Copy_of_Amendment_5_Responses_to_Questions_16R0005.pdf

RFP Section/Reference Comment/Question Government Response Section 6.1 INTERPRETING SERVICES RFP states, “The Contractor shall provide sign language interpreting services Monday through

Friday between the hours of 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM EST in all time zones in Region I and Region II.”

Inclusion of EST in this statement implies service in other time zones would not align with usual work days. Will the Government remove EST from the statement so interpreting services are provided 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM local time in all time zones?

The EST has been removed

Section 6.3 SCHEDULING RFP states, “The Contractor shall provide scheduling services Monday through Friday from 8:00am to 5:00pm.” The RFP requires services for all of the United States spanning Guam (time zone UTC+10) to Maine (UTC – 5). Without a time zone specification this requirement implies 24 hours/day of scheduling services. Will the Government add EST to this statement to limit scheduling services to 9 hours per day?

See the amended RFP dated 7/15/2016 Section 6.3.

Section 6.3 SCHEDULING RFP states, “The Contractor shall have in place and maintain a procedure for processing local, regional, interpreting requests; and shall be prepared to accept and fulfill requests starting on the effective date of the contract”. Section 6.0 KICK-OFF MEETING specifies a Kick-off meeting “Within five (5) business days after award”. Section 32.3 NON-COST/PRICE EVALUATION CRITERIA, Factor 1: Technical Approach, requires the Contractor to “Demonstrate the ability to provide services in all location within five business days of award of the contract”. Award generally refers to the day the contractor is notified of the award. Will the day of award be the effective date of the contract? If not, when will the effective date of the contract be with respect to award or with respect to the Kick-off meeting?

It is possible that the award date could also be the effective date. The selectee should be prepared to meet the solicitation requirements upon award.

Section 7.0 SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER RFP states, “The Contractor shall provide sign language Sign Language Interpreters that are considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and the state requirements, if applicable, where services are delivered.” Is the meaning of “performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract” a reference to Attachment J-5 Skills Assessment Standard? If not, what is the meaning of “performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract”?

Yes, this is in reference to Attachment J-5, Skills Assessment Standard.

See amended RFP Section 7.0. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

Section 7.0 SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER RFP states, “The Contractor shall provide sign language Sign Language Interpreters that are considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and the state requirements, if applicable, where services are delivered.” Is it the Government’s intent that each interpreter be considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and considered qualified by meeting the state requirements?

The interpreter must meet the state requirements. The interpreter must also meet the 60% score on the Skills Assessment. See RFP Section 7.0.

References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

Section 7.0 SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER RFP states, “The Contractor shall provide sign language Sign Language Interpreters that are considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and the state requirements, if applicable, where services are delivered.” Is it the Government’s intent that each interpreter be considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract or considered qualified by meeting the state requirements?

The interpreter must meet the state requirements. The interpreter must also meet the 60% score on the Skills Assessment. See RFP Section 7.0.

References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

Section 7.0 SIGN LANGUAGE INTERPRETER Is it the Government’s intent for the contractor to evaluate each interpreter whose resume is submitted using Attachment J-5 Skills Assessment Standard and provide that score in the resume? If not, how does the Government want the Contractor to validate that interpreters have a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract.

Yes, scores shall be included in the resume of Key Personnel. See requirements for non-key interpreters in the amended RFP Section 14.2.

Section 30.2 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS RFP states, “Your submission should be received by July 27, 2016 to Jacqueline Howard at the following e-mail address: Jacqueline.howard@dot.gov with a courtesy Copy to Robin.Gates@dot.gov.” Email messages with large attachments often have difficulty traversing mail servers and networks. To avoid such problems our intent is to post the proposal documents in Dropbox.com and send DOT the links to the documents with the understanding that DOT will use the links to download the documents using any common browser. Will the Government accept this delivery approach?

We have no problems receiving emails with attachments. Please submit your proposal as indicated in the solicitation.

Amendment 4 Pricing Chart Will DOT please confirm that the chart in amendment 4 only replaces the base year and all option years and notes remain as written in the revised RFP? Confirmed

32.3 NON-COST/PRICE EVALUATION CRITERIA,

Factor 3: Past Performance

Will DOT please confirm that all past performance questionnaires should be sent directly from the reference to Jacqueline.Howard@dot.gov with a courtesy copy to Robin.Gates@dot.gov? Confimed. Please Reference: "PPQ: DTOS5916R0005"

Questions and answers provided in Amendment 0002, Question 10 Please confirm that the 20 page limit only applies to the Technical Factor and Management

Approach Factor and not the Past Performance Factor, Personnel Factor, Cost Volume or any Cover letters, Appendices and Table of Contents.

20 pages applies to the Technical Volume of the proposal. All other sections have no page limitations. However, the Offeror is advised not to submit an unnecessary amount of information. Simply respond to the RFP requirements in a concise manner.

Questions and answers provided in Amendment 0002, Question 67 The RFP states “The Contractor shall provide sign language interpreters that are considered qualified by having a cumulative score of at least 60% on the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and the state requirements, if applicable, where services are delivered.” It is not clear what standards the performance based standards assessment is referring

to. If these metrics refer to the EIPA certification, this is only for the educational environment.

Further, the EIPA is scored as a pass or fail rather than percentages. We recommend accepting the RID certification as it is considered the gold standard and is recognized nationwide.

See attachment J-5 Skills Assessment. EIPA does not apply to this contract. See Section 7, Qualifications regarding RID certification.

Questions and answers provided in Amendment 0002, Question 67

For purposes of this contract, will DOT accept RID Ed:K-12 certification?

No. See amended RFP Section 7.0, Qualifications.

Pricing Chart In the pricing chart for the base year, there are no hours listed for CLIN 0004 or 0005. Based on the Option year CLINS 1004 and 1005 etc. was this intended to be 1000 for CLIN 0004 and 500 for CLIN

0005?

See the chart in Section 1 of the amended RFP.

CLIN 0005 CLIN 0005 is called "Additional Service Region II" but the Note for this CLIN says "Additional Services in Region I and II are last minute requests that are less than 5 business days". Which statement is correct for this CLIN? See the chart in Section 1 of the amended RFP.

mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov mailto:Robin.Gates@dot.gov

Base Period Chart In the base period chart there is a CLIN for cancellation, but this CLIN is not listed for the option years. Is this intentional? See the chart in Section 1 of the amended RFP.

Travel Expenses Is the government expecting the CLIN for travel to be filled in or just to remain the extended price the government has listed?

Offerors should use the number provided in the RFP for the travel

CLIN.

Business Proposal/Cost Response What is expected to be in the Cost Proposal besides the completed cost charts for all five options? Please refer to the solicitation requirements for preparing your proposal.

Page 4, Price Chart In the chart, are we to list the cancellations as an hourly rate? And if so how many hours do we use to calculate the extension? See the chart in Section 1 of the amended RFP.

1/ Q7 Can the Government please clarify what performance based standards assessment is referred to here?

See Attachment J-5. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

2/Q7 Will DOT be administering the performance based standards assessment on all interpreters under the contract? If not, who will administer the assessment?

See Section 7.0 of the amended RFP. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

3/Q7 This section refers to "...the performance based standards assessment as defined in this contract and the state requirements..." Can the Government point out where in the contract these standards are defined?

See Attachment J-5. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

4/Q7 Can the Government clarify how the level of 60% on the performance based standards assessment is determined?

See Atachment J-5. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

5/Q7 Can the Government identify what factors are included in the cumulative score for the performance based standards assessment?

See Attachment J-5. References to "Performance Based" have been deleted.

6/Q1

Boston MA, Farmington, NY, and Riverside, CA are areas listed as locations requiring services where the cost of interpreters is significantly higher than in most areas around the country. Will the government allow us to apply a differential to those rates so that we can offer our best rates for work in the rest of the country? Otherwise we would have to set all nationwide work at the rates that would be needed for these areas in order to eliminate significant risk.

See Section 5 of the revised RFP.

1-Jul

Can the Government clarify if the hours scheduled under CLIN 0002 are always prescheduled, all-day type assignments and the hours under CLIN 0004 are last minute and/or, typically shorter assignments? If not, can a clearer description be provided of the differences between the hours under each of these CLINs?

Yes, CLIN 0002 is prescheduled hours. CLIN 0004 is for additional interpreters in Region I (not last minute). For last minute, see CLIN 0005.

9/Q1

We note that region 1 includes areas that are well outside the DC Metro area and will likely incur significant travel costs to fill, including some areas of Virginia where Portal to Portal fees are often required. If vendors must wrap this into our hourly rates, it will result in a significant price increase on CLIN 0004 since we are not able to predict where most of the work will take place and must set the rate based on the area which will incur the most cost to fill. Will the Government allow for a separate CLIN to bill travel for work done under CLIN 0004 only when it is outside the immediate

DC Metro area so that vendors can offer the Government the best rates possible for the work local to the DC area?

No.

10/6.3.1

The solicitation requires interpreters to remain available to DOT when there is a billable cancellation.

The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) Code of Professional Conduct (CPC) requires that interpreters avoid conflicts of interest. The original assignment may not pose a conflict of interest and replacement work could cause such a conflict. Could the wording be changed to say,"...the Sign Language Interpreter must remain available to DOT for the entire billable portion of the cancellation unless the replacement work assigned would cause a violation of the requirements of the CPC."?

Redeployment of interpreters is the Lead Interpreter's Responsibility, see Section 6.3.1 of the RFP.

11/7.2

A requirement in the solicitation for the lead interpreter is NIC certification. There are many other RID/NAD certifications that are equally valid and not including them would greatly limit the options available to the vendor to find the best fit for the position. In fact, the more experienced personnel wil often have an older certification which they have had to maintain with continuing education. Will the Government change this requirement to state the interpreter must have NAD IV or V or RID NIC, CI, CT, TC, IC, or CSC?

There is no change to be made as all of the certifications you have listed are national certifications.

12/Q8

Most Federal Government agencies require once monthly reporting. The twice monthly reporting required in section 8 is cumbersome and adds overhead costs. Would the Government change this requirement to require reporting once a month?

No.

Sheet1