Prime offerors with large business subcontractors on their team shall also submit a SBPP. Will the Government confirm that small business Prime offerors (not Joint Ventures) with large business subcontractors on their team do not have to submit a SBPP? If an SBPP is required in this situation, what are the adjective ratings for small business Prime offerors? | Attachment 6 SBPP | All contractors should submit a SBPP | |
| 75 | The government provided hours in the 'IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates' are by labor category, by year and are not broken out by task or by contract type as required in the 'Total Offeror Price' tab. |
| In order for offerors to provide a price as outlined in the 'Total Offeror Price' tab (by Task, by contract type, by year) will the government provide the breakout of hours (or percentages) by labor category, by task, by contract type, by year? If not, what assumption should the offerors make in this regard? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | Total Offeror Price Tab | The Attachment has been revised which provides more clarity |
| 76 | Regarding Tasks 9-18 in column B, for each task (9-18), should one include the label "(FFP)" and the other include the label "(L-H)" similar to Tasks 1-8? |
For example:
should cell B21 be changed to: "Configuration and Change Management (FFP)"
| and should cell B22 be changed to: "Configuration and Change Management (L-H)" | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | Total Offeror Price Tab | The Attachment has been revised which provides more clarity | ||
| 77 | Are Tasks 19 & 20 considered labor or ODCs and are they FFP, L-H or cost tasks? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | Total Offeror Price Tab | The Attachment has been revised which provides more clarity | |
| 78 | Regarding Tasks 19 & 20, are the prices listed in Years 1-7 required 'plug' amounts? If not, can offerors change the prices for Tasks 19 & 20 Years 1-7? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | Total Offeror Price Tab | The Attachment has been revised which provides more clarity | |
| 79 | What contract type (FFP or L-H), site (Government (On-site) or Contractor (Off-site)) and place of performance should the offerors rates reflect? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates | The Attachment has been revised which provides more clarity | |
| 80 | Should cell B70 be updated to reflect '508 Analyst' rather than '508 Tester/Developer'? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Attachment+4+Pricing+Matrix | IRS GSA LAB CAT Rates | Cell B70 provides a description for the LCAT, if the vendor proposes another LCAT the attachment can be used to do so. | |
| 81 | Is the page limit for the Mandatory Requirements volume 5 or 7 pages? On page 3, the table shows a 5-page maximum and the instructions on page 4 shows a 7-page maximum. | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation Procedures/Method of Award (Page 3); Factor 1 - Mandatory Requirements (Page 4) | 7 pages | |
| 82 | Will the government confirm that the Program Manager (BPA) is the only key personnel resume required in the Management Approach volume, since the other key personnel positions identified in the PWS are to be designated during individual Task Order quotation? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Factor 3 - Management Approach (Page 7) | Government confirms that the Program Manager (BPA) is the only key personnel resume required in the Management | |
| 83 | Will the government allow for Past Performance Questionnaires to be used in lieu of CPARs in support of the Past Performance volume? There may be instances where, for various reasons, the government has not completed CPARs for a project. | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Factor 5 - Past Performance (Page 7) | CPARS is no longer a factor. Past Performance Questionnaires will be evaluated. | |
| 84 | Will the government consider an extension to the due date to allow quoters adequate time to review the government's Q&A responses? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation of Offers, Due Date and Instructions (Page 4) | No extension will be granted at this time | |
| 85 | Will the government consider additional awardees (currently up to 4 with 2 for Small Business and two for Unrestricted) to ensure that Prime vendors with no OCIs with EDOS and other programs are available to bid? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation of Offers, Due Date and Instructions (Page 4) | Government will not consider additional awardees | |
| 86 | Per Section 3.2 (Task Orders) of the PWS, "Awardees on Enterprise Development Operations Services (EDOS) will not be able to compete on the task orders under EPPIS and vice-versa for the same scope of work." Will the government please explain how it intends to maintain appropriate task order-level competition on EPPIS if EDOS prime contractors are able to bid for places on the BPA? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 3.2 Task Orders, (Pages 2 - 3) | EDOS Prime awardees will not be able to compete on EPPPIS BPA. They will not be able to compete on task orders as prime. | |
| 87 | Will the government please consider inserting clarifying language in line with the August 3 Q&A pg. 109 (Section 3 Task Orders) in order to better promote task order level competition? E.g., "All IRS Enterprise Development, Operations Services (EDOS) BPA primes are NOT permitted to submit offers for EPPIS BPA." | ||||
| Prohibiting EDOS prime contractors from holding prime contracts on EPPIS will enable IRS to have two large business bids on task orders, versus limiting competition to just 1 large business, or no large businesses given some EDOS task orders come in multiple parts, each to be supported by different EDOS vendors. | August 3 Q&A, Section 3 Task Orders | Section 3 Task Orders (Page 109) | The verbiage is clear that EDOS Prime awardees will not be able to compete for an award on EPPPIS BPA | ||
| 88 | Can the Government confirm that Volume 4 - Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) should include Attachment 5 as well as additional narrative content to fully address the Factor 4 evaluation criteria? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation of Offers, Factor 4 (Page 7) | All business are required to submit a SBPP | |
| 89 | Related to bullet #9 of PWS Task Area 13 which states "Prior to each milestone exit, review, revise, and update, as necessary, the Programs’ Solution Architecture and the Vision Solution Architecture (VSA); this effort includes planning review meetings, preparing materials for engineering briefings for technical and executive decisions," could the government please clarify this task activity? Also, could the government please describe Vision Solution Architecture? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.13 Task Area 13, Engineering and Architecture (Page 21) | The task area requirements are clearly stated. Developing a vision for Solution Architecture to meet the future needs of the government is vision solution architecture in a nut shell | |
| 90 | Related to paragraph #1 of PWS Task Area 15 which states "The contractor shall provide the program with the development and deployment of security architecture and engineering changes made as part of the program," is the contractor expected to provide security development or assist with current development efforts and implementation of current COTS cyber tools? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.15 Task Area 15, Cybersecurity (Page 22) | Contractor is not expected to provide security development or assist with current development efforts and implementation of current COTS cyber tools, it is expected to provide analysis, strategies, implementation plans and others as needed | |
| 91 | Related to bullets #19-21 of PWS Task Area 15 which state "Compliance of development efforts with information security best practices and industry regulations; Review and analysis of source code, database, and Digital Services software code vulnerability scanning; Real time support to secure development activities and mitigation /remediation activities to ensure products produced are compliant with all cyber security policies," would the government consider using additional DevSecOps to address vulnerabilities in the software development lifecycle? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.15 Task Area 15, Cybersecurity (Page 23) | Government will consider all options to address vulnerabilities in the software development lifecycle | |
| 92 | Related to bullet #6 of PWS Task Area 17 which states "Options for operations and maintenance of a set of ancillary applications," could the government please clarify this task activity? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.17 Task Area 17, Enterprise Operations (EOps) (Page 25) | Contractor is expected to provide Options for operations and provide analysis, strategies, implementation plans and others for maintenance of a set of ancillary applications | |
| 93 | Related to bullet #5 of PWS Task Area 14 which states "Enhance testing, including the design and development of automated test artifacts to the extent practicable," is the contractor expected to provide the automated testing software or tools? Does the IRS currently license any testing software? If so, can the government comment on the software name and vendor? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.14 Task Area 14, Enterprise Testing (Page 21) | Contractor is not expected to provide the automated testing software or tools. Licensing information about testing software will be provided at task order level based on the requirements | |
| 94 | Can the government confirm whether recertification is required for vendors to re-certify their socioeconomic status as of the date of their quotation submission, taking into consideration the NAICS code and associated size standard mentioned above?" | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Re-Certification of Business Size (Page 6) | Yes recertification is required | |
| 95 | Can the government allow a phased approach? We would request the government to consider only Volume 1 - Mandatory Requirement for the phase 1. The companies who pass the phase 1 can submit the rest of the volumes in phase 2. | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation Criteria (Page 9) | Government plans to continue with the current approach. | |
| 96 | Could the government please clarify if an offeror needs to submit Labor Category Crosswalk as a separate document or do we need to include it in the Contractor’s Technical Quote for the PWS requirements? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Sec-EVALUATION PROCEDURES/METHOD OF AWARD (Page 3) | CrossWorks is included in Attachment 4 | |
| 97 | Could the government please clarify if the 2-page limit for each resume is included in the Factor 3 - Management Approach 10-page limit? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Factor 3 - Management Approach | ||
| (Page 6 & 7) | The 2-page limit is for each resume is included in the Factor 3 | ||||
| 98 | If the 2-page limit for resumes does count against the 10-page limit for the management approach, can the government allow an increase in the page count for Factor 3 - Management Approach to accommodate 2-page resumes for each of the six key personnel? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation Procedures, Volume 3, Factor 3 (Page 3) | The 2-page limit for resumes does count against the 10-page limit for the management approach, the government will keep the page count for Factor 3 | |
| 99 | Can the government allow an increase in the page count for Factor 2 - Technical Approach to 25-30 pages? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation Procedures, Volume 2, Factor 2 (Page 3) | Government intends to keep the page count intact for Technical Approach | |
| 100 | The solicitation refers to Labor Category Crosswalk (Attachment 4), which is Pricing Matrix, in Factor 2 – Technical Approach (Volume 2). Our understanding is that the contractors are required to provide a Labor Category Crosswalk similar to Attachment 4: Pricing Matrix in Factor 2 – Technical Approach response. Is our understanding correct? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Factor 2 – Technical Approach (Volume 2), | ||
| Page 6 | Understanding is correct | ||||
| 101 | Could the government please elaborate on what is meant by accountable personnel? Would the contractor be able to work with key IRS stakeholders in order to work on this task? | RFQ+8246+Attachment+1+BPA+Performance+Work+Statement+PWS | 5.13 Task Area 13, Engineering and Architecture, Page 20 | Contractor would be able to work with key IRS stakeholders in order to work on this task | |
| 102 | Could the government please confirm that the cover page, table of content, volume cover letter, any volume disclaimers, and volume end sheet are NOT included in a volume page count? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Evaluation Procedures / Method of Award (Pages 3 - 4) | Government confirms that the cover page, table of content, volume cover letter, any volume disclaimers, and volume end sheet are NOT included in a volume page count | |
| 103 | Can the Government clarify whether the Factor 3 Management Approach evaluation criterion related to addressing "each deliverable requirement identified throughout the PWS" must include specific acknowledgement of all deliverables included in Section 7.2 of the PWS and Attachment 2 of the solicitation or if the evaluation will focus only on BPA-level deliverables (e.g., Kick-off, QASP/QCP, etc.)? | RFQ+8246+EPPIS+Cover+Letter | Factor 3 – Evaluation of Offers (Pages 6-7) | Government clarifies for the Factor 3 Management Approach evaluation criterion related to addressing "each deliverable requirement identified throughout the PWS" must include acknowledgement of most of the deliverables included in Section 7.2 of the PWS and Attachment 2 of the solicitation | |
| 104 | Does the government want resumes for the KPs that fall under the Task Order level? Based on the scope of the individual TOs, these KPs are likely to change based on the technical requirements and timeframe of the award. An example is the Technical Architect- this SME will depend upon the Task Order's technical requirements. |
Requesting that the Program Manager at the BPA level be the only KP resume required for proposal submittal.
| Attachment 1 PWS | 6.1 Contractor Key Personnel (1)(2) / Page 27 | Government want resumes for the KPs that fall under the BPA level |
| 105 | Please confirm that to meet the minimum years of experience under Volume 1 Factor 1 the Contractor may "combine" years of experience (YOE) between cited contracts for either the Offeror and/or subcontractor, affiliate, or GSA CTA partner? Example: Prime's Contract #1 shows 5 YOEs in Integration, and Subcontractor Contract #2 has 2 YOE in integration, which together equals the 7 YOE requirement. | |
| RFQ Cover Letter | FACTOR 1 – Mandatory Requirements: (Volume 1)/Page 5 | Government confirms that to meet the minimum years of experience under Volume 1 Factor 1 the Contractor may "combine" years of experience (YOE) between cited contracts for either the Offeror and/or subcontractor, affiliate, or GSA CTA partner |
| 106 | Does the Government intend for us to submit all 6 volumes by December 7th? The draft RFP stated that the volumes would be submitted in phases. In Phase 1 we would submit Volume 1 Factor 1 and in Phase 2 we would submit Volume 2 - Volume 6. |
| We are requesting that the volumes be submitted in phases as outlined in the draft RFP. As written, the instructions conflict with the intent of a phased evaluation approach, thus allowing Small Businesses to concentrate their resources on bids where they are most likely to be competitive after the down-select is completed. | RFQ Cover Letter | Evaluation Procedures/Method of Award/Page 3 and 4 | Changed to 3 Volumes in Amendment 1 | ||
| 107 | Can the Government clarify the statement "enterprise level for the program of similar size, complexity" ? Specifically, in terms of one or a combination of 1) team size, 2) system size 3) number of user base, and/or 4) calculations size? | RFQ Cover Letter | FACTOR 1 – Mandatory Requirements: (Volume 1)/Page 5 | The specification for "enterprise level for the program of similar size, complexity" is given in the PWS | |
| 108 | Should Volume 1 Factor 1 be 5 pages or 7 pages? On page 3 of the Cover Letter the table states it should be 5 pages and under the description for Factor 1 - Mandatory Requirements on page 4 it states it should be 7 pages. | RFQ Cover Letter | Evaluation Procedures/Method of Award/Page 3 and Factor 1 Mandatory Requirements (Volume 1)/ Page 4 | 7 pages | |
| 109 | Factor 5 on Page 7, states "The Government will evaluate an Offeror’s relevant corporate past performance managing contracts similar in scope and complexity to that contemplated by the solicitation." Can the Government confirm that Offeror past performance (PP) and/or experience includes affiliate PP/experience as permitted by 13 CFR 121.103 and FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) by way of a meaningful relationship commitment stated within it's proposal between the Offeror and supporting entity? | RFQ Cover Letter | FACTOR 1 – Mandatory Requirements: (Volume 1)/ Page 5 and FACTOR 5 - Past Performance (Volume 5)/page 5 | Government confirms that Offeror past performance (PP) and/or experience includes affiliate PP/experience as permitted | |
| 110 | Due to the federal holiday and clarifications that are needed from the Government in regards to changes between the draft and final RFP will the Government consider providing a 2-week extension? | RFQ Cover Letter | Evaluation of Offers/ Page 4 | Government intends to keep the planned dates to ensure the BPA is award timely | |
| 111 | The Cover Letter states: "The Offeror shall also address in their management approach, each deliverable requirement identified throughout the PWS." Attachment 2 – BPA PWS Deliverable List is over 5 pages. The page limit for the Management Approach is 10 pages. To properly address "each" deliverable requirement will take the majority of the 10 pages allowed. Will the government allow vendors to address this evaluation requirement as a separate attachment, so that they can effectively address the other evaluation requirements in the Management Approach using the 10-page limit? Alternatively, we request that the Government remove the requirement of addressing each deliverable. | Cover Letter | FACTOR 3 – Management Approach (Volume 3), page 6 | Government does not intend to allow vendors to address this evaluation requirement as a separate attachment | |
| 112 | RFP cover letter requests vendors to include 5 attachments in their quote (RFQ Attachments to be submitted with quote. | ||||
| (Attachment 1 – BPA PWS, Attachment 2 – BPA PWS Deliverable List, Attachment 3 – BPA Provisions and Clauses, Attachment 4 – Pricing Matrix , Attachment 5 – BPA QASP). These are the documents provided by the Government. Are you expecting the vendor to include these documents as part of the quote? or did you mean to say that these are the attachments provided by the quote? If not, please specify what documents need to be included as part of the quote? | Cover Letter | RFQ Attachments to be submitted with quote, page 14 | These are the documents provided by the Government. Are you expecting the , the attachment 4, offeror's proposal, and other documents specified need to be provided | ||
| 113 | We request the Government to consider removing the scope alignment requirement within factor 1. PWS has 20 task areas. Describing vendor's experience and adequately addressing all task areas across the 4 major mandatory criteria within 5 or 7 pages is nearly impossible. We request the Government to remove the task area alignment from factor 1. | Cover Letter | FACTOR 1 – Mandatory Requirements | ||
| Page 5 | Government does not intend to change the requirements for factor 1 | ||||
| 114 | For factor 5, do we need to submit CPARS only? | Cover Letter | FACTOR 5 – Past Performance | ||
| Page 8 | CPARS is no longer a factor. Past Performance Questionnaires will be evaluated. | ||||
| 115 | For factor 5, can we provide scope and task area alignment? | EPISS Cover Letter | FACTOR 5 – Past Performance | ||
| Page 7 | Vendor can provide scope and task area alignment | ||||
| 116 | "All information identifying the Offeror and its points of contact shall be removed from the redacted copy of the quotation . Failure to provide a redacted version of the quote will result in removal of the quote from consideration by the Agency without evaluation." | ||||
| question: Can the government consider removing this requirement as it puts additional work to the offerors? | Cover Letter | Submittal Format: | |||
| Page 2 | Redacted versions of Volume 1 and 2 only are necessary for the technical evaluation team. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .