Clarification_Questions_for_New_Hampshire_Job_Corps_Center_-_Final_May_23_2014.docx

Attachment 1 Amendment 0006

QUESTIONS FOR THE NEW HAMPSHIRE JOB CORPS CENTER

SOLICITATION NUMBER: DOL141RP20756

1. Please provide the Government’s cost estimate for the base period for Center Operations, OA and CTS contracts. Please segregate Start-up/1st Year and 2nd Year.

Response: This is not provided to Offerors.

2. Please provide an annual fuel and utility estimate for the New Hampshire Center.

Response: Fuel and utility estimates for the New Hampshire Center are as follows:

ESC's Estimate

New Hampshire - Based on averages from other Centers (FY2012-FY2013)

Cost Per Unit

New Hampshire - Based on averages from other Centers (FY2012-FY2013)

Cost Per GSF

New Hampshire - Projected FY2015

Cost Per GSF

A/E Proposed Design + 20%

A/E Proposed Design FY2015

A/E Proposed Design + 20%

A/E Proposed Design FY2015

3. Should the Contractor propose GSA vehicles ?

Response: Yes. This is a normal cost for Job Corps Centers.

4. The RFP states the contract is a “Cost + fixed fee” reflecting a reduction of over 50% of the existing fee incentive opportunity. What is the basis of this decision?

Response: See Section G.3, Fee of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1 The RFP incorporates language of 46% for liquidated damages on student leaves and ineligible enrollment. This is a 300% increase in the PRH standard. What is the basis of this determination?

Response: Liquidated damages on student leaves and ineligible enrollments have been reduced to 15%. See Sections G.8, Liquidated Damages for Failure to Comply with Regulations for Separating Students/Issuing Leaves and G.9, Liquidated Damages for Ineligible Enrollment of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

5. The RFP indicates the offerer shall determine the inflationary rate used for projecting costs. Please clarify the basis.

Response: This is a business decision to be made by the Offeror.

6. Previous RFPs exempted charts, tables and graphs from the 12-point font limit. Are smaller, yet readable fonts allowable for this proposal?

Response: Smaller fonts are not acceptable. The idea is to have them be concise and easy to read. Permitting smaller font undermines that intent and opens the door to “micro-print”. 12-point font was determined to be a reasonable standard.

7. Since the New Hampshire Center will be a new Center, can the government provide the anticipated start date and build-up plan for student arrivals? At what date does the government anticipate the Center will reach 100% OBS capacity?

Response: This question has already been addressed in Amendment number four in revised sections F.3 and F.5.

8. Will the contractor be responsible to procure furniture, furnishings and equipment for the Center?

Response: Yes, after contract award.

9. The RFP calls for the establishment of an off-center Electrician program. Can this trade be taught on the Job Corps campus? Will funds be provided for equipment, materials and textbooks for this trade?

Response: The New Hampshire JCC was planned with the anticipation that the Electrician CTT would be off-Center, including the design and construction of the Center.

10. Since it is a start-up Center, should offerors plan costs for Year 2 of the contract at full design capacity?

Response: Yes

11. The Staff Resources Proposal included a Transition/Phase-Out Plan. Previous start-up RFP’s included a Start-up Plan. Will there be a Start-up Plan required for this procurement? Will this be a separate section in the Cost Proposal?

Response: Yes

12. Since this is a start-up contract and there is no incumbent operator, what is the length of time the government estimates the contractor has to hire staff, procure equipment and recruit students prior to the opening of the Center?

Response: This question was addressed in a prior amendment.

13. There isn’t an Advanced Manufacturing – Precision Manufacturing, Job Corps TAR. Is the contractor expected to create a TAR for Precision Manufacturing or use the existing basic Advanced Manufacturing TAR?

Response: The Offeror may propose to use the existing MACHI-100-OJC-09 and/or MANUT-100-OJC-09 TARS or propose to develop a new TAR.

14. There isn’t a Facilities Management TAR. Is the contractor expected to create a Facilities Management TAR or use the existing Facilities Maintenance TAR?

Response: The contractor will be expected to use the FACMA-100—OJC-09 TAR or its revised version.

15. Section C.3.c.13, page 13 – In reference to the note directly under the CTT offerings table that states “ Two (2.0) slots represent the equivalent of one (1.0) student in all cases for basic CTT, Advanced Training, and Advanced Career Training.” The PRH references sited in the note at the bottom of page 13 (3.2 R1.e and 5.2 R2.a) do not include language for Advanced Career Training. ACT is conducted off-center at a university, community college or technical school, and these students are usually enrolled in their programs full-time. Please clarify if it is your intent to use the two-to-one slot ratio described above for Advanced Career Training students as well as OCT students.

Response: One “full-time CTT student” (referred to in R.2R1.e and 5.R2.a of the PRH) would include students in ACT or OCT and would use two slots. However, if a student in OCT is not full-time (e.g., only mornings, afternoons, or every other week), they would only use one slot. ACT students are considered to be full-time.

16. Page 2, The contractor shall provide Post-Center Career Transition Services annually for 216 Graduate and 107 Former Enrollee youth returning to the state(s) of New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.

As to Post-Center Career Transition Services, is such requirement only related to students departing from the New Hampshire Job Corps Center and returning to New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Connecticut.

Response: Yes.

17. Page 2, The amount to be reimbursed to the contractor for purchased accountable property and exclusive of excess personal property (as defined in the DOL Property Handbook for Employment and Training Administration contractors, including revisions and amendments thereto), is provided in the pricing schedule.

Without a list of property to furnish the New Hampshire Job Corps Center, the pricing schedule cannot be completed. Does the Government intend to provide a list of property to furnish the New Hampshire Job Corps Center?

Response: After contract award, the Government intends to provide the contractor a copy of the furniture binders that provide specifications, pricing, floor plans and three recommended bids from the GSA schedule. Note: The cost of furniture, furnishings and equipment should not be included in the pricing schedule of the proposal.

18. See Section C.3.C.13 - Off-Center Training and Advanced Career Training are identified as follows:

Has the Government identified and/or selected a provider for Off-Center Training and/or Advanced Career Training?

Response: The Government has identified, but not selected, potential providers near the Center. It remains for the Offeror to identify and propose which providers it would use.

19. Page 22, This is a cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract.

Other Job Corps center contracts are a cost plus incentive fee contract. Does the Government intend to make this a cost plus fixed fee contract? Why is the contract not considered for an incentive fee at the point the center is OMS accountable?

Response: See Section G.3, Fees of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

1. Page 22, Period of Performance

What is the purpose of a transition period for the month of July 1, 2015?

Response: See Section F.3, Period of Performance of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

2. Page 26, G.3.1, Fees permitted under the contract. The contractor shall be permitted to propose and bill a fixed fee of no greater than 3.6% of total estimated direct costs.

Considering that other Job Corps contracts include an incentive fee and that the average fee is 4.8%, what is the basis for capping the fixed fee and 3.6%. During a start-up the operator assumes liability for monitoring construction completion and liability for purchasing furniture and equipment that per this paragraph is excluded in the base. It also appears that the government is changing the invoice limits to one per month rather than the current practice of invoicing semi-monthly. This is a new additional cost (cost of money) to the contractor which is paid from the fixed fee, which is being capped at a lower level. Considering the additional effort necessary to open a new center to include hiring and training 100% of the staff and establishing relationship in a community unfamiliar with the Job Corps program, setting a maximum fee of 3.6% is arbitrary and unreasonable.

If the center is expected to be OMS accountable beginning in year 3, why is incentive fee not applicable at that point in time?

Response: See Section G.3, Fees of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

24. Page 26 G.4, Invoice Requirements What is the government definition of “actual cost incurred?” Does this phrase reference the accrual basis definition of cost incurred or the cash basis definition?

Response: Invoice requirements have been revised. See Section G.5, Invoice Requirements of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

25. Page 27-28, the contractor agrees to comply with the current requirements for eligible enrollments. The contractor agrees that it will refund the Government for costs associated with an ineligible enrollment, which may include the cost to the Government for each day a student is improperly enrolled in the program (counted in the reported on-board strength). The contractor agrees further that the refundable cost to the Government for each day a student was improperly present in the program (counted in the reported on-board strength), is 46% of the Student Per Day Cost. This “Per Day Cost” is then multiplied by the total number of days in which the ineligible student was in the program.

The percentage associated with refundable cost is identified as 46 percent. Given it is different than the current refundable cost in other Job Corps contracts, is the percent in this solicitation correct and is it fair? This percentage is not reasonable and is too high to represent the variable costs associated with enrollment on a per student basis.

Response: See Sections G.8 and G.9 of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

26. Page 38, H.27 KEY PERSONNEL

The personnel specified below or in attachment to this contract are considered to be essential to the work being performed hereunder. Prior to diverting any of the specified individuals to other programs, the Contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer reasonably in advance and shall submit justification (including proposed substitutions) in sufficient detail to permit evaluation of the impact on the program. No diversion shall be made by the Contractor without the written consent of the Contracting Officer; provided, that the Contracting Officer may ratify in writing such diversion and such ratification shall constitute the consent of the Contracting Officer required by this clause. (1) Center Director; (2) Deputy Center Director; (3) Administration Director/Manager; (4) Programs Director; (5) Training Managers (Academic and Career Technical Training); (6) Career Success Manager (Social Development Manager).

In the Job Corps Policy and Requirements Handbook (PRH), Chapter 5.2, R4, b, it is indicated that “….contractors shall request written approval or waivers from the Regional Director for….the appointment, continued assignment, or change in employment status of the Center Director, Project Director, or senior staff (i.e., all supervisory personnel who report directly to the Center Director)”. Given the PRH is incorporated into the contract by reference, which provision is applicable?

Response: See FAR Clause 52.215-8, Order of Precedence – Uniform Contract Format. Accordingly, contract clauses take precedence over the specification. Consequently, Clause H.27 takes precedence.

27. Page 98

In previous solicitations, the page limit for a Job Corps center with outreach and admissions and career transition services was 140 pages. Has the number of pages been reduced from 140 pages to 100 pages?

Response: Yes.

28. Page 98

Staff Resources

Pages

Given this solicitation is associated with a new Job Corps center, is transition (start-up) included in the 20 page allocation for the Staff Resources section?

Response: Yes.

29. Page 104, Past Performance Questionnaires: Offerors must complete Section A of Attachment J-8, Past Performance Confirmation Questionnaire, for each past performance reference identified above, which is not readily available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). The offeror must forward this questionnaire to the Government agency or company listed as a reference and request that the Past Performance evaluation be completed for Sections B-F of Attachment J-8.

Are existing Job Corps contractors requested to submit Attachment J-8 to the applicable Regional Offices of Job Corps for completion and submissions given they should be available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS)? Is this correct?

Response: If a past performance evaluation is not in PPRIS a past performance questionnaire must be forwarded to the Government agency or company listed as a reference.

30. Page 114-115, Price

Please note that part of the analysis of the offeror’s business management proposal will include an analysis of the offeror’s subcontracting plan. The subcontracting plan will be reviewed in accordance with the following:

(i) To what extent does the plan fully address all aspects of FAR 52.219-9?

(ii) How effective is the proposal in offering concrete, feasible, proven strategies and methods to ensure the achievement of small business goals in each category?

(iii) To what extent does the offeror plan to subcontract major program components? (The Office of Job Corps seeks to encourage subcontracting major portions of Center operations. Therefore, offerors proposing to subcontract key program components may be eligible for maximum credit, i.e. major components include personnel to deliver Social Skills, Academic Education, Career Technical Training, Administration; minor components - OA&CTS, Health Services).

Can the Government provide clarification as to the meaning of “……may be eligible for maximum credit, i.e. major components include personnel to deliver Social Skills, Academic Education, Career Technical Training, Administration; minor components - OA&CTS, Health Services).”

Response: An Offeror’s subcontracting plan will be evaluated, in part, on the extent to which it subcontracts major portions of Center operations.

31. Section L.6.H, page 98 – The page limitation for proposals with Admissions and Career Transition Services components, in addition to the Technical Approach, has in the past been 140. Please clarify the 100-page limitation noted in the table on this page.

Response: A: The page limit has been changed from prior RFPs with a higher page limit. The 100 page limit is the new maximum level for the Technical Approach to include Outreach and Admissions and Career Transition Services.

32. Section L.6.I.2.c.ii, page 102 – The description of Position Descriptions states, “at a minimum, include position descriptions for staff who will carry out the following or substantially similar functions within your organizational structure:” but there is nothing that follows the colon. Please clarify.

Response: The language following the colon should read “Key Personnel, as clarified in I.2.c.1-6 above”.

33. Section L.6.I.2.b.iii, page 103 – Because this is a new center, is the transition/phase-out plan applicable? If not, please provide information on what should be included in a start-up plan. Will the government consider increasing the page limitation for the Staff Resources section if a start-up plan is required?

Response: Both, the transition-in (start-up) and phase-out plans apply. The page limit for Staff resources remains at 20 pages.

34. Page 111, Section L.8, The Requests for Clarification deadline is April 23, 2014. The answers and necessary information must be provided in a timely manner to allow contractors sufficient time to incorporate data and/or make necessary revisions. Waiting to release an amendment after the deadline will delay contractors’ processes. Please consider issuing initial answers prior to April 23, 2014.

Response: The RFP for the Operation of New Hampshire Job Corps Center is extended from an expiration date of June 13, 2014 to a new date of June 30, 2014 by 12 pm local time. See Amendment 0006.

35. Page 24, Section G.2, The BMP section does not require the G&A table from Section G. How will this information be populated at the time of award? Neither the Attachment J-1 nor the Business Management Proposal section requires this information. Please clarify.

Response: See Attachment J-1 of the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

36. Page 26, Section G.3.1, The RFP states “fixed fee of no greater than 3.6% of total estimated direct costs.” Please confirm that the fee calculation is on total direct and indirect costs.

Response: Yes. The fee calculation is on total direct and indirect costs. However, this section has been revised. See Section G.3, Fees of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

37. Page 27 & 58, Section G.6 & Att. J-1, Please confirm the Student Per Year Cost chart is based on Total Estimated Costs for center operations only; OA & CTS cost amounts should be excluded.

Response: Yes. OA and CTS cost amounts should be excluded from the Student Per Year Cost calculation.

38. Page 28, Section G, Please clarify how option years will be exercised.

a. Will the option years be awarded at the proposed amounts? In the past the proposed option year amounts have been used as a reference only. Option years were awarded at the level (inflation increase) available in the program year budget.

Response: Option year amounts will be awarded at the level agreed to in the contract.

b. As in the past, will contractors be allowed to request a change in option price if the contractor has reason to believe the total cost to the Government shall exceed the estimated cost as stated in the option year proposal?

Response: Yes. If the contractor has reason to believe that total cost to the Government shall exceed the estimated cost as stated in the option, the contractor shall notify the Contracting Officer in accordance with 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds.

c. What factors will be considered in awarding option years? Will the operator’s performance be considered in granting option years? Any other factors?

Response: Yes, performance will be considered in addition to other considerations cited in the FAR, RFP and PRH.

39. Page 29, Section H, The RFP does not include the Executive Order – Minimum Wage for Contractors, which takes effect on January 1, 2015. Based on the start date of February 1, 2015, the Executive Order seems relevant to this contract. Please clarify/correct.

Response: To date, the Department of Labor has not revised Wage Determination (WD) based on Executive Order – Minimum Wage for Contractors. Revised WD will be incorporated into the solicitation/contract in accordance with FAR 22.1007.

40. Page 30, Section H.6.B, Please clarify the appropriate Davis-Bacon wage determination to incorporate into subcontracts. The RFP states: “Contracts shall also ensure that they are incorporating the prevailing Davis Bacon Wage Determination as of the day that the subcontract is awarded.” Does this mean to incorporate the current WD that is effective in the contract? Based on the FAR and the Wage Determination Online.gov website, the contracting officer should incorporate a new WD with each option year and only WD’s incorporated by the contracting officer are applicable to a contract.

Response: Yes. Applicable Wage Determinations will be incorporated into the contract with each Option Year exercise as required by FAR 22.1007.

41. Page 30, Section H.6.B, Please clarify if Davis-Bacon applies only to subcontracts awarded by contractors.

Response: Yes.

42. Page 30, Section H.7, SCA – Please confirm that employees on the OA/CTS component of the contract are also exempt from the application of SCA wages.

Response: Employees of the prime contractor on the OA/CTS component of the contract are exempt from the application of SCA wages. SCA Wage Determinations are applicable to subcontract employees.

43. Page 41, Section I.1, A June 2011 version of FAR 52.216-8 is available. The RFP references the clause with a date of March 1997. Please clarify/correct.

Response: FAR 52.216-8, Fixed Fee is no longer applicable to this solicitation.

44. Page 55, Attachment J-1, The Attachment J-1 schedule is not marked for center, OA or CTS. Please confirm that offerors should complete this form three times for each operations CLIN – Center Operations, OA & CTS and that all three reports should be presented in the same BMP section.

Response: Yes.

45. Page 51, Attachment J-13, National Staff Compensation Report –

a. The report references a contract start date of 12/01/14. Please clarify/correct.

b. The Pay Group 1 references a Minimum salary level of $19,779. This report does not seem to incorporate the Federal Contract Minimum wage of $10.10/hour, which becomes effective January 1, 2015. The new required hourly wage would result in a minimum salary of at least $21,008/year. Please clarify/revise.

Response: a. Consistent with Amendment #4 and the revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1 the contract start-up date is planned to be 12/1/2014. B. With the award scheduled to start on December 1, 2014, the rates in the table apply. The President’s Executive Order – Minimum Wage for Contractors, released February 12, 2014 has an effective date of 1/1/2015, as you have indicated. Any revision scheduled to occur after that date will cause adjustments when appropriate.

46. Page, 52, Attachment J-17, Page Davis-Bacon Wage Determinations –

a. According to the wdol.gov website, the General Decision Number NH20130012, dated 01/17/14 (according to the RFP) was actually dated 12/13/13, but has been superseded by NH140012, dated 01/17/14. Please clarify/correct.

b. The wage determinations cited are for Building and Residential construction work. Please provide additional wage determinations for Heavy and Highway construction work.

Response: See J-17, Davis Bacon Wage Determinations revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

47. Page 61, Attachment J-3, Will the Financial Display by Year (ETA 2110 format) be modified to accommodate the start-up and build-up periods?

Response: No, the start-up and build-up are to be reflected in the first base year columns.

48. Page 77, Attachment J-5, The CTST chart references a Resort Landscaping and Facilities Management Composite CTT program. Please clarify/correct as the CTT listing on page 12 does not include this same trade, but instead a program titled Facilities Management.

Response: The CTT listings on page 14 and Attachment J-5 are corrected to read Facilities Maintenance rather than Facilities Management.

49. Page 87, Attachment K-1, A January 2014 version of FAR 52.204-8 is available with updated amounts and references to SAM.gov. Please clarify/correct.

Response: See Section K of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

50. Page 105, Section L.6.I.4.a, Accounting System Certification - Attachment J-3 included in the RFP is not an Accounting System Certification. Can this requirement be revised to require only a letter from an accounting firm that certifies that the contractor’s cost accounting system and controls are adequate for cost reimbursable-type contracts? Please clarify/correct.

Response: Please see L.6.I.4.a.5 of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

51. Page 106, Section L.6.I.4.d, Requiring narrative detail for all contract years will result in a very large BMP. As in the past, would the government consider accepting narrative detail for the first year (start-up & build-up) and the second year and then mark-up descriptions for the option years.

Response: In order to reduce the size of the BMP, it will be sufficient to submit narrative detail for the first year (start-up & build-up) and the second year and then mark-up descriptions for the option years.

52. Page 106, Section L.6.I.4.d., Section B references OA and CTS as separate CLIN’s of the proposed contract. However, Section L.6.I.4.d. page 106 is titled Narrative Cost Detail – Center, leading to the assumption there is no requirement for any cost detail write up for these separate and distinct contract CLIN’s. Please clarify if there is a requirement for this detail and if there is, what is required and where should it be placed in the Business Management Proposal volume.

Response: There is a requirement for cost detail write ups for the Center, OA and CTS. OA and CTS write ups should follow the center cost write ups in the BMP. Cost write ups for OA/CTS should follow the instructions specified in L.6.I.4.d, Narrative Cost Detail – Center.

53. Page 107, Section L.6.I.4.f, Transition/Phase-Out Costs -

a. The Transition/Phase-Out Costs section describes a transition of an incumbent’s contract, which does not pertain to this procurement. Please clarify/correct.

b. Please provide instructions for the Transition Out Period that is referenced in Section B as occurring at the end of the five-year contract.

c. If the Transition Out is a projection for 5-6 years in the future, will contractors be allowed to update the estimates at the time of an actual transition out?

Response: This section has been revised. See Section L.6.I.4.f, Transition Costs of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

54. Page 112, Section M.2, The priority order is presented for the Technical and Staff Resources sections. Please provide the priority order for Price.

Response: There is no priority order for Price elements. See Section M.2 for order of importance of evaluation factors.

55. Page 114, Section M.3.5, How will the cost be evaluated (base period cost, 5-year, with extension period, etc.)? How will the Transition In and Transition Out proposals be evaluated?

Response: See Sections M.3.5, Price and M.5, Evaluation of Options. Transition Out costs will not be part of the Offeror’s evaluated costs (See revised L.6.I.4.f of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1).

56. Pages 27-28, Section G.7 and G.8 as follows:

1. G.7 Liquidated Damages for Separating Students/Issuing Leaves –

Please provide the rationale and formula for the increase from 15% Student Per Day Cost to 46% Student Per Day Cost.

Response: See Sections G8 & G9 of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

2. G.7 Liquidated Damages for Separating Students/Issuing Leaves –

PRH CN 13-07 issued on March 24, 2014 is in conflict with the G.7clause for these liquidated damages. Please explain the discrepancy and if the PRH takes precedence over the RFP or vice versa.

Response: See Sections G8 of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

G.8 Liquidated Damages for Ineligible Enrollments – Please provide the rationale and formula for the 46% Student Per Day Cost as this clause was not included in previous RFPs.

Response: See above.

3. G.8 Liquidated Damages for Ineligible Enrollments – Is this clause applicable to OA contractors or Center operators that have contractual responsibility for OA or both?

Response: See above.

57. Will the entire facility be completed and turned over for operation on 02/01/15 or should the build-up plan include opening and operating buildings after 02/01/15 as they are completed?

Response: The Center is scheduled to begin Start-up 12/1/2014 (rather than 2/1/2015) with the Build-up scheduled to begin June 1, 2015, consistent with Modification #4 and Section F of revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

58. Will DOL announce a webinar or other pre-proposal communication to review and present the RFP and other needed information?

Response: There is no planned webinar or other pre-proposal conference scheduled for this procurement.

59. The RFP states this will be a Cost plus Fixed Fee (CPFF). Please clarify if this contract will also have an incentive fee component.

Response: See revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

60. The RFP states, “The contract period of performance is for a base period of two years with three, one-year option periods. The Contractor shall operate the New Hampshire Job Corps Center during the period of 02/01/2015 – 1/31/2020 (provided all option years are exercised), and if appropriate, shall perform necessary functions related to a transition period for assuming responsibility for the operation of the center for the month of July 1, 2015.” Should the planned transition period instead be stated as January 1, 2015?

Response: See revised Section F.3, Period of Performance revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1.

61. During the transition and start up process, what procurement activity will the contractor be responsible for? Will DOL purchase all the equipment, furniture and other capital items for the center or will the contractor be responsible for these procurements after the contract award?

Response: After contract award, the contractor is responsible for procuring these items.

62. The RFP does not indicate a section for identifying OA/CTS related costs. Please clarify.

Response: See number 52 above.

63. Will a list of GSA vehicles that will be assigned to the Center be provided?

Response: No, please see prior response regarding GSA vehicles.

64. Please clarify if the BMP will be required to be submitted on both EXCEL 2003 and PDF Formats?

Response: All parts of the proposal shall be submitted both in hard copy as described in Section L and on electronic media (compact disc (CD), in PDF format). When submitting attachments J.1 and J.3 on CD, offerors shall use EXCEL 2007 or earlier version.

65. Changes from the Model RFP (previously submitted-not changed)

Page 7, Section C.1.C, The language about not exceeding an average 103% during each year refers to the time period as the Program Year.

a. “Program Year” must be changed to “Contract Year” since the contract costs are tracked by contract year, not program year. Any disallowed costs related to exceeding the 103% average would have to be identified by contract year.

b. The average OBS tracking should be based on CYTD stats, not “at any point during” the year. Centers have to surge at times beyond the 103% in order to maintain a CYTD average at the contracted level.

c. The disallowance of costs for exceeding 103% of OBS seems punitive. Is this necessary? How will the disallowed costs be determined/calculated?

Response: The reference to Program Year remains. The referenced language is consistent with JOB CORPS PROGRAM INSTRUCTION NO. 13-13.

66. Page 26, G.3.1, The 3.6% fixed fee appears to be for all five years. No incentive fee is available. In the past for new centers, contractors were allowed 4.8% Fixed Fee for the two base years, and then the standard fixed and incentive fees applied for the option years.

Response: See above.

67. Page 55, Att. J-1. Forms have been revised to remove the Incentive Fee lines for this procurement that includes only fixed fees.

Response: See Attachment J-1 revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

68. Page 58, Att. JK-1, The extension period allows only a 3.6% fixed fee.

Response: See above.

69. Where should the G Schedules be placed within the proposal submission?

Response: See Section L.6.4.a. revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1

70. Where should the ‘Option to Extend Services” form be placed in the submission?

Response: See Section L.6.4.a. revised RFP DOL141RP20756.r1