RFP_Number__ED-FSA-16-R-1234__RFP_Questions_and_Responses.pdf

Department of Education, Federal Student Aid (FSA)

Integrated Governance Support Services (IGSS)

Solicitation Number: EDFSA-16-R-1234

17 August 2016 1

RFP Number: ED-FSA-16-R-1234

RFP Questions and Responses

# RFP

Section Page # Question

1.

L.9.3

(Tab B)

M.3.4.2

Can the Government clarify the number of years required for an offeror’s experience to be considered recent – is it within the past 3 or 5 years?

Section L.9.3 Tab B Relevant Experience states “Note: Recent is defined as within the last three (3) years from the date of release of this RFP.”

Section M.3.4.2 states “The Government will evaluate the relevance of the

Contractor’s previous experience either as a prime Contractor or as a significant Sub-Contractor, in performing work on similarly scoped contract/orders awarded to them in the past five (5) years by

Governmental Entities (federal, state, or local) or by Non-Governmental

Entities.

Government Response: The number of years required for an

Offeror’s experience to be considered recent is within the past three (3) years.

2.

L.8.2

73-74

Section L.8.2 General Format Instructions – Basic IDIQ, TO 0001, and

TO 0002 states “Offerors shall furnish the proposal in separate volumes for the Basic IDIQ, TO: 0001, and TO: 0002 as follows: Volume I:

Technical/ Management Proposal; and Volume II: Contract, Small

Business Participation Cost/Price Proposal.”

Can the Government confirm offerors are to submit a single Volume I and

Volume II, which will contain the response for the Basic IDIQ, TO 0001, and TO 0002 requirements and not three separate Volume I’s and Volume

II’s for the Basic IDIQ, TO 0001, and TO 0002 (i.e., a Volume I and II for the IDIQ, a Volume I and II for TO 0001, and a Volume I and II for TO

0002)?

Government Response: The Offeror shall submit a single

Volume I and Volume II which contain clearly identified components of the Basic IDIQ, TO 0001, and TO 0002 as indicated within the RFP instructions.

3. L.5.1 72

Due to the scope of the RFP and time required to prepare a response, can

FSA extend the due date by two weeks.

Government Response: FSA will extend the RFP due date to

September 09, 2016.

4.

Attach ment_C

Is there an incumbent contractor providing the Enterprise Architecture

Program Support Services? If so please provide the vendor’s name.

17 August 2016 2

# RFP

Section Page # Question

__FSA

_IGSS_

TO__0

001_P

WS

Government Response: No, there is no incumbent providing the RFP services.

5.

ment_C

__FSA

_IGSS_

TO__0

001_P

WS

Can FSA provide access to the baseline Current State Architecture diagrams and artifacts?

Government Response:

The baseline current state architecture is maintained on an internal FSA Sharepoint site and cannot be made publicly available. The current state architecture as of August 6, 2014 in PDF format can be inspected by appointment through the

Contract Specialist: Elvis Taylor at: FSAEAT@ed.gov.

Appointments can be made until Thursday, September 01, 2016, 2:00 P.M.

6.

ment_

D__FS

A_IGS

S_IM_

TO_00

02_PW

S

Is there an incumbent contractor providing the Investment Management

Support Services? If so please provide the vendor’s name.

Government Response: No there is no incumbent providing

Investment Management Support Services.

7.

Is there a conflict of interest between this effort and Solicitation

EDENFS16R0004, Project Management Support Services?

Government Response: No, there is no Conflict of Interest with

Program/Project Management Support Services. Both are independent requirements.

8.

Are there labor category designations and descriptions for the key personnel?

Government Response: Yes, please review Attachment E supplement (REV 1) FSA IGSS Functional Labor Category

Descriptions.

9.

Could the Government provide the levels of effort and time to completion for both task orders?

Government Response: The purpose for requesting proposals for this solicitation requirement is to have Contractors submit pricing data for the contract with their proposal submission.

The Contractor will be responsible for providing the

Government the proposed dollar amount for this solicitation mailto:FSAEAT@ed.gov

17 August 2016 3 requirement.

10.

Based on the size and complexity of the proposal requirements, would the government consider extending the due date until 9/15/16?

Government Response: See response to question number 3.

11.

The staffing section of the proposal is listed 20 pgs for the approach but the states 20 page approach with 2 pages per resume. Are the resumes included in the 20 page limit for the Staffing Approach?

Government Response: No, the resumes are not included in the

20 page limit.

12.

Volume III, Tab A Past Performance does not state the number of references required. Tab B states 3-5 references. Tab A is based on

“favorable experience” while Tab B is “relevant work”. As these may be mutually exclusive, can the references be different? If not, how many references are required for Tab A? Are Past Performance Questionnaires required for all Tab A and Tab B references? As this is not clear and the

Q&A may not be posted until very close to the due date which will make it difficult to coordinate PPQ responses, we would ask for an extension of the due date to 9/15/16.

Government Response: In Volume III Tab A Past

Performance the Offeror shall provide at least three (3) but no more than five (5) different references. The Past Performance for Tab A should be the same as Tab B. The Offeror shall be responsible for ensuring that each of the customer references receives, completes and returns Attachment F, Past

Performance Questionnaire, to the Contracting Officer. The

Offeror shall complete the project title and contract reference number to match its proposal information before sending the form to its reference. See response to question number 3.

13.

Please confirm that a total of 7 resumes are required. Also, can you advise if “representative” resumes are acceptable?

Government Response: There is no limitation on resume submission numbers. The Government is not clear on the question of “representative.”

14.

Are hand deliveries of the hard copy/CD of the proposal acceptable or, is it mandatory the UPS, FedEx, etc. be utilized?

Government Response: Hand deliveries of the hard copy/CD of the proposal is acceptable. The POC is Elvis Taylor.

15.

Section J (List of Attachments) of the RFP states that Attachment B is a

QASP but, the actual document if the IGSS CMP. Is there a QASP or, should Section J be changed to reflect that Attachment B is actually the

IGSS CMP? If Attachment B should be QASP, can the government post the attachment and advise the status of the CMP?

17 August 2016 4

Page # Question

Government Response: Page 66, Section J, Attachment B should read: Integrated Governance Support Services

Contract Monitoring Plan (CMP). This has been corrected via the amendment 0003. There will be no additional release of a

QASP attachment.

16.

C.3.4

C.3.5

1). Section C.3.4 of the RFP Elaborates Security Architecture Planning. It states –

“The Contractor shall, at the discretion of the Contracting Officers (COs), provide services that include, but are not limited to:

1. Assist with developing, maintain, and enhancing Enterprise Security

Architecture Best Practices.

2. Assist with developing, maintain, and enhancing Enterprise Security

Architecture Concept of Operations”.

Q. Is the government intent to have a 3rd listed item of –

3. Assist with developing, maintain, and enhancing Personally

Identifiable Information (PII) assessment reports

Q. This statement above may have inadvertently got merged into subheading for “Section C.3.5”. Please confirm

Government Response:

Section C.3.4 should have a third item of “Assist with developing, maintain, and enhancing Personally Identifiable

Information (PII) assessment reports”. Section C.3.5 should be entitled “Integration Services.” This has been corrected via the amendment 0003. An amendment to the RFP Section C

Statement of Work incorporates these corrective actions.

17.

As part of Task Order 0001 -

Attachment_C__FSA_IGSS_TO__0001_PWS.doc, Government on page-

12 lists Key Personnel as follows –

• SME Level I

• System Architect Level I

• Business Analyst Level II

Q. Does government assumes that these are the ONLY personnel needed for Task Order 0001? or Does government does NOT anticipate any additional personnel in addition to these key roles for the activities within Task Order?

Government Response: At a minimum, the Government has indicated anticipated key personnel for the Task Order, but the purpose for requesting proposals for this solicitation requirement is to have Contractors submit pricing data for the contract with their proposal submission. The Contractor will be responsible for providing the Government the proposed dollar amount for this solicitation requirement.

17 August 2016 5

As part of Task Order 0002 -

Attachment_D__FSA_IGSS_IM_TO_0002_PWS.doc, Government on page-5 lists following Key Personnel –

• Project Control Specialist

• IT Strategic/Capital Planner

• Program Administration Specialist

Q. Does government assumes that these are the ONLY personnel needed for Task Order 0002? or Does government does NOT anticipate any additional personnel in addition to these key roles for the activities within Task Order

Government Response: See response to question number 17.

Section-M of the Solicitation, government clearly articulates the

Evaluation Factors and ratings for each factor. The respective ratings or rankings are very subjective, how will the government be able to objectively evaluate each of the vendor’s proposals? Is it possible for government to provide weightage for each of the evaluation factor?

Government Response: The Government will evaluate each

Offeror’s proposal in accordance with the evaluation criteria that has been provided in the RFP. The Government is using adjectival ratings, therefore, no weights will be provided.

Who is the incumbent and what is the current award or contract #?

Government Response: See response to question number 4 and

6.

Would the awarded vendor be conflicted out of rest of Loans segment IT support?

Government Response: The question is not clear on what is being asked.

What is the current value of the contract?

Government Response: The purpose for requesting proposals for this solicitation requirement is to have Contractors submit pricing data for the contract with their proposal submission.

The Contractor will be responsible for providing the

Government the proposed dollar amount for this solicitation requirement.

Would the awarded vendor be conflicted out of all of FSA’s IT support?

Government Response: At the present time, the Government is unaware of an existing conflict for the Awardee.

Would the awarded vendor conflicted out of upcoming PMO solicitation?

Government Response: See response to question number: 23.

Are the task orders (001 and 002) intended to be sample only or would they be awarded?

17 August 2016 6

Page # Question

Government Response: Task Order 0001 is intended to be awarded with the Basic IDIQ and Task Order 0002 is intended to be awarded, subject to availability of funds as indicated and highlighted in Section J, Attachment D.

Are the task orders 001 and 002 fixed price or T&M?

Government Response: Fixed price.

When does vendor require to have PPQ submitted directly? Is that Aug

31st – which is the due to for the proposal?

Government Response: The completed Questionnaire shall be submitted directly via email from the customer reference to the email box: FSAEAT@ed.gov as stated in Section L by the due date established for receipt of offers. See response to question number 3.

L.8.2

Can you please clarify proposal submission general instructions section

L.8.2 as they seem to be vague? Specifically

Government Response: Section L.8.2 is the General Format

Instructions - Basic IDIQ, TO: 0001, and TO: 0002, which provide details pertaining to the general format of proposal submission. Section L. 9 Format and Instructions for Proposal

Submission: Basic IDIQ, TO: 0001, and TO: 0002 detailed the specifics as to what is required for the RFP offer submission.

Please review the entire Section L for specific details related to

RFP instructions.

Do we need to include response to Task Order 0001 and 0002 as part of

IDIQ Volume 1 and Volume 2 (Technical approach, management approach and staffing approach, pricing) or do they need to be separate?

Meaning Task order 001 will have a separate volume 1 that consists of

Technical approach, management approach and staffing approach and

Volume 2 that consists of pricing or can they be combined with IDIQ level volumes?

Government Response: See response to question number 2.

In the pricing list for Task order 0001 and 0002, column ‘I’ indicated

‘Total’ but there are no formulae embedded. Is that the ‘Total hourly rate for all years combined’? Are you expecting vendor to sum hourly rates across all years and populate this column?

Government Response: No, there are no formulas embedded in the attachments. Yes, it is expected that all years be summed for all requested years and populated in column I.

L.5.1

(SOW) Pg 72

Please confirm whether hand-delivery to the 830 First Street NE address is an acceptable delivery method for the hard copy and CD.

Government Response: See response to question number 14.

L.8.2

(SOW)

Pg 73-

Is the Government requesting 1 technical volume covering the Basic

IDIQ, Task Order 1, and Task Order 2 or three technical volumes – one each for the Basic IDIQ, Task Order 1, and Task Order 2.

17 August 2016 7

Page # Question

Government Response: Government Response: See response to question number 2.

L.8.2

Pg 73-

Is the Government requesting 1 technical volume covering the Basic

IDIQ, Task Order 1, and Task Order 2 or three technical volumes – one each for the Basic IDIQ, Task Order 1, and Task Order 2.

Government Response: See response to question number 2.

Pg 76

(Tab

A)

Cover

Letter

Page 76 of the RFP states “Tab A - Cover Letter (One (1) page limit) and

Executive Summary (One (1) page limit) Filename shall be “Volume I –

Tab A –Cover Letter and Executive Summary-Offeror Name.doc” which implies a Microsoft Word 2003 format, however the Proposal

Organization Table on page 74 of the RFP mandates a PDF format. This discrepancy appears for several of the required file names. Can you please confirm the file format in which each Volume and Tab should be submitted?

Government Response: Refer back to Section L 8.2….. Electronic copies shall be provided on CDs and shall be formatted using

Microsoft Office 2003 (MS Office 2003) or Portable Document

Format (.PDF) as specified in the Proposal Organization Table below. Electronic files shall be named as specified throughout the Instructions to Offerors, Section L.

The labor categories descriptions contained in

“Attachment_E_supplement__FSA_IGSS_Functional_Labor_Category_

Descriptions.pdf” do not contain any specification regarding years of experience required for each labor category. Can FSA update the document with such information so that we can ensure the resources proposed will meet FSA’s requirements

Government Response: Yes, please refer to Attachment E supplement (REV) of FSA IGSS Functional Labor Category

Descriptions.

M.3.5

Factor

E Price

FSA states "The Government will evaluate the price of the Offeror’s proposal by multiplying the proposed fully burdened hourly rate for each proposed labor category by the ceiling number of hours proposed for that labor category, and then totaling those sums to derive a total for the contract period. The Government will add the total for each contract period (base year and four one-year options) to derive the evaluated price for this acquisition." Can you please provide additional information regarding how the pricing evaluation process will be accomplished? The statement above refers to a "ceiling number of hours" proposed by labor category, however the two Task Orders require FFP pricing.

Additionally, is it FSA's intent to evaluate vendor pricing solely on the price proposed for TO1 and TO2? If not, additional guidance on exactly how the pricing is to be evaluated would be most helpful.

Government Response: The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the RFP criteria with the expectancy of Offeror’s providing pricing for Task Orders:

17 August 2016 8

Page # Question

0001, 0002, and 0003 using proposed rates from the Attachment

E, Labor Rates for the IDIQ.

F.3.

20-32;

Att. C

Please clarify which if any deliverables are at the IDIQ contract level (vs the TO level).

Government Response: The Basic IDIQ deliverables represent the known possible deliveries that can be requested throughout the life of the contract, but specified within individual task orders as stated in Section F.3:

(a) All applicable TO deliverables, their required delivery dates, destination of delivery, and schedule for completion of work to be performed will be specified within individual TOs issued under this contract, as applicable.

F.3.

20-32;

Please clarify the numbering in the column titled "Ref." For example, please clarify what 3.3.1 referring to in the RFP?

Government Response: The RFP Section F. 3 Deliverables has been amended to appropriately revise the REF column with the

Section C- Statement of Work.

F.3.

20-32;

Att. C

Please clarify how the deliverables of Task Order 1 in Attachment C match up with the deliverable table in the RFP. It appears that Task Order

1 and the RFP Deliverable tables do not match. Also, the tables of the

RFP do not match up to the verbiage of the sections laid out in each

Section area of the Objective Area.

Government Response: See response to question number 38.

The Task Order 0001 has its individual specified deliverables indicated, and was not intended to identically match the Basic

IDIQ possible delivery items.

H.3.

The requirements stated in Section H.3 requiring offerors to submit representation information concerning their proposed EIT products and services do not seem to apply to the services under this procurement, which are consulting services. Would the government consider removing the requirement to submit a Voluntary Product Accessibility Template

(VPAT)?

Additionally, the link in the solicitation goes to the main Section508.gov website. If it is required, could you please provide a link to the VPAT form or template that is required to be completed?

Government Response: Section H.3 Electronic and Information

Technology (FSA April, 2016), “(a) X 36 CFR 1194.21, Software applications and operating systems” has been removed from the RFP.

Also,“(d) Offerors must submit representation information concerning their proposed EIT products and services. Offerors shall make this representation by completing and submitting the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template located at http://www.Section508.gov with their offer.” has been removed from RFP.

41 H.5. 40 Regarding: PIV Card Implementation to Access FSA Data for Privilege http://www.section508.gov/

17 August 2016 9

Page # Question

Users (September 2015), we assume that the users on this contract are not

Privilege Users, based on the definitions and examples, and this clause would not apply to this contract; could you please confirm?

Government Response: Currently, all requirement Task

Orders do not require Privileged users, but the clause will remain in the IDIQ for future requirements, as applicable and specified in individual Task Orders.

L.9.1.

The file names specified end in .doc, but the file type required in the table is a PDF. We assume it is acceptable for the file name to end in .pdf rather than .doc, please confirm.

Government Response: See response for question 34.

L.8.2

Section L.8.2 states "Electronic copies shall be provided on CDs and shall be formatted using Microsoft Office 2003 (MS Office 2003)" Would

Microsoft Office 2010 or 2013 also be acceptable?

Government Response: Yes, these versions are acceptable.

L.5.1

Would it also be acceptable to hand deliver the proposal?

Government Response: See response to question number 14.

Please review all RFP instructions.

Att.D;

Activit y 1.1

Pg.2;

Att. D

Attachment D, Activity 1.1 Business Case Analysis, Page 2, Deliverable-

The Due Date on the deliverable is "delivered within two (2) business days after request by the task lead". Please clarify this statement.

Considering there are 20-25 Major investments and 10-15 non-major investments to be reviewed and analyzed, plus develop a report, two days is not a sufficient amount of time. Will the government consider revising this timeline to incorporate a more realistic deliverable schedule?

Government Response: The report should be delivered within four (4) business days after request by the task lead.

Would the Government accept hard copies and CDs that are hand delivered to ED?

Government Response: See response to question number 14.

Can the Government clarify if Tab A a total of 2 pages (1 page for the cover letter, 1 page for the executive summary), or if the letter and summary should fit onto 1 page?

Government Response: The executive summary is considered 1 single page and the cover letter is considered another single page for a total of 2 pages. Refer back to RFP L.9.1 : Tab A -

Cover Letter (One (1) page limit) and Executive Summary (One

(1) page limit) Filename shall be “Volume I –Tab A –Cover

Letter and Executive Summary-Offeror Name.doc”

Could the Government clarify how it would like each volume to be

"complete in itself" for electronic mail submission? Should offerors send separate emails for each volume for each of the three proposals (Basic

IDIQ, TO:0001, and TO:0002) using the naming conventions detailed in the instructions, or should we fulfill the requirements in another manner?

17 August 2016 10

Page # Question

Government Response: Please see response to questions number: 2 & 34.

Who is the incumbent contractor for this effort?

Government Response: See response to question number 4.

What is the current maturity level of FSA's EA Program?

Government Response: The maturity level of the FSA EA

Program is currently not measured.

Could the Government share FSA's current Loans Segment FEA documentation, including the PRM, BRM, DRM, ARM, and IRM?

Government Response: No, the Government will not be sharing the requested documentation, at the present time.

When is the anticipated award date for this contract?

Government Response: The anticipated award date for the

RFP is September 30, 2016.

Pg 78

On page 78, the pricing volume instructions state, "The accounting practices for each member shall be clearly." How should this sentence end?

Government Response: The sentence should read, “ The accounting practices for each member shall be clearly stated.”

The proposal states that Arial font is acceptable for charts and other graphic illustrations. Are tables included in this group?

Government Response: Yes, tables are included in Arial font being acceptable.

PWS

C.3.5

Could the Government provide clarification on PWS C.3.5, Integration

Services; what does the Government want to integrate governance and project management processes with?

Government Response: To be defined in individual task orders.

Does the Government use a particular tool for Enterprise Architecture?

Government Response: Standard Microsoft productivity tools and Microsoft SharePoint are currently used.

Does the Government have experience and education preferences for all of the provided labor categories in Attachment E?

Government Response: Government Response: See response for question 34.