B08_Attachment 0012_Draft RFP QA Sheet.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 57 KB Posted
- Attached to
- W15P7T-23-R-0004 - PEO C3T - Systems Engineering and Program Management (SEPM) Support Services
- Solicitation number
- SEPM-W15P7T-23-R-0004
About this file
This document summarizes a draft request for proposal for systems engineering and program management support services. The solicitation is a competitive 8(a) small business set-aside issued by the Department of the Army Materiel Command Army Contracting Command Aberdeen Proving Ground. Offerors are required to submit proposals by email by the date specified in the solicitation document for an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract with a one year base period of performance and two one-year option periods to provide support for the Project Manager Command, Control and Communications Tactical program. The support services include areas such as technical engineering, digital systems engineering, information assurance and cybersecurity engineering, readiness management, and field site operations. Pricing is to be provided using the attached cost/price template and the level of effort is defined in labor categories and hours by location in another attachment.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
IDIQ PWS
Attachment 0001 SEPM IDIQ PWS Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Pg. 2 "PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE / PLACE OF PERFORMANCE" | How long are the lead times for other CONUS & OCONUS sites outside of Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG)? | Lead times vary, however the typical lead time is 2 weeks. |
| 2 | Pg. 2 "PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE / PLACE OF PERFORMANCE" | How long would a typical OCONUS deployment last? | A typical deployment would last from 2 to 6 weeks. |
| 3 | Pg. 2 "PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE / PLACE OF PERFORMANCE" | For those deployed OCONUS to a Theater of Operations, Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance will be required. Costs for this insurance are factored on several details (location, length, role/position, on a base/COB/FOB or local economy, etc). Will such deployments come under independent task order (TO) calls to remain seperate from CONUS deployments? | No, the deployments will be included in the current task order. |
| 4 | Pg. 8 - final paragraph | For personnel required to travel to the "Army Central Command (ARCENT) Theater of Operations (with locations to be defined according to the mission)", will military air (MILAIR) be available for CRC and/or OCONUS deployment? | Predominant use is MILAIR, however commercial airfare may be used on a case by case basis. |
| 5 | Pg. 15 - final paragraph | IAW "The contractor shall obtain all licenses (in the event that there is a requirement to deploy to a Theater of Operations" - we have Subcontractor and Teaming Agreements in various countries to operate. As we may or may not be required to utilize these assets, may we preclude these from the proposal and submit at the TO level as required? | Yes. |
| 6 | Pg. 16 "3.1 TRANSITION PERIOD OF TASK ORDER " | Does the transition include active OCONUS operations? | There is the potential for active OCONUS operations at time of award based on mission need |
| 7 | Pg. 17 "3.2 KEY PERSONNEL" | Since there will be a period of time between submission and award, can the associated resumes be representative or is the contractor obligated to have these personnel on contract? | Under Attachment 0009 "RFP Instructions", please see page 16, "Letter(s) of Intent". |
| 8 | Pg. 19 "3.3 TECHNICAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT" | Can the government please provide an itemized roster of System of Systems (SoS) subordinate/supported systems? | The vendors can obtain information for our systems through publicly releasable materials from PEO C3T and ASA(ALT) |
| 9 | Pg. 19 "3.3 TECHNICAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT" | Are there currently any active and/or scheduled (w/in the first months after award) major engineering and/or integration projects? If so, can the government please provide some details? | PEO C3T integrates commercial IT systems and is in a constant state of modernization. Current technical efforts are in the area of Digital Engineering and zero trust. |
| 10 | Pg. 19 "3.3 TECHNICAL ENGINEERING SUPPORT" | In support of SIF, GSC, IFS Portal, etc., what are the main ITSM software(s) used? | We currently use Remedy. |
| 11 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | As the DSEs will be performing Incident Management, O&M, Help Desk, etc. and the PWS states CONUS/OCONUS support, shall this be designed as a 24/7/365 operation? | No dedicated 24/7 support system required, however individuals will be available to answer questions from the field. |
| 12 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | Is there a ticketing system in use? | We currently use Remedy. |
| 13 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | Is there a system in place to track user information? If so, which one? | There is no system in place to track user information. |
| 14 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | How many persons will be receiving support? How many users are there? | The number of persons receiving support and the number of users is based on unit needs/participation. |
| 15 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | Are there any special levels of support for the users? For example, will some users require immediate support or escalation? | Reachback to the PM who is the requirement owner or manufacturer/vendor for the specific piece of equipment, as necessary. |
| 16 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | Is there a knowledge base being used? If so, please provide information regarding support and usage. | Knowledge based on experience with supported systems, updated by additional training provided by the PEO as necessary. |
| 17 | Pg. 23 "DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) SUSTAINMENT SUPPORT, Subpara. 3.3.11.2" | May these services be proposed to be provided from our TS/FCL which has been providing said services relevant in size, scope, and complexity on USMIL major programs and maintains the required infrastructure and assets? | TS level services will be performed at Aberdeen Proving Ground. |
| 18 | Pg. 25 "3.3.12 DIGITAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING (DSE) LIFE CYCLE SUPPORT" | Is there a systems/software life cycle management system respository in-place? If so, which one? | PM specific repositories may exist, which will be identified at contract award. The repositories should not affect an Offeror's technical and/or cost/price proposal. |
| 19 | Pg. 34 - 35 "FIELD SITE OPERATIONS, Subpara.3.4.10.1; Field Site Maintenance and Sustainment" | IAW providing "technical and operational support missions of the Army Sustainment Command (ASC) and its subordinate regional Army Field Support Brigades (AFSB). The contractor shall provide on-site support at: Fort Hood, TX; Fort Lewis, WA; Fort Bragg, NC; Fort Polk, LA", as well as "serving as the PEO C3T liaison to III Corps and Fort Hood units" and with the primary place of performance being Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG) - will these be recurring scheduled site visits or is the contractor required to maintain a constant/consistent presence at these sites, or just Ft. Hood to service all AORs? | No constant/consistent presence at these sites is required, however home of record at an active Army post is preferable. |
| 20 | General | Over the next 6 months what do you see as the most important program objectives you would like to see achieved? | Perspective Offerors are to meet the requirements of the PWS. |
| 21 | General | Have staffing program objectives been achieved? | Perspective Offerors are to meet the requirements of the PWS. |
| 22 | General | Over the next 12 to 24 months what are the most important objectives the program will want to achieve? | Perspective Offerors are to meet the requirements of the PWS. |
| 23 | General | Over the next 12 to 24 months what are the most important obstacles the program will have to overcome in order to meet program objectives? | Perspective Offerors are to meet the requirements of the PWS. |
| 24 | General | Will the government confirm a minimum number of resources that vendors should not go below when bidding the scope of work? | This is contained in the LOE. |
| 25 | General | How many full-time and part time contractor FTEs are currently working on this contract? | This is contained in the LOE. |
| 26 | General | Are there other companies providing services which would require interface and/or collaboration in order for either party or parties to execute their contract deliverables? | This is a single award contract. There would not be required collaboration with another contractor. |
| 27 | General | What program objectives are not being achieved presently? | No response. |
| 28 | Page2 CONUS Locations | Do any of the locations fall under Collective Bargaining Agreements? | Please provide more clarity as to what you mean by "Collective Bargaining Agreements". |
| 29 | Page 2 CONUS Locations | Will any of the contracts fall under SCA (Service Control Act)? | Yes |
| 30 | Page 47, 9.0 FEDERAL HOLIDAYS | Section 9.0 states: “PEO C3T observes the eleven (11) official federal holidays” and a list of eleven holidays is included. Paragraph 2 should be updated to “The eleven holidays are:” | PWS updated accordingly |
| 31 | Page 18, 3.2 Key Personnel, T16C Senior INFOSEC Senior | PWS 3.2 T16C Senior INFOSEC Senior: Consistent with the LCAT description, could the Government include the ability to substitute a Bachelor's degree with 5 years of additional experience. | Yes. PWS updated accordingly. |
| 32 | Page 18, 3.2 Key Personnel, T26C Systems Engineer Senior (Communications Systems Integration Team Lead) | The requirements for T26C Systems Engineer Senior (Communications Systems Integration Team Lead) and inconsistent with the LCAT LOE requirements for T26C Senior Systems Engineer. | The Communications Systems Integration Team Lead will be identified and separated in the LOE so that the vendor can price accordingly |
| 33 | p. 17; Section 3.2 Key Personnel | There are two separate descriptions for the T26C Systems Engineer listed in Key Personnel. |
| Will the Government please clarify whether there should be two separate descriptions for the T16C Engineer INFOSEC Senior? | The Communications Systems Integration Team Lead will be identified and separated in the LOE so that the vendor can price accordingly | |||
| 34 | Architecture development | We want the contracting officers to clarify the specific requirements and deliverables related to architecture development, including the types of systems and networks that need to be designed, developed, and maintained, the applicable standards and guidelines for architecture development, and the level of coordination and documentation required for this task. | The PWS does not require the contractor to design or develop anything in terms of architecture development. The term "support" is key. The engineers will be providing support to existing processes. | |
| 35 | Architecture development | We also want to inquire about the expected level of technical expertise and experience required for the contractor to successfully deliver on the architecture development. | The technical expertise is the area that will differentiate vendors. At a base level, they should provide support that can participate in technical exchanges with communications, network, transport, cybersecurity and applications experts and be able to capture requirements and engineering products across the PEO portfolio. | |
| 36 | Information Assurance and Cybersecurity Engineering | What specific information systems and networks will the contractors have access to and be responsible for securing? | PEO C3T is compromised of system of systems that support the tactical network. Systems range from Beyond Line of Sight SATCOM, Line of Sight Tactical Radios that include either Type 1 or Type 3 encryption, and command and control applications. | |
| 37 | Information Assurance and Cybersecurity Engineering | What cybersecurity standards and regulations must the contractor adhere to in order to ensure the secure operation of information systems and networks? | The governing Army Regulation is AR 25-2, that states the systems must be authorized via the Risk Management Framework. The ISSO support will need to maintain cybersecurity certifications of a IAM II https://public.cyber.mil/wid/cwmp/dod-approved-8570-baseline-certifications/ | |
| 38 | Information Assurance and Cybersecurity Engineering | What types of cybersecurity risks and threats are most relevant to the systems and networks covered under this contract, and how will the contractor be expected to address these risks and threats? | Specific cybersecurity risks and threats are classified, however, please reference the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Top 10. https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa20-133a | |
| 39 | Information Assurance and Cybersecurity Engineering | The requirement of information management is not clear enough for my understanding. I want to know what specific tasks and responsibilities are included in the information management support services that we are expected to provide. Additionally, if there are any specific systems or software the contractor will be required to use for information management, and if there are any specific guidelines or standards that need to be followed. | Awardee is expected to support PEO C3T's help desk team performing Information Management Office activities. |
TO PWS
Attachment 0007 SEPM TO PWS Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Page 48, 9.0 FEDERAL HOLIDAYS | Section 9.0 states: “PEO C3T observes the eleven (11) official federal holidays” and a list of eleven holidays is included. Paragraph 2 should be updated to “The eleven holidays are:” | PWS updated accordingly. |
| 2 | |||
| 3 | |||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | |||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | |||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | |||
| 10 |
RFP Instructions W15P7T-23-R-0004 Draft RFP Instructions Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | ||
| 1 | Pg. 1; article B. | Note: Attachment 0015 “RFP Question Template” not included in draft RFP for review. | Attachment 0015 "RFP Question Template" will be attached upon release of the solicitation. | |
| 2 | Pg. 1; article C. | Shall the contractor submit the Notice of Intent (NOI) after receiving the answers to questions, or with "Attachment 0015 “RFP Question Template”? We can send it today if required. | NOIs can be submitted from the time the official RFP is released up to the date/time indicated in section A(1)(c) on page 2 of "Attachment 0009 - RFP Instructions". | |
| 3 | Pg. 2; article G. | IAW "Offerors shall not submit any assumptions, terms, conditions, caveats, or exceptions with proposals. All concerns shall be addressed and resolved by submitting questions by the date specified in this RFP." | ||
| Can the government please confirm that there will be additional Q&A sessions after this 27-Apr-2023 submission? Will there be another Q&A after the final RFP release? | Yes, there will be another opportunity for interested vendors to submit questions once the official RFP is released. Please see section A(1)(b) on page 1 of "Attachment 0009 - RFP Instructions". | |||
| 4 | Pg. 9; article b., Subfactor 2 | Can the government please confirm that the fixed/primary place of performance for all Key Personnel will be Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG)? | The majority of key personnel will have a primary place of performance at APG, however the TPOC will determine based on mission needs. | |
| 5 | Pg. 10; article c., Subfactor 3 | It states "Tracking and reporting to ensure that the transition is 100% complete within 45 days of contract award"; however, the PWS indicates that the transition-in is for a period of 30 x days. Can the government please confirm which timeline is valid? | PWS updated accordingly | |
| 6 | Pg. 10; "Content and OrganizationContent and Organization" - article c. | Instead of Part C: List of Past Performance Questionnaires distributed to customers (POC’s name, title, email, and phone number), will CPARS be accepted to validate past performance? | CPARS will be accepted to validate past performance; however, failure to submit Past Performance Questionnaires for any example may not provide the Government with all the pertinent information needed to assess Past Performance. | |
| 7 | Pg. 12; "Organizational Structure Change History" | As a roadmap will be included, may 8(a) certified Tribally-owned groups of companies utilize current/past performance from sister-compamy organizations having the same socio-economic & 8(a) status that are managed by the same PMO/leadership teams ? | No; the Offeror shall submit past performance from the same CAGE code that will be submitting a proposal as the prime. | |
| 8 | Pg. 15; Item #2, article b. "Letter(s) of Intent (LOIs)" | As the proposal validity is required to be one-hundred eighty (180) days, are these LOIs to be representative or actuals? | LOIs provided shall be valid for 180 days | |
| 9 | Pg. 15; Item #2, article d. Salary survey data | Can the government please confirm if salary surveys are required for anywhere outside of Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG)? If so, please provide the relevant data for pricing (i.e., job title & description, location, duration, etc.). | No, the salary surveys should be for APG only. Please see "Attachment 0005 - SEPM Cost/Price Template" and "Attachment 0006 - SEPM LCAT Descriptions and LOE" for relevant data. | |
| 10 | Pg. 18; final paragraph "If Only One Offer Received" | Are offerors permitted to submit more than one/multiple offers proposing alternative solutions (i.e., established and compliant (TS/FCL) places of performance for some staff) | Offerors are required to submit their best and final proposal. Only one proposal will be accepted | |
| 11 | Pg. 19 "Labor Rate Targets" | IAW "Offerors will be provided 1920 hours for each respective labor category at each respective location, to include education, technical experience, and security clearance.", may the contractor show a reduction in force (RIF) in the outer years of the project? | No. The contractor is to propose to the LOE. | |
| 12 | pg. 23; "Volume II - Past Performance Factor" 4(a) | "Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D." Where is Appendix D found in the draft RFP files? | This sentence has been removed from the RFP Instructions. | |
| 13 | Attachment 0009, Page 1, L.A.1.a, Proposal Submission Requirements | The solicitation document states that “Proposals shall be submitted via SAM.gov” while Attachment 0009 states “the proposal shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer, Megan Lamiotte, megan.a.lamiotte.civ@army.mil the Contract Specialist, Kristopher Tress, kristopher.b.tress.civ@army.mil”. Please confirm that proposals are to be submitted via email to the above addresses. | Solicitation Document has been updated to confirm that proposals are to be submitted via email to the addresses listed in Attachment 0009. | |
| 14 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” and “Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” | ||
| Will the government confirm that company logos are exempt from the font limitations and may be submitted in their native font? | The government confirms that company logos are exempt from font limitations. | |||
| 15 | AAttachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” and “Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” | ||
| Will the government confirm that text in headers and footers may also use a reduced font size not less than 10-point? | The government confirms that text in headers and footers may also used a reduced font size not less than 10-point. | |||
| 16 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” and “Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” | ||
| Will the government confirm that text in quote boxes and callout boxes may also use a reduced font size not less than 10-point? | The government confirms that text in quote boxes and callout boxes may also use a reduced font size not less than 10-point. | |||
| 17 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” and “Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” | ||
| Will the government exclude screenshots from this font requirement so they may be submitted in their native screen capture font? | Graphics are excluded from font requirements. Please keep in mind that any text contained within the screenshots shall be legible and any graphics included will count against the page limit requirements. | |||
| 18 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Pages containing text shall be type written using the standard letter size (8.5 x 11)”. Will the Government allow the use of 11” x 17” foldouts for large tables and figures? | No. Offerors must adhere by page standards and limits set forth in the RFP Instructions. | |
| 19 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that “Text shall be single spaced and a minimum of twelve (12) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” and “Any table or graphic shall use a minimum of ten (10) point Times New Roman or Arial font.” | ||
| Please confirm that these font requirements do not apply to the Government-provided Excel worksheets, including Pricing excel files, which should be submitted in the fonts provided. | Offerors shall not change the font contained within the Government-provided Excel worksheets. | |||
| 20 | Attachment 0009, Page 3, L.A.1.m, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that proposals should use “no less than one (1) inch margins/borders.” | ||
| Please confirm that these requirements do not apply to the Government-provided Excel worksheets, including Pricing excel files, which should be submitted in the margins provided. | The offerors shall not change or alter the margins contained within the Government-provided Excel worksheets. | |||
| 21 | Attachment 0009, Page 4, L.A.1.n, Proposal Submission Requirements | The RFP states that the total page limit for the Technical volume “Applies to the body of the technical volume, but does not apply to Title Pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Index.” | ||
| Please confirm that exclusions from page limits for Title Pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Index applies to all volumes. | The Government confirms that exclusions from page limits for Title Pages, Table of Contents, and Acronym Index apply to all volumes. | |||
| 22 | Attachment 0009, Page 4, L.A.1.n, Proposal Submission Requirements |
Page 8, L.A.2.b(ii) Proposal Submission Requirements The volume organization table in paragraph L.A.1.n does not match the Proposal Submission Requirement for Volume II Past Performance in paragraph L.A.2.b(ii) Content and Organization. Specifically, the volume organization table does not account for:
Part A: Table of Contents (no page limit) Part C: List of Past Performance Questionnaires Distributed to Customers (no page limit) Part D: Organization Change History (no page limit)
| Part E: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms (no page limit) | RFP Instructions are updated to reflect page limits for all volumes. | |||
| 23 | Attachment 0009, Page 6, | |||
| L.A.2.b(i)(2) (2) Section 2 – Factor 2: | Para A.2.b.(i)(2) refers to Factor 2 as "Program Management Plan". Should this be labeled “Factor 2: Technical Readiness”? | Yes, it should be labeled "Factor 2: Technical Readiness". RFP Instructions updated. | ||
| 24 | Attachment 0009, Page 8, L.A.2.b, Content Requirement | The RFP states that “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion.” Please confirm that the Table of Contents and Summary Section are excluded from page count limitations. | Table of Contents excluded from page count limits. Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. | |
| 25 | Attachment 0009, Page 8, L.A.2.b.(ii)b, VOLUME II – Past Performance, Content and Organziation | Para L.A.2.b.(ii)b refers to “Summary Page included on first page of Past and Present Performance Information Sheets.” Could the Government revise Attachment 0010 Past Performance Questionnaire to indicate format and required content for the Summary Page? | Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. | |
| 26 | Attachment 0009, Page 5, L.A.2.b.(i) - Volume I - Technical |
Page 18, M.C. Factors and Subfactors to be Evaluated
| Based on our review, the draft RFP focuses on current and legacy technology relative to PEO C3T Systems of Systems. We understand that this is important; however, nowhere in Volume I do we see an opportunity for the evaluation of a competitor's ability to successfully support the PEO's 2023 strategic objectives. We would recommend a new Factor that addresses the PEO's efforts to be more efficient, effective, and innovative. We would further recommend that this new Factor have an equivalent importance to Factor 1. | PEO C3T integrates commercial IT systems and is in a constant state of modernization. As such, it is critical for the vendor to uderstand the current Mission Command Network and the contraints that affect modernization. | |
| 27 | Attachment 0009, Page 22, M.D.4.b, | The draft RFP states: "The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information)." |
Due to the complexity of the SEPM PWS, we recommend the Government consider scoring the past performance citations in a cumulative manner rather than scoring each individual citation separately. This would create a level playing field for equal competition among offerors and still allow offerors to demonstrate 100% coverage of the PWS.
| Each individual submission is scored, and a cumulative rating is given based on the combined individual ratings. | ||
| 28 | Attachment 0009, Page 23, M.D.4.d(ii) RELEVANCY | The draft RFP indicates that to achieve a Very Relevant score requires that the Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. This could be interpreted by the reviewer that only the incumbent past performance on the current contract can achieve a Very Relevant Score creating an unfair advantage to the incumbent. We would recommend the following revision. |
| Present/Past Performance effort cumulatively demonstrates the successful delivery of the full scope, magnitude and complexities that the solicitation requires. | The rating methods are based on the definitions provided in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, and cannot be altered. | |||
| 29 | Attachment 0009, Page 19, M.D.1 EVALUATION APPROACH | Para D.1 “The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:” Should this read: “all technical factors and subfactors”? | The language referenced is provided in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, and cannot be altered. | |
| 30 | p. 1; Section A.1.a | Ref: "The size per e-mail shall not exceed 9 MB. If necessary, Offerors may submit multiple emails. If submitting multiple emails, please denote in the Subject line of the email “Email 1 of 2” or “Email 2 of 3”, etc." |
| Will the Government please consider allowing offerors to upload to DoD SAFE for the proposal submission to alleviate the need for breaking apart volumes and submitting multiple emails? Also DoD SAFE allows for encryption. | The Government maintains the position of wanting offerors to submit their proposal via email. If necessary, offerors can send over their proposal documents in zipped folders to address the concern of email MB size. | ||
| 31 | p. 4; table, I.Technical, Notes | The table on p. 4 defines the page limits for each Technical Factor/Subfactor and does not address the summary section required from p. 7, Section 2.b. |
Ref section 2.b: "Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file."
1) Will the Government please clarify whether they are asking for a summary for the entirety of Volume I, or a summary to precede each Factor (Section/Factor 1,2, and 3)?
2) The table on p. 4 defines the page limits for each Technical Factor/Subfactor and does not address the summary section required from p. 7, Section 2.b. Will the Government please clarify where the Summary/Summaries are located and what the page limit for them is/are?
| 3) Will the Government please remove the Summary/Summaries from the Volume I page limits defined in p. 4's table? | Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. |
| 32 |
| p. 4; table, II.Past Performance, Notes | Will the Government please confirm that the 26 page limit total for this Volume is reference to Part B, the Offeror's Past and Present Performance Information Sheets, and not to Parts C, D, and E of the Volume. | The Government confirms that the 26 page limit total is reference to Part B, the Offeror's Past and Present Performance Information Sheets and not Parts C, D, and E of the volume. |
| 33 | p. 4; table, II. Past Performance, Notes |
and
p. 10; b. Part B Ref p. 10; b. Part B: "(Summary Page included on first page of Past and Present Performance Information Sheets)
| Will the Government please clarify whether they want a Summary Page that includes all Past and Present Performance Information Sheets, or a Summary Page for each of the potential five Past and Present Performance Information Sheets? | Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. | ||
| 34 | p. 10; 2.c Subfactor 3, 3rd bullet | Ref: "Tracking and reporting to ensure that the transition is 100% complete within 45 days of contract award, ... " |
| Will the Government please confirm the transition period is 30 days as identified in Attachment 0008, p. 39, Volume IV - Transition-In Plan, paragraph 2? | The transition plan is 45 days. Attachment 0008 has been updated. | ||
| 35 | p.7; 2.b | Ref: "Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file." |
| Will the Government please confirm the Summary Section request for each volume file is applicable only to the Volume I Technical and Volume II Past Performance files as directed in each volume's instructions, and is not required in all other volume files? If the Summary section is required in the other Volume files, will the Government please update the instructions accordingly? | Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. | |||
| 36 | Section B | Will the Government please confirm the Offeror is to submit the Section B shown in Attachment 0008 Draft Task Order for the Pricing Volume? | The Offerors are expected to fill out Attachment 0005 - SEPM Cost/Price Template for the cost/price volume. | |
| 37 | p. 3; A.1.n table |
| p. 19; #(v)(5) | The documents to be submitted are identified with their corresponding naming convention in the table on p. 3; however the Volume 5 Reps and Certs is not included. Will the Government please provide the naming convention it wants offerors to use for this file? | Government has updated the table on page 3 to provide the naming convention for Volume V - Reps and Certs |
| 38 | Volume V-Miscellaneous Submittals | |
| pg. 4 table / pg. 19, #5 | What is the naming convention for the Certifications and Representations file(s) for Volume V-Miscellanous Submittals? | Government has updated the table on page 3 to provide the naming convention for Volume V - Reps and Certs |
| 39 | 2. Proposal Content | |
| pg. 7, b: Content Requirement | Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file. |
| Will the government confirm that the Summary Sections are not included in page count for each volume? | Requirement for Summary Section has been removed from RFP Instructions. | |||
| 40 | 2. Proposal Content; pg. 11: Vol II - Past Performance | Will the government please provide Attachment X - Past Performance Information Sheet as cited in Vol II - Past Performance? | Attachment 0010 - Past Performance Questionnaire was provided with the draft RFP and will be provided once the official RFP is posted. | |
| 42 | C. Factors and Subfactors to be evaluated; pg. 23: Vol II - Past Performance | Will the government please provide any additional evaluation criteria as related to the Past Performance Evaluation Criteria defined in Section M: "in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D." Please Provide Appendix D. | This sentence has been removed from the RFP Instructions. | |
| 43 | Attachment 6 LCAT Descriptions | The number of LCATS in attachment 6 is for the entire IDIQ for pricing. Attachment 5 only provides for pricing task order one. Where will the Govt ask for rates at the IDIQ level? | The Government is not requesting labor rates at the IDIQ level. All Offerors shall use Attachment 0005 SEPM Cost/Price Template for the cost/price volume. | |
| 44 | Attachment 5 Cost Price Template | Will the Govt please correct the formula in the Total (TO) tab in block E76 to include the total ODC cost? | Government has corrected the formula | |
| 45 | Instuctions | In order to ensure a continuous proven performance record, and minimize risk, will the government require that Past Performance contracts should be underway for at least one year from RFP issue date in order to be evaluated? | No | |
| 46 | Attachment 9 - Section M | In attachment 9 Page 11 of the Draft RFP states: The Offeror shall submit no more than five recent and relevant Government and/or commercial contracts for the Government to assess the Offeror’s probability of meeting solicitation and PWS requirements based on a demonstrated record of performance. Of these five recent and relevant Government and/or commercial contracts that the Offeror may submit, no more than two may be from the proposed significant subcontractors/significant teaming partners. However in 4. 4. Volume II - Past Performance Factor Sub-item D the requirements states: d. Offerors shall submit a maximum of five Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past three years, from date of release of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP. The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available. | ||
| Question: Will the government please clarify that there should be 5 total maximum Past Performance contract references submitted. | The Government confirms that the maximum number of five Past Performance contract references can be submitted. | |||
| 47 | Quality Management Processes: Given the Government’s emphasis on delivering best practice based services, will the Government be requiring, or providing additional strengths, for companies that can demonstrate ISO 9001:2015, ISO/IEC 20000-1:2018, ISO/IEC 27001:2013 certifications? This will benefit the Government because it provides evidence that the Offeror has a mature Integrated ISO Management System, supported by institutionalized business practices, and signifies the Offeror’s ability to provide enhanced responsiveness in meeting customer requirements through continuous improvement approaches. | We will evaluate the proposals based on meeting the requirements of the PWS | ||
| 48 | Quality Management Processes: Given the Government’s emphasis on delivering best practice based services, will the Government be requiring, or providing additional strengths, for companies that can demonstrate compliance with Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Services Level 3 standards? | We will evaluate the proposals based on meeting the requirements of the PWS |
LCAT LOE
Labor Categories / LOE Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | T26C Senior Systems Engineer | The LCAT LOE requirements for T26C Senior Systems Engineer are inconsistent with the Attachment 0001 IDIQ PWS, 3.2 Key Personnel requirements for T26C Systems Engineer Senior (Communications Systems Integration Team Lead). | The Communications Systems Integration Team Lead will be identified and separated in the LOE so that the vendor can price accordingly |
| 2 | General | The substitution language confusing for some positions, for example: B3A Senior Communication Specialist specifies the following: "1 additional year of experience may be substituted for 1 academic year of education. 1 year of post-secondary education may be substituted for 1 year of experience." | If a candidate is 1 academic year short of a bachelors degree, and the candidate has 1 additional year of experience above the minimum required experience, the substitution is acceptable. |
| 3 | General | The substitution language confusing for some positions, for example: T16C Senior INFOSEC Senior specifies the following: "1 academic year at an accredited college or university in an accredited preferred degree related post-secondary program for 1 year of experience. " | If a candidate is 1 academic year short of a bachelors degree, and the candidate has 1 additional year of experience above the minimum required experience, the substitution is acceptable. |
| 4 | General | For all positions, we recommend that a Master's degree requirement can be substituted with a Bachelor's plus 5 years additional experience. | The Government does not wish to alter current requirements. |
| 5 | Labor Categories in Attachments 0005 LOE Tab |
and Attachment 0006, LCAT Descriptions Tab, Column A Will the Government please conform the Labor Categories shown in Attachment 0005 with the Category shown in Attachment 0006 for the following LCATs?
• INFOSEC Engineer, Senior: Att 0005 - Information Management / Att 0008 - Technical Engineering
• Computer Scientist, Subject Matter Expert: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Information Management
• Data Analyst, Journeyman: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Business and Operations Management
• Network Engineer, Senior: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Information Management
• Network Engineer, Senior: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Information Management
• Network Engineer, Subject Matter Expert: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Information Management
• Program Analyst, Journeyman: Att 0005 - Technical Engineering / Att 0008 - Business and Operations Management
• Program Analyst, Subject Matter Expert: Att 0005 - Readiness Management / Att 0008 - Business and Operations Management
| • Program Specialist, Junior: Att 0005 - Readiness Management | / Att 0008 - Business and Operations Management | ||
| Attachments 0005 and 0006 have no discrepancies in Labor Categories. Categories provided in Column A of the LCAT Descriptions tab in Attachment 0006 are the correct categories for each position. | |||
| 6 | Attachment 0006, SEPM LCAT Descriptions and LOE | Attachment 0006, SEPM LCAT Descriptions and LOE, contains a Tab titled “Definitions” that references OASIS SB Labor Categories and the levels Junior, Journeyman, and Senior. |
1) Would the Government consider including Junior, Journeyman, Senior, and Subject Matter Expert (SME) in this definition?
2) The OASIS SB contract, Paragraph B.2.1. Standardized Labor Categories, provides for Degree Substitutions as shown below. Would the Government please include the OASIS Degree substitutions in the Definitions TAB?
B.2.1. Standardized Labor Categories Additionally, the following qualification substitution chart applies:
Bachelor's Degree 6 years’ work experience may be substituted for a Bachelor's Degree Associate's Degree plus 4 years’ work experience may be substituted for a Bachelor's Degree Master's Degree 12 years’ work experience may be substituted for a Master's Degree Bachelor's Degree plus 8 years work experience may be substituted for a Master's Degree Doctorate's Degree 20 years’ work experience may be substituted for a Doctorate's Degree Bachelor's Degree plus 16 years work experience,
| or a Master'sDegree plus 12 years work experience may be substituted for a Doctorate's Degree | 1. The definitions have been added. 2. The Government does not concur with adding the OASIS SB degree substitutions in the Definitions, as subtiutions may vary by labor category. | |||
| 7 | Attachment 007 & 001, TO (pages 16, 17 & 18) & IDIQ (pages 17 & 18) | PWS Section 3.2 Key Positions: Considering the Mission Essential nature of the Key Positions and the LOE Labor categories defined for this request, would the Government please consider the Key positions be designated as Subject Matter Experts as opposed to Senior where supplied Labor category designations permit? | The Government does not wish to alter current requirements. The key personnel identified will only require Senior level qualifications. | |
| 8 | Attachment 007 & 001, TO (pages 16, 17 & 18) & IDIQ (pages 17 & 18) | Section 3.2 Key Positions: Would the Government please consider including two technical descriptions for the multiple T16C Engineer INFOSEC Senior similar to the two descriptions for the T26C Systems Engineer Senior Key Personnel? | PWS updated accordingly |
Draft Task Order Draft Task Order Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | We assume Attachment 0008 Draft Task Order is provided for informational purposes in support of responding to Factor 1, but no specific TO pricing is required. | TO pricing is required in Attachment 0005 - SEPM Cost/Price Template | |
| 2 | Section C, pg. 38 | The Travel and ODC estimated values listed in the Table do not match the RTEP Plug values in Attachment 0005 or the Table on pg. 15 in Attachment 0009. Will the Government please update these values so that all documents match? | The Government does not find an inconsistency. |
| 3 | 1 | confirm the Period of Performance for this effort includes one 12-month base period and two 12-month option period, and not a 12 month base period with four 12 month option periods. | The Task Order is one 12 month base and two 12 month options |
| 4 | |||
| 5 | |||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | |||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | |||
| 10 |
Past Performance Questionnaire Past Performance Questionnaire Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Summary Page | Attachment 0009, L A.2.b.(ii)b, VOLUME II – Past Performance, Content and Organziation, Page 8, refers to a “Summary Page included on first page of Past and Present Performance Information Sheets.” Could the Government revise Attachment 0010_Past Performance Questionnaire to indicate format and required content for the Summary Page? | This sentence has been removed from the RFP Instructions. |
| 2 | |||
| 3 | |||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | |||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | |||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | |||
| 10 |
Solicitation Document W15P7T-23-R-0004 Solicitation Document Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | p. 2; Section A, #10 | 10. Proposals to solicitation W15P7T-23-R-0004 are due on TBD. Proposals shall be submitted via SAM.gov. |
| Will the Government please clarify the submission instructions? The instructions to offerors document (Attachment 0001) states submission shall be by email. We would like to recommend using DoD SAFE for the proposal submission to alleviate the need for breaking apart volumes and submitting multiple emails, as well as for accomodating CUI. | The Government maintains the position of wanting offerors to submit their proposal via email. If necessary, offerors can send over their proposal documents in zipped folders to address the concern of email MB size. | |||
| 2 | p. 17; Section I | Will the Government please add DFARS 252.225-7995 to the Solicitation Document as it is included in both the Attachment 0001 IDIQ PWS and the Attachment 0008 Draft TO PWS? | Government has added DFARS 252.225-7995 to the Solicitation Document | |
| 3 | p. 17; Section I | Will the Government please add DFARS 252.225-7043 to the Solicitation Document as it is included in both the Attachment 0001 IDIQ PWS and the Attachment 0008 Draft TO PWS? | Government has added DFARS 252.225-7043 to the Solicitation Document | |
| 4 | p. 17; Section I | Will the Government please add FAR 52.219-14 Limitation on Subcontracting to the contract clauses? | Government has added FAR 52.219-14 to the Solicitation Document | |
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 | ||||
| 9 | ||||
| 10 |
Cost Price Template Cost/Price Template Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Total (TO) tab | Cells R49:U49 have data that seem to be outside of the Base and Options Periods. Will the Government please update the Attachment to clarify what these values are for, or delete them if not required? | Cost Price Template adjusted. |
| 2 | Total (TO) tab | Escalation rates in cells H6 & L6 are pre-populated and highlighted green. Will the Government please confirm that the Offeror is to update these values per the Escalation factor statement on line 86? | The Offeror needs to populate all green cells. The green cells under Total (TO) in H6 and L6 should show the offerors escalation rate that they are proposing for Option Period 1 and Option Period 2. |
| 3 | Total (TO) tab | There are no Subcontractor lines or sections to allow for input of Subcontractor costs. Will the Government please update the Attachment to support this data or allow the Offeror to make the necessary changes? | Cost Price Template adjusted. |
| 4 | Travel CLINs tab | Will the Government please update the CLIN "XXXX" values to match the corresponding CLINs in the Solicitation Document; Section B? | Solicitation Document represents the CLIN structure of the IDIQ portion of the contract which will not have any funding attached to it at the CLIN level. Funding will be at the CLIN level on the TO based on the Awardee's submitted Cost/Price proposal. |
| 5 | ODC Clins tab | Will the Government please update the CLIN "XXXX" values to match the corresponding CLINs in the Solicitation Document; Section B? | Solicitation Document represents the CLIN structure of the IDIQ portion of the contract which will not have any funding attached to it at the CLIN level. Funding will be at the CLIN level on the TO based on the Awardee's submitted Cost/Price proposal. |
| 6 | LOE tab | Per the LOE tab, row 24 is a Labor Cat # I15C for a Telecommunications Specialist, Journeyman. Per Attachment 6, Labor Cat #I15B is for Telecommunications, Journeyman and Labor Cat # I15C is for Telecommunications Specialist, Senior. Will the Government please clarify what the level should be? | Journeyman is the correct Labor Category. LOE tab has been corrected. |
| 7 | Total (TO)/ LOE tabs | Per the Total (TO) tab, row 41 Network Engineer, Senior at Ft. Bliss, TX has 5,760 hours per contract period. Per the LOE tab, Network Engineer, Senior on row 30 at Ft. Bliss, TX has 3,840 hours per contract period and row 31 at APG, MD has 1,920 hours per contract period. Will the Government please clarify how many hours per contract period by Work Area/ Place of Performance? | Hours listed in the LOE tab are the correct hours |
| 8 | Total (TO)/ LOE tabs | Per the Total (TO) tab, row 44 Systems Engineer, Senior at Ft. Bliss, TX has 11,520 hours in Base Period and Option Period 1 and 13,440 hours in Option Period 2. Per the LOE tab, Systems Engineer, Senior on row 34 at Ft. Bliss, TX has 3,840 hours per contract period and row 35 at APG, MD has 7,680 hours in Base Period and Option Period 1 and 9,600 hours in Option Period 2. Will the Government please clarify how many hours per contract period by Work Area/ Place of Performance? | Hours listed in the LOE tab are the correct hours |
| 9 | LOE tab | Will the Government please confirm the Offeror's Proposal is not to deviate from the Hours shown in the LOE in Attachment 0005? | The Offeror's proposal cannot deviate from the LOE. |
| 10 | Attachment 5 Cost Price Template | Will the Govt please correct the formula in the Total (TO) tab in block E76 to include the total ODC cost? | Cost Price Template adjusted. |
SBPP
Small Business Participation Plan Questions
| Page # or Section Reference | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Attachment 11 | Will the Government please clarify whether attachment 11 necessary as this is a set aside contract? | Yes, Attachment 0011 is still required as the Government needs to know how the small business participation is broken down per proposal. The Government wants to ensure that 51% of the work is being performed by 8(a) small business(es). |
| 2 | |||
| 3 | |||
| 4 | |||
| 5 | |||
| 6 | |||
| 7 | |||
| 8 | |||
| 9 | |||
| 10 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .