DOL-ETA-16-R-00024_Amendment_6_Q_and_A_5_4_16.pdf

Shreveport JCC/OA/CTS DOL-ETA-16-R-00024 Amendment 6

Questions and Answers

1 Reference

Comment

Question While RFP Section M.1 describes the relative importance of price and the various non-price factors, it merely lists Technical Approach subfactors without describing their relative importance. Are the Technical Approach subfactors all equally important? If not, please describe the importance of each Technical Approach subfactor relative to the others.

Government Response Yes

2 Reference

Comment

Question In response to Amendment No. 4 Question 23 (asking, “Does an offeror provide twenty pages of past performance information if past performance information is posted in the past performance information retrieval system (PPIRS-RC)?”), DOL states, “The information in PPIRS-RC is accessible by the Government provided there is past performance information for an offeror being evaluated.” Does this mean that the Government will access the information available on PPIRS for each offeror being evaluated so that offerors do not need to include information they know is available on PPIRS?

If not, please explain.

Government Response Yes

3 Reference

Comment

Question In response to Amendment No. 4 Question 24 (asking in part, “Does the Government expect the oral presentation to be limited solely to information printed on the slides as well as printed in the written narrative?”), DOL states, “Yes, the Oral Presentation must cover only information on the Presentation Slides and Written Narrative.” Does this mean that offerors are required to merely read the content of their slides during the oral presentation or may an offeror’s oral presentation instead go beyond the text set forth on its slides to provide additional commentary on that information?

Government Response

The oral presentation may go beyond the information provided on the slides.

4 Reference

Comment

Question In response to Amendment No. 4 Question 24 (asking in part, “Please clarify how the written proposal can synopsize the oral presentation if the written proposal must be submitted prior to the oral presentation?”), DOL states, ‘The Presentation Slides and Written Narrative must be included with the complete proposal which should be submitted on or before the closing date of the RFP.” Given this requirement, how can an offeror’s written materials serve as a distillation of any portions of its oral presentation that respond to Government questions with information that goes beyond that set forth in its presentation slides?

Government Response

The written narrative is required 14 days after completion of the oral presentation. See revised Section L.6.

5 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4 Question 26 (asking in part, “How does the Government reconcile perceived conflicts if the written documents are not evaluated? How will the Government determine if there is a “conflict” between the written proposal and the oral presentation?”), DOL states, “The written documents will be reviewed for consistency with the oral presentations.” Given this, if it is necessary for an offeror to provide information that goes beyond that set forth in its presentation slides in order to adequately respond to a Government question (i.e. to clarify or correct a point made during the oral presentation or a resulting misunderstanding):

Question a. Will such additional information be considered in conflict with – and trumped by -- the written materials?

b. Will such additional information be considered in the evaluation of the offeror?

c. To what extent will that additional information become part of the resulting contract?

d. Why would such additional information not be considered discussions if it is necessary to the determination of the proposal’s acceptability and results in the modification or supplementation of the information contained in the slides and previous portions of the oral presentation?

Government Response

a. No

b. Yes

c. See revised language in Section L.6

d. Exchanges with offerors will be limited to clarifications as defined by FAR 15.306.

6 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4 Question 26, DOL also states, “Oral presentations will be documented by the Government.”

Question a. Will audiotape be used to document the offerors’ oral presentations?

b. Will videotape be used to document the offerors’ oral presentations?

c. Will evaluator notes be used to document the offerors’ oral presentations?

Government Response

a. Yes

b. No

c. No

7 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 29, DOL states in part, “On the day of the Oral Presentation, the Government and the offeror will set ground rules for the presentation and the breaks. Space may be limited to three presenters in the Conference Room. The size of the Conference Room will determine how many presenters may be in the room.” DOL provided similar statements in response to Amendment No. 4, Questions 36 and 45.

Question a. Does this mean that different ground rules will be used for each offeror depending on the day of its oral presentation instead of using a single set of ground rules for all offerors?

b. Does this mean that a different conference room will be used for each offeror depending on the day of its oral presentation instead of using a single conference room for all offerors?

c. Does this mean that a different number of presenters will be allowed for each offeror depending on the day of its oral presentation (and the size of the conference room used) instead of using the same number of presenters for all offerors?

d. Will the Government assign any personnel to evaluate an offeror’s proposal who have not been present for such offeror’s oral presentation?

e. Will the Government personnel who are present in the room during an offeror’s oral presentations depend on the day of its oral presentation or will the same Government personnel be in the room during all offeror’s oral presentations?

f. If the same Government personnel will be in the room, please identify those Government personnel and state whether they are the only personnel involved in evaluating offerors’ oral presentations.

g. To what extent will other Government personnel be given access to the Government’s recording of offerors’ oral presentations for the purpose of evaluating them?

Government Response

a. No

b. The Government will use whatever conference room is available the day oral presentations are scheduled. However, the Government will make every effort to use the same conference room for all oral presentations.

c. There is no limit on the number of presenters an offeror may use.

The number of presenters allowed in the conference room will be the same for all offerors.

d. Oral presentations will be evaluated by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) which will be established prior the first oral presentation.

e. See above. However, the Government may invite other Government personnel as observers at it’s discretion.

f. The TEP will evaluate oral presentations.

g. The Government’s audio recording is considered source selection information and will be protected accordingly.

8 Reference

Comment Part 6 of the Proposal Section Content, Technical Approach portion of the RFP Section L.6 provides in part, “During the presentation, the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) members will not interrupt the offeror to ask questions (except to request the repetition of inaudible words or statements or the explanation of terms that are unknown to them) or otherwise engage the offeror in any dialogue. A question and answer period will follow and may cover the entire proposal.”

Question a. Does this mean that the question and answer period will take place at the end of the entire oral presentation or will a question and answer period take place after each portion of the oral presentation so that the Government participants will be able to ask questions along the way instead of saving them for the end?

b. If the question and answer period will take place at the end of the entire oral presentation, will offerors be allowed to substitute presenters as questions are posed in order to ensure that the appropriate personnel are in the conference room to address the Government’s questions?

Government Response

a. There will be two question and answer sessions. One after the Technical Approach presentation and one after the Staffing Resources and Relevant Experience presentations.

b. See answer above. The Government will make allowance for the appropriate personnel to be in the room to answer questions.

9 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 31 (asking in part “Given video and/or audio tape recording will not be provided, may Offerors tape their own presentation?”), DOL states, “No. Offerors may not record their own presentation.” Given that, as noted above, DOL’s response to Amendment No. 4, Question 25 makes clear that the slides and oral presentation are the only portions of an offeror’s proposal that will be evaluated:

Question a. What is the reasoning behind not allowing an offeror to have a copy of any recording of their oral presentation made by the Government (analogous to its file copy of the other portions of its submitted proposal)?

b. What is the reasoning behind not allowing an offeror to make its own recording of its oral presentation for its own records (analogous to its file copy of the other portions of its submitted proposal)?

Government Response

a. See FAR 15.102(e). The Government is not required to provide a copy of recorded oral presentation to the offeror.

b. Offerors may record their presentations.

10 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 33 (asking in part, “please clarify how the current Section M [criteria] can be used to evaluate this new form of proposal), DOL states in part, “The Oral Presentation will be evaluated instead of a Written Proposal.” In addition, Part 6 of the Proposal Section Content, Technical Approach portion of the RFP Section L.6 provides in part, “If there are any conflicts between the oral presentation and the written proposal, the written proposal will take precedence. The written proposal will be incorporated by reference into the contract upon contract award.” Given this:

Question a. How will the Government ensure that the awarded contract is consistent with the evaluated proposal?

b. If it cannot or will not ensure such consistency, please identify the legal authority under which the Government can award a contract that is different from the proposal that it determined to offer the best value to the Government.

Government Response

a. The written material will be reviewed for consistency with the oral presentation.

b. If there are inconsistencies and discussions are necessary, the offerors will be informed of these inconsistencies during discussions. See FAR 15.306.

11 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 38, DOL confirms that “The Technical Approach (presentation slides and written narrative), Staff Resources (presentation slides and written narrative), and Relevant Experience (presentation slides) sections shall be bound separately as well as the Past Performance and the Business Management Proposal section shall be separately bound.” In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 39 (asking, “Are the Presentation slides to be bound with the Written sections and an additional set of the Presentation Slides bound separately?”) however, DOL states, “Four hard copies of each Oral Presentation for the Technical Approach, Relevant Experience and Staff Resources (and one CD with electronic proposal) must be submitted on or before the closing date of the RFP. In addition, in response to Amendment No. 4, Question 41 (asking, “Proposal Format box on Page 4 states Pages consecutively numbered within each section. Does the page number continue from the Written to the Presentation Slides or vice versa”) however, DOL states in part, “The written narrative for the Technical Approach and the Staff Resources are separate documents from the Presentation Slides. Page numbers should be numbered consecutively.” These three answers appear to be inconsistent. Please state whether the following statements accurately describe the requirements relating to the proposal format and, if not, explain the requirement more clearly:

Question a. The Technical Approach (presentation slides and written narrative), Staff Resources (presentation slides and written narrative), and Relevant Experience (presentation slides) sections shall be bound together in a single volume in the following order:

i. Presentation Slides for Technical Approach;

ii. Written Narrative for Technical Approach;

iii. Presentation Slides for Staff Resources;

iv. Written Narrative for Staff Resources; and

v. Presentation Slides for Relevant Experience.

b. The Past Performance and the Business Management Proposal section shall be bound together in a single volume.

c. The pages within each Section (Technical Approach Presentation Slides and Written Narrative; Staff Resources Presentation Slides and Written Narrative; Relevant Experience; Past Performance; and Business Management Proposal) shall be numbered consecutively, with page numbering restarting at page 1 for each Section.

d. Four hard copies of the bound volumes described above, plus one CD with the electronic version of those bound volumes, must be submitted on or before the closing date of the RFP.

e. No separate set of Presentation Slides need be submitted.

Response

a. Yes, but written narrative is no longer due at the time of closing.

See revised Section L.

b. Yes

c. Yes

d. Yes

e. Yes

12 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 43, DOL states, “The questions in the RFP [Section L] are the sequential order which the Technical Evaluation Panel will be evaluating each offeror’s Technical Approach and Staff Resources.”

Question a. Are they also listed in descending order of importance, (a) through (g)?

b. Are the specific questions within sections (a) through (g) listed in descending order of importance?

Government Response

a. No. Questions for each factor are of equal importance.

b. No. Specific questions are of equal importance.

13 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 46, given that the three criteria listed for evaluation of the Oral Presentation is the same criteria used when the solicitation permitted substantially more pages for written narrative, does the Government consider this to be a realistic and reasonable number of slides and written proposal narrative pages that provides offerors with an adequate opportunity to respond to this portion of the RFP requirements and has the Government taken into account the new page and slide limits in connection with the ability of offerors to adequately address all of the elements contained in the criteria?

Question

Government a. Yes.

14 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 51 (asking in part “how the agency expects offerors to cover the myriad of required topics in 25 slides”), DOL states, “The offeror must decide and provide detailed documentation of how they will operate the Job Corps Center.” Please explain why the Government believes that 25 slides is a realistic and reasonable number of slides that provides offerors an adequate opportunity to respond to this portion of the RFP requirements.

Question

Government Response

See revised Section L6.

15 Reference

Comment In response to Amendment No. 4, Question 52 (asking in part, “how the agency expects offerors to cover the required elements within the 10 slide limitation”), DOL states, “The offeror must decide and describe the offeror’s experience and the results obtained for the population served through the Offeror’s experience. It is the offeror’s responsibility to structure their proposal based on the page limitations outlined in the RFP.” Please explain why the Government believes that 10 slides is a realistic and reasonable number of slides that provides offerors an adequate opportunity to respond to this portion of the RFP requirements.

Question

Response

See above.

16 Reference

Comment The original solicitation, L.6, Instructions for Proposal Submission, H.

Proposal Format, A. Proposal Section Content, 1. Technical Approach, (c) states:

“Offeror shall describe the counseling, placement, and support activities that will be offered at the center, including a description of the strategies and procedures the entity will use to prepare students for placement [include the following if CTS is included in “and to place graduates and former enrollees”] into unsubsidized employment or education leading to a recognized postsecondary credential upon completion of the program.”

In Amendment 2, (c) at the bottom of page 5 states:

“Offeror shall describe the counseling, placement, and support activities that will be offered at the center, including a description of the strategies and procedures the entity will use to prepare students for placement into unsubsidized employment or education leading to a recognized postsecondary credential upon completion of the program.”

Question Did the Government intend to delete “include the following if CTS is included in ‘and to place graduates and former enrollees’”? At present there is an inconsistency in that CTS is currently still in the Statement of Work. If the Government did not mean to delete this part of the sentence, and if this language is to be re-inserted in Section L in a subsequent amendment, will the government also add CTS to the evaluation criteria in Section M since it is not in that section at this time?

Government Response See revised Section L

17 Reference Page 5

Comment It states: “Please be advised that the Technical Approach and Staff Resources sections of the offeror’s proposal shall be written so that strategies and methods are in substantial compliance with the PRH and the Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act of 2014. To the extent that an offeror’s Technical Approach deviates from a WIOA or a PRH requirement, the Offeror shall explain how its approach meets the essential aspects of the PRH as well as any potential benefits or disadvantages from the Offeror’s deviation.”

Question Please clarify: Are provisions of the WIOA as well as the PRH optional?

May an offeror deviate from all such requirements if it can state benefits regarding such departure? To the extent that the requirements of the PRH and WIOA differ, which controls?

Government Response

No, offerors must fully comply with WIOA but can substantially comply with the PRH. Also, WIOA supersedes the PRH. The PRH is the primary policy document for Job Corps. The PRH establishes a framework for the operation of the Job Corps system by describing the purpose, requirements, and quality indicators for each program component. Under WIOA the Contracting Officer has the option of not exercising any contract of Job Corps Center operations if the performance data for reveal that fail to achieve 50%or higher of expected level of performance with respect to each of the primary indicators of performance for eligible youth.

Substantial compliance requires the offeror’s approach to accomplish the same purpose and effect of the stated PRH requirement but provides the offeror with flexibility to deviate from the stated PRH requirement. The Offeror bears the burden of demonstrating in its proposal, how the alternative method accomplishes the same purpose and effect as the stated PRH requirement.

This Amendment corrects the RFP to direct that offerors shall be in full compliance with WIOA.

18 Reference Page 5

Comment

Question The Job Corps Policy and Requirements Handbook (PRH) is incorporated into the scope of work of the solicitation; it is referenced throughout the document. The PRH is currently under revision and is expected to change program delivery in a significant manner. Given Government evaluators, as well as some potential Offerors, are familiar with the anticipated changes, does the Government expect Offerors to include anticipated changes in developing a response to questions?

How does the Government intend to address the Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) issues that are present by reason of the work by certain potential offerors on such changes?

The Government will mitigate any conflict of interest that may arise in connection with this RFP in accordance with FAR 9.5.

How does the Government intend to evaluate offers based on a PRH that is changing and that conflict, as stated earlier, with WIOA?

This question is not clear. The Government cannot address conflicts between the PRH and WIOA unless the conflicts are specifically identified.