Office of Procurement Services U.S. Department of Labor
Office of The Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management
Information Technology Center Office of Systems Development and Integration
RFP#: DOL110RP20830
| 1. |
| Question 1: Page D-1 lists the SOW as having 41 pages, but the .pdf file available on fbo.gov is only 17 pages long. Are there pages missing from the posted SOW? |
| Answer: No. There are only 17 pages in the SOW. |
| 2. |
| Question 2: Page F-4 asks for a copy of all partnership agreements between the Prime and partners. Does the entire subcontract need to be included because that would exceed the 3 page maximum allowed per attachment? |
| Answer: No. The entire subcontract shall not be included. |
| 3. |
| Question 3: Page E-2 bullet #1 under ‘Evaluating Past Performance’ asks for no more than 3 relevant contracts but bullet #2 asks for 3 relevant contracts for each teaming partner for each ‘first time joint effort’. Can you clarify on the total relevant contracts for Past Performance is required /allowed? |
| Answer: 3 relevant contracts are required, in addition, if this is a first-time partnership. |
If this is an existing partnership, please provide only 3 relevant contracts, per bullet 1.
| 4. |
| Question 4: Are Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business primes required to have GSA - IT Schedule 70 contracts in order to respond to the subject opportunity? If not, is it DOL’s preference to award the opportunity to a Schedule 70 holder? |
| Answer: It is the Government’s intent to award to a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business. This is not a GSA schedule procurement. |
| 5. |
| Question 5: Will the winner of solicitation DOL110RP20830 be required to recertify their business size every year? Or will the size standard on the date of submission be sufficient (if under $25m at the time). |
| Answer: The winning company will not have to recertify their business size once awarded the contract. |
| 6. |
| Question 6: If this scope of work, or any portion thereof, is being performed under another contract please identify the contract(s) and identify the contractors. |
| Answer: The scope of work will only be performed on this contract. |
| 7. |
| Question 7: We would like to see all the labor categories and descriptions on the current contract(s) (only key personnel labor category descriptions are provided in the solicitation). Additionally, many tasks with the SOW are not written in a manner that allows many bidders to understand the required level of effort. For example, SOW 3.5 describes the nature of application management, but little indication of the level of effort expected. Similarly, SOW 3.6 references Tiers 1-3, but gives no indication of the level of effort (full-time equivalent (FTE) staff) expected at each tier. Accordingly, we would also like to see the existing or projected FTE level of effort for each task/subtask. |
| Answer: On page 10, of the SOW O&M and support activities are fully described, including the 30 systems to be maintained. Each offeror shall describe their approach and resources to support their approach. |
| 8. |
| Question 8: In Section B the solicitation indicates that there are to be 3 categories associated with individuals (direct labor, consultants, and subcontracts). These categories seem to suggest that this may be a cost plus type contract yet Section F.1 states that it is a fixed price contract and the instructions in F.4 ask bidders to provide fully loaded labor rates. For example, Direct Labor generally is interpreted to exclude Fringe, G&A, Overhead, Fee, etc. These categories also seem to suggest that the Government anticipates that consultant and employee billing rates may be different? Similarly, why does the Government need to see subcontractor billing rates to the prime contractor as suggested in the same section unless those invoice items are expected to represent actual subcontractor cost on a cost-plus subcontract. Please clarify the contract type and/or explain the invoice reporting requirements. |
| Answer: This is an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The basic contract will have the labor categories, hours and rates listed. Each Task Order placed from this IDIQ will be fixed priced based upon the rates listed in the basic IDIQ contract. |
For invoicing requirement, please reference Section B Invoice Requirements in the Request for Proposal.
| 9. |
| Question 9: We could not find the attachment referenced in C.7 para. 4 (Non-disclosure agreement). Will this be provided after contract award or was it an omission from the solicitation? |
| Answer: The Non-Disclosure agreement will be posted prior to contract award. |
| 10. |
| Question 10: Please clarify the purpose of the incentives and disincentives metrics. Is the government expecting monetary incentives/disincentives? If so, is this one of the many fixed price incentive type contracts as described in FAR 16.204? Please clarify. |
| Answer: The government expects to place monetary incentives / disincentives Task Orders against this IDIQ. |
| 11. |
| Question 11: The Mandatory Instructions for Technical Proposals requires clarification. There is a bulleted list followed by three numbered sections. How do the three numbered items organizationally relate to the bullet list? Other than the desire that all items must be covered it is unclear how they are to be organized based on the instructions provided. Additionally, does the government really want to see a mapping of the price proposal and the SOW embedded in the technical proposal as suggested by the last bullet item? |
| Answer: Sections 1, II, and III shall be attached as an Appendix to the Technical Proposal. |
The Offeror shall align their Price Proposal with their technical work requirements.
| 12. |
| Question 12: Please clarify that the date on the SF 1449 is the correct due date for the proposal submission. |
| Answer: The RFP has been amended to extend the proposal submission date to December 11, 2009, 2:00 PM Eastern Standard Time. |
| 13. |
| Question 13: Please clarify that the offeror is required to submit three past performances selected from within the last 5 years. |
| Answer: The Offeror will provide at least 3 past performance references, per Factor 2, E-14. |
| 14. |
| Question 14: Please confirm that, as stated in section F-5, the Government will accept Government, and/or commercial/corporate past performance references that are similar in size, scope and complexity as being relevant. Please clarify this discrepancy. |
| Answer: There is no such discrepancy in Section F-5. |
| 15. |
| Question 15: On page E-14 there are 10 data elements requested for past performance and page F-6 requires 11 data elements. Please clarify the discrepancy as to which set of instructions are to prevail. |
| Answer: Past Performance shall contain: |
1. Name and Address of Contracting Agency
2. Summary of the performance requirement illustrating clear linkages with the SOW
3. Period of Performance
4. Contract Number
5. Contract Type
6. Contract Dollar Amount (Initial and Final with explanation of difference)
7. Name, address, valid telephone number of Contracting Officer
8. Description of any problems encountered and resolution
9. Timeliness of performance
10. Customer satisfaction
11. Performance of relevant key personnel
| 16. |
| Question 16: In order to provide a full description of relevant services that are similar to the requirements of previous work, the solicitation requires covering eight (8) task areas and18 experience factors. This offeror respectfully requests extending the page limitation to 5 pages per citation in order to provide the Government the detail needed to ensure the work relevance. |
| Answer: The government extends the page limit for each attachment from 3 to 5. |
| 17. |
| Question 17: Because offerors may have more than one (1) partnership agreement for submission, please clarify that all Partnership Agreements are not counted against the page count limitation? |
| Answer: The Offeror shall submit partnership agreements consistent with section F-4. |
Refer to Question 18
| 18. |
| Question 18: If the Partnership Agreements are to be counted against the page count limitation then would the Government revise the page count limitation to the business proposal 40 pages to promote full and open competition among all offerors? |
| Answer: The page limitation is amended to 40 pages. |
| 19. |
| Question 19: It is unduly expensive for SDVOSB Small businesses to generate Certified Statements. Reviewed Statements yield the same results, therefore, will the Government allow Reviewed Statements in place of Certified Statements to satisfy this requirement and eliminate this cost burden? |
| Answer: Offerors shall comply with the requirement for a Certified statement. |
| 20. |
| Question 20: It is very difficult for a small business to have 3 to 5 contracts valued at $5M or more. We respectfully request that the Government revise their definition of a “large” contract to state $1M or greater. |
| Answer: No. If the small business does not have the past performance experience, then the small business will receive a neutral rating and shall not be rated favorably or unfavorable. |
| 21. |
| Question 21: We have spoken to D&B and it appears that a SWOT Analysis report does not exist. Would the Government consider revising the Dun and Bradstreet SWOT Analysis Report to read Dun and Bradstreet Comprehensive Report? A comprehensive report provides information on all aspects of the business including credit, contracts, revenues, credit worthiness and all aspects of the business. |
| Answer: The RFP provides for an alternative to the SWOT Analysis Report. The Dun and Bradstreet Past Performance Evaluation Report is acceptable. |
| 22. |
| Question 22: If the Government agrees to the substitution of the Comprehensive Report then attention should be paid to the page count limitation. Since the Comprehensive Report is approximately 20 pages would the Government kindly consider revising the page limitation on the business proposal to 40 pages |
| Answer: No. |
| 23. |
| Question 23: For the eight (8) Key Personnel identified in the RFP this would require at least 16 pages which would take more than 40% of the total technical proposal. Will the Government exclude the resumes for key personnel for the technical proposal along with the cover page, table of contents and the executive summary? |
| Answer: The RFP is amended to change the number of allowed attachments from five (5) attachments to ten (10) attachments. Resumes for Key Personnel shall be provided as an attachment to the Technical Proposal. |
All other conditions remain unchanged.
| 24. |
| Question 24: For teaming arrangements, is the Teaming past performance required in addition to the most relevant contract past performance, and, if so, does this count against the maximum number of past performance summaries provided? |
| Answer: Yes it is required, per section F.5. No it does not count against the maximum number of past performance summaries. |
| 25. |
| Question 25: Is a currency of in the past 3 years still required? |
| Answer: No, it is within the last 5 years. |
| 26. |
| Question 26: For first time arrangements, a list of three past and present contracts are required. Therefore, are offerors to provide three for each (total of six) or just three? |
| Answer: Three past performance references are required from the Offeror. Please refer to question #3. |
| 27. |
| Question 27: Are offerors to assume “present” means current continuing work, or simply work completed within the past 3 years (for example)? |
| Answer: Present to mean existing and in progress. |
| 28. |
| Question 28: RFP Sec E.2, Evaluating Past Performance, 5th bulleted paragraph, Include a letter of consent from Subs to release PP data. Where in the proposal does this letter go and does it count against page count? |
| Answer: No it shall not count against the page count. Provide as an attachment in the Past Performance proposal. |
| 29. |
| Question 29: RFP Sec E.3 Task1 3rd bulleted paragraph, page E-4 This bulleted paragraph mandates a review of OASAM and VETS IT investment information and associated SDLCM and CPIC documents to ensure their compliance with “Federal and Departmental policies, directives, and guidance.” Would the Government specify which policies, directives, and guidance? |
| Answer: The DOL SDLCM, inclusive of IT Capital Planning, Enterprise Architecture, and IT Security (FISMA). |
| 30. |
| Question 30: Would the Government make available to offerors the latest official version of FISMA and the DOL Computer Security Handbook? |
| Answer: A copy of the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) can be found by following this link or on the NIST.GOV website. The DOL Computer Security Handbook is an internal document implementing FISMA. |
| 31. |
| Question 31: The ITC Records Management Program, National Archives and Records Administration requirements, DOL Records Management Policy, and the OASAM & VETS Projects are not defined, and their governing policies are not specified. Would the Government be able to provide this information? |
| Answer: Offeror’s are expected to be experienced in implementing and managing Federal Records Management. Please visit the http://archives.gov for NARA information. |
| 32. |
| Question 32: Is there publically available information on the DOL EA program or will the Government provide it? |
| Answer: The DOL EA program is consistent with the Federal Enterprise Architecture and information can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/e-gov/fea/ |
| 33. |
| Question 33: What applications are running on the 30 administrative systems? What operating systems are the administrative systems using? |
| Answer: Administrative support applications include: parking administration, civil rights complaint tracking, correspondence tracking, procurement, workplace injury, and similar systems to support program administration. Systems are web-based and operate on Windows Server OS. |
| 34. |
| Question 34: What application code and databases are present and currently being supported? |
| Answer: ASP.NET and SQL Server 2000. |
| 35. |
| Question 35: Will web hosting be a component of any of the tasks? If so, will the contractor be responsible for hosting application services? Would this be on-site or off-site hosting? |
| Answer: No. |
| 36. |
| Question 36: No instruction is provided in the RFP specifying what Assurance of Section 508 Compliance is to be provided by Offerors. Would the Government specify what constitutes a sufficient response in this Proposal section? |
| Answer: No. It is anticipate that the Offeror is familiar with requirements for complying with Section 508. |
| 37. |
| Question 37: No instruction is provided in the RFP specifying what information is to be included in the Letter of Corporate Commitment. Would the Government specify the mandatory information that needs to be furnished in the Letter of Corporate Commitment? |
| Answer: No. |
| 38. |
| Question 38: RFP Sec. F.3, Submission of Technical Proposal, page F-3. No explanation is provided regarding what is to be considered as an “attachment.” Please explain the various materials that should be considered for inclusion as attachments. |
| Answer: Documents that can be attachment are identified in the RFP. |
| 39. |
| Question 39: Please specify whether or not, I. Summary of Contract Performance Requirements; II. Summary Table of Key Personnel; and III. Qualifications and Availability/Commitment of Individual Staff are to be treated as “attachments.” In addition, if not attachments, please specify whether I, II, and III are to be included within the 40-page limitation. |
| Answer: Please refer to question #12. |
| 40. |
| Question 40: Would the Government define what it means by “contract provisions” and its expectations regarding the rigor of the performance measures framework that offerors should propose? We suggest that this framework should be applied at a higher, general level at this point. |
| Answer: Please refer to the technical, business, and performance requirements of the RFP. |
| 41. |
| Question 41: Are the performance measures offerors propose to be considered only as “draft” statements; that is, a foundation for discussion and finalization when actual work is requisitioned following award in the task areas? |
| Answer: Yes. |
| 42. |
| Question 42: While this RFP section suggests that the contractor will be required to adhere to a framework of performance measures when executing work under the tasks (and managing the overall program), the RFP does not establish any vehicle (e.g., required reports) for indicating adherence to these measures. Is the Government’s primary intent for this section to determine each offeror’s understanding of the optimal elements of a performance measures framework; or determine each offeror’s willingness to agree to a very rigorous set of performance measures? Will the Government specify the reporting deliverables for this contract; or, as an alternative, will it amend the RFP to request offerors to recommend and specify a reporting deliverables? |
| Answer: No. Reporting is consistent with project and life cycle management, for IT Service Management. |
| 43. |
| Question 43: This paragraph of the SOW mandates that “All contractor staff must be professionally certified within the pertinent lifecycle process area.” While we are proposing key staff (who will lead efforts) and other senior personnel who possess professional certification, requiring all staff—including various support and junior personnel—to possess certification could result in a higher rate for services provided. In addition, it is likely that some of the tasks will require expertise for which no actual certification exists. Would the Government consider amending this requirement to read, “All lead and senior-level contractor staff must be professionally certified serving pertinent lifecycle process areas (where appropriate certifications exist).” |
| Answer: No. Key Personnel certification requirements are specifically identified. |
| 44. |
| Question 44: Are these requirements inclusive of the contract currently being performed |
by the incumbent contractor (Aquilent, Inc.) or is this work a combination of more than one current contract? If this work is a combination of more than one contract, please identify the other contractors?
Answer: The work specified is not limited by a contract.
| 45. |
| Question 45: Ref: Section F.3, Clarity of Price Proposal – The solicitation states, “How is the Price Proposal Aligned with the technical work requirements?” The instructions indicate that this should be included in the Technical Proposal. Should this topic actually be addressed in the Price Proposal, not in the Technical Proposal? |
| Answer: No. |
| 46. |
| Question 46: Ref: Section F.5, Instructions for Past Performance Proposals – The solicitation states, “Relevant contracts include those where Large is defined as contracts valued at $5M or greater.” Is it the government’s intent that all past performance references are to be “large” as defined here? |
| Answer: Relevant contracts are to be valued at $5M or greater. |
| 47. |
| Question 47: Past performance is a critical evaluation factor however the requirement to submit the questionnaires no later than 15 calendar days before the closing date means that they must be completed before the likely date of the government’s response to questions. As the government’s responses could have a significant impact on the selection of past performance references, will the government revise the response date of the questionnaires to coincide with the due date of the proposal? |
| Answer: The government will consider this schedule. |
| 48. |
| Question 48: Can Key Personnel Resumes be submitted in an appendix and thereby not count against the 40-page Technical Proposal limit? |
| Answer: Yes, please refer to question #24. |
| 49. |
| Question 49: Ref: Section F.3, III Qualifications and Availability/Commitment of Individual Staff – Can the letters of availability and commitment be submitted in an appendix and thereby not count against the 40-page Technical Proposal limit? |
| Answer: Yes. |
| 50. |
| Question 50: Resumes, Letters of Commitment, and other documents that might be included in appendices will most likely exceed 3 pages. Will the government remove the 3-page limit on each appendix? |
| Answer: Please refer to questions 49 and 50. |
| 51. |
| Question 51: Can tables and figures use a font smaller than the 12 point standard required for the Technical Proposal? |
| Answer: Yes no smaller than 10 point. |
| 52. |
| Question 52: Do you want 3 Past Performance questionnaires per team? |
| Answer: Please refer to instructions on page F-6 and question #3. |
| 53. |
| Question 53: How many and what type of copies do you require for the past performance proposal? |
| Answer: Offeror’s shall deliver 1 original and 3 copies of the Past Performance proposal. |
| 54. |
| Question 54: Is it possible that employees work at contractor facilities for some tasks? |
| Answer: The government shall evaluate as part of an Offeror’s proposal. |
| 55. |
| Question 55: Solicitation instructions, Section F.4. – The solicitation states "A copy of all partnership agreements [do we mean "subcontracts"?] between the Prime and partners [subcontractors?] shall be included." It appears that this requirement was not fully developed prior to solicitation release. |
Please clarify:
a. Are partnership agreements required to be submitted with the Business/Price Proposal?
b. What are considered Partnership Agreements?
c. Subcontracts are mentioned in the instruction but are rarely developed and executed prior to program award. Are subcontracts required with proposal submission? If so, are draft copies sufficient or are fully executed copies required?
d. Partnership agreements are always considerably longer than the 3-page limit for attachments, and there may be more than 3 agreements, which is the limit for Attachments according to the instructions.
Will you revise these requirements, the page and attachment limits, or both?
Answer: A copy of all partnership agreements between the Prime and partners shall be included.
Please refer to questions #18 and #19.
