Q A.pdf

NO. REFERENCE PG. NO. PARA. NO QUESTION / COMMENT CONTRACTOR

RECOMMENDATION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1 Solicitation Upon review of Section H, there is no statement that prohibits cross-teaming; however, in Section L, 1.5 Teaming Arrangements it states "(b) A business entity can participate in this acquisition on one proposal only." Update Section H, or appropriate Section to include prohibition to cross-teaming, if that is the Government's intent. The government determined the requirement set forth in Section L of the solicitation is sufficient.

2 Solicitation 76 Table Attachment 5A is not posted on the FBO web site.

Government Post Attachment 5A. List of Attachments revised. New set of attachments will be posted on FBO with release of RFP.

3 Solicitation 76 Table Attachment 5B is not posted on the FBO web site.

Government Post Attachment 5B. List of Attachments revised. New set of attachments will be posted on FBO with release of RFP.

4 Solicitation 84 1.3 Reference: The Offeror must therefore submit with its proposal a signed statement from an authorized representative on company letterhead indicating it will participate in the mandatory post award orientation; that it understands $1,000 will be the total price for this participation (no more and no less). There is no reference to this requirement in Section L.

Government update Section L organization and text to include requirement for this letter.

Rationale: Government stated a requirement for a letter, but does not state which volume and which section to insert the letter. Revise Section L to include "Task Order 0001 Statement" letter as item to be submitted with Volume I, Contract Documentation. Please see section L0004, paragraph 1.5, of the

RFP.

5 Solicitation 90-91 Table General. Table layout and titles do not match the layout and text provided in Section L. We will point out as many descrepencies as possible in the following comments. We recommend a review to ensure they match or provide bidders which (table or text) takes prescendence. Government update referenced table to be consistent with text that also provides required layout and content. Updated table will be incorporated into the RFP.

6 Solicitation 91 Table Layout stated for Volume III does not match the Section L layout and text provided following the table. Please clarify requirement for organization and content.

Government will verify and revise RFP for consistency.

7 Solicitation 91 Table Layout stated for Volume IV does not match the Section L layout and text provided following the table Please clarify requirement for organization and content.

Government will verify and revise RFP for consistency.

8 Solicitation 91 Table Reference Volume II, Subfactor 2, Workforce Management Approach. There is no page length stated. May we assume that the page length for Subfactor 1 includes

Subfactor 2? That would mean the Government limits the page length to answer Subfactor 1 and 2 to 15 total pages. Please clarify requirement Government will verify and revise RFP for consistency.

9 Solicitation 91 Table There is no page limit stated for Present and Past Performance Citations. There is an asterisk "*", instead. There is no text referencing what the "*" means. Please clarify the page limit for each Present and Past Performance Citation. Table revised to clarify page limitations.

10 Solicitation 91 Table There is no page limit stated for PPQs. There is an asterisk "*", instead. There is no text referencing what the "*" means. Please clarify the page limit for each PPQ. PPQ are to be submitted separately by Offeror's PPQ recipients. PPQs will not be counted against Volume III page limitation.

11 Solicitation 91 2.0 There is no paragraph 2.0. Section goes from 1.0 to 3.0 Please clarify. Paragraph numbering discrepancies. Will update RFP.

12 Solicitation 91 3.0 The reference states to complete the Cross-Reference Matrix for Volumes II and II; however, the outline for Volumes II and III does not state where to place the matrix. Please clarify by updating Secton L outlines. Section L updated to include Cross-Reference Matrix for Volumes II and III.

13 Solicitation 93 4.0 Attachment L1 and L2 states "WB*" instead of page length.

There is no reference that corresponds to "*". Please clarify the meaning of "*". Paragraph 4.0 revised to define WB or Paragraph 4.0 revised to include page lengths for Attachments L1 and L2.

14 Solicitation 93 4.0 The table lists two attachment, L1 and L2, however, there is only one workbook. Please clarify whether there is only one attachment or if there are two attachments. Will post both workbooks on FBO as attachment to RFP.

15 Solicitation 93 4.0 Table Attachment L4. There is no L4 in the document or attachments on FBO. Please clarify Relevancy matrix removed.

16 Solicitation 99 L-0005 Volume organization and content do not match Section L Table organization. Please clarify Section L revised. Please see final RFP.

17 Solicitation 99 L-0005 The organization of the Past Performance citations under Sections for Subfactors is confusing. The Subfactors for SETA V are Corporate Management Plan;

Workforce Management Approach; Quality Control Plan and Security Administration Plan. Does the Government want bidders to write Citations to specifically address the subfactors? This is confusing and may be a left over from a previous draft where Citations were categorized by Mission Capablity Factor.

Please clarify the Governments intent. Also recommend update the Section L layout at the beginning of the section to reflect the layout in this section. Section L revised. Please see final RFP.

18 Solicitation 100 2.5 Reference states requirements for Organizational Structure Change History. However, there is no reference in Section L organization and content that shows where this goes. Please updated Section L organization and content show where to present Organizational Structure Change History. "Organizational Structure Change History" added to Volume I.

19 Solicitation 101 2.6 Paragraph references Attachment L4; however, there is no Attachment L4 included in the Solication. Please clarify. Attachments to RFP revised. Please see final RFP.

20 Solicitation 102 3.1.1 Paragraph references Atch L3 which is the PPQ. Does the Government mean L5? Please clarify and update Solicitation. Section L revised. Please see final RFP.

21 Solicitation 102 3.1.4(b) Sentence references "Factor 1 Mission Capability in Section M."

This reference does not exist. Please clarfiy. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

22 Solicitation 103 3.2.3 Sentence references "total page count", but the Solicitation does not provide "total page count" for citations. Provide page count for citations. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

23 Solicitation 103 1.0 Where do we insert Solication Attachment 1A and Attachment 1B. Clarify where to insert the Labor rate sheets for Hurlburt and Cannon. Attachment 1 should be part of Volume III, Price.

24 Solicitation 104 3.1 Second paragraph references the "Cost Proposal Workbooks" (Ref Atch L1 and L2)" . What is L1 and L2? There is only one Cost_Workbook attached to the Solicitation. Please clarify. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

25 Solicitation 105 3.3.1 Third sentence references a "DEFINITIONS" Section. We could not find a DEFINITIONS section in the Solicitation. Please clarify. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

26 Solicitation 105 3.3.1 Reference Sentence: "Indicate the application base for indirect rates and/or factors." Attachment 1 has placeholders for fully burndened FFP hourly rates only.

Please clarify what the Government means by "Indicate the application base for indirect rates and/or factors." And please clarify where this should be documented. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

27 Solicitation 105 3.3.1 Reference Sentence: Demonstrate the computation of the fully burdened FFP hourly rates for all labor categories identified in rate tables. Does the Government require this breakout for FFP rate bids? If so, please provide format and how to provide. Also, if the Government requires this for subcontractors, please provide format and how to provide.

Subcontractors will need to provide sealed packages to the Government. Please clarify the requirement to show rates and computations. Recommend removing this requirement since this is FFP hourly rates and LPTA competition. Yes. Please provide breakout for FFP rate bids. Format is provided in Attachment 1 with final RFP. The government does not require subcontractors to submit separate rate sheets. However, the Offer shall include subcontracting costs, if any, with its FFP rate bids.

28 Solicitation 106 3.3.2 There is no Worksheet 6.0 within the Cost_Workbook. Also there is only one (1) Cost_Workbook. Update paragraph to reflect appropriate reference and instructions. Cost_Workbook reference is removed. See revised Section L and M.

29 Solicitation 105 4.2 Reference statement: Historical and year-to-date financial data shall be submitted for each company that makes up the Prime, and the ability to fund contract performance shall be addressed for the combined firm. Please clarify the specific financial documents to be provided. Also, with the decrease ceiling of this procurement, is this informed still needed?

Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

30 Solicitation 105 4.2 Reference statement: Historical and year-to-date financial data shall be submitted for each company that makes up the Prime, and the ability to fund contract performance shall be addressed for the combined firm.. Please clarify the meaning of "Historical" in terms of the number of past years to be provided. Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

31 Solicitation 105 4.2 Reference statement: The Prime and Team Members financial documents referenced in paragraph (a) above shall be submitted immediately upon receipt of the solicitation but no later than 15 days after the release date of the solicitation. Please provide the planned date of Final RFP release so bidders may ensure adequate financial documents are ready for submission. Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

32 Solicitation 105 4.2 Reference statement: The Prime and Team Members financial documents referenced in paragraph (a) above shall be submitted immediately upon receipt of the solicitation but no later than 15 days after the release date of the solicitation. Please provide the address to send Financial Documents. Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

33 Solicitation 105 4.2 Reference statement: The Prime and Team Members financial documents referenced in paragraph (a) above shall be submitted immediately upon receipt of the solicitation but no later than 15 days after the release date of the solicitation. Please verify that Subcontractors may send Financial documents directly to the Contracting Authority. Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

34 Solicitation 109 4.3(b)(c) The two referenced evaluation criteria are very similarly written. Is this the intention of the government? Please clarify Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

35 Solicitation 111 6.1 References Attachment L-6. There is no such attachment listed as part of the solicitation or as part of Section L. There is an attachment to the Solicitation named "DATCH07_Cost_Workbook_SETA_V_14_NOV". Please clarify. Revised Section L and M. Please see final RFP.

36 Atch 1A N/A N/A Section L does not provide instructions on where to place this attachment in the proposal. Please clarify. Changed Attachment 1A to Attachment 1. Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

37 Atch 1B N/A N/A Section L does not provide instructions on where to place this attachment in the proposal. Please clarify. Revised Section L. Please see final RFP.

38 Atch 1B N/A N/A The Cost WorkBook breaks out specific positions to be costed for Cannon AFB, NM. However, Atch 1B includes rates for all categories, levels and option years. Please clarify whether the Government wants bidders to fill out only the positions designated as "Cannon" within the Cost_Workbook? Attachment 1A and 1B revised. New Attachment 1 will be incorporated to final RFP.

39 Section L, Atch L2 3 N/A Reference Aircrew Controller position description states: "Extensive background as an aircrew member flying SOF aircraft is mandatory…" Please confirm that the use of this Labor Category requires candidates to have been assigned as an aircrew member with active flight time on SOF aircraft. Please verify this is mandatory and is not waiverable.

Confirmation pending and update to be posted prior to/upon release of the RFP.

40 Section L, Atch L3 3 N/A Table reference Factor 1 as "Mission Capability" when Section L references it as "Technical" Update Questionnaire, replace "Mission Capability" with "Technical" Questionnaire revised.

41 Section L, Atch L3 4 N/A Table includes Sample TO #1 nd Sample TO #2 as Subfactor 2 and Subfactor 3. This is inconistent with the Section L and M criteria. Please correct PPQ. Questionnaire revised.

42 Section L, Atch L3 4 & 5 N/A Table references Factor 4 - Cost/Price. This is inconsistence with Section L & M which state "Factor 3 Price". Please correct PPQ. Questionnaire revised.

43 Section L, Atch L5 2 N/A Under Description of Effort, Government references L- 0008, Paragrph 2.1.2.1 which does not exist. Should the reference be "L-0005, Para 3.1.4"? Please clarify. Attachment L5 replaced with Attachment 8.

44 PWS Wide in Scope: The missions identified in the Performance Work Schedule are basically the entire mission set for AFSOC. Focus the contract. Consider focusing the efforts in areas that are mutually reinforcing. For example, one element of a contract will focus in the support of the Unmanned Aerial Systems mission. Other focus areas (with their own contracting mechanism) include: intelligence management and professional support services to include areas like operational deployments and contingency support; medical modernization, training and education;

plans and programs (to include program designs and current year execution); and infrastructure support (i.e. housing privatization. Having a segmented contracting umbrella will open the aperture for the integration of multiple small businesses into the AFSCO enterprise. In addition, and of critical importance, it will limit the organizational conflict of interest for the companies involved in this contract support, permitting these companies the opportunities to bid for other contracts in areas outside their initial Command support (i.e. as the small business enterprise grows, it will expand to complementary areas outside the initial scope of the focus area of their contract) This is a follow-on contract that has been successfully performed by small business contractors. In addition, our market research indicates there are several small businesses could perform this requirement. The solicitation is also written to allow small businesses to propose with teaming partners, where they see fit. As such, we determined the need to issue

45 Disjointed: Under the rubric of Management and Professional Support services it appears that the mission descriptions from A1-7 plus other ancillary missions were cut and pasted in the PWS. The problem with this strategy is that the expense that will be required to augment the organic capability of AFSOC in support of Housing Privatization Consultation and Advisory Services is much different than the expertise required to support the AFSOC Unmanned Systems Operations Support or Studies, Analyses, and Evaluations recommendations for AFSCO senior leaders. Identify mission champions. The integration of small businesses to any enterprise is a risky proposition…for the organization and the small business. The success of the enterprise will depend on the commitment of the organization’s mission champions in ensuring the small business receives the information and the support necessary to enable a smooth transition in support of the mission. One way to incentivize this process is by adding a “mission champion” element to the program managers entrusted with the mission area supported by the small business. The Government understand the different required expertise for each ancillary missions. As such, we allowed for teaming arrangements.

46 Contracting Dynamics: The period of performance (POP) for the entire project is assumed to be five years. The contract ceiling of $45M over the life of the contract, and the scope of the contract appears to be complete mismatch even if the POP was one year. Prioritize mission support. The funding identified for this effort is insufficient to cover all the desired areas with quality personnel. Prioritizing missions will help the small business provide a realistic cost, schedule. In addition, and of critical importance, having mission blocks will permit the small business meet the 50% expenditure for a prime requirement of this contract. The PoP and contract ceiling of $45M are established based on historical data. Furthermore, the Government will be utilizing other contractual vehicles to fulfill other requirements. As such, we believe ceiling amount of $45M for PoP of five years is appropriate for this requirement.

47 Limitations in subcontracting: Section 1.11 states that at least 50% of the total cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the small business prime. The wide focus of the mission supported on this contract vehicle will reduce the candidate pool for small businesses given the most small businesses get their start as specialized concerns. Industry Day. Organize an Industry day to give the small companies entering this mission sector the opportunity to visit the facilities and meet the mission stakeholders. There will be no Industry Day for this solicitation.

48 We have a question regarding the inclusion of past performance in an LPTA competition. Given that we can only receive an acceptable or unacceptable with no advantage to having superior past performance over another offeror and given that a company who has little to no past performance would not receive an unacceptable, what does the gov’t gain in including past performance as an evaluation factor? Additionally, what would be the advantage for an offeror to submit 14 citations when submitting one citation (or none) would be sufficient to score an acceptable.

It seems that this strategy creates more work for offerors who are able to provide recent and relevant past performance, creates more work for the source selection team in verifying and evaluating that data, and would do little to narrow the field of offerors as those who couldn’t put together solid past performance would get a pass. Past performance evaluation provides the government opportunity to identify any adverse present and past performance information regarding the offeror and its major subcontractors. Citation requirements have been updated and is reflected on final RFP. The requirement is not to submit

49 Will there be an Industry Day event scheduled for this effort?

No.

50 RFP 97 & 102 L-0004 Volume II paragraph 2.0 (c) and L-0005 Volume III paragraph

3.1.4 (b) This subparagraph cites a “Mission Capability Proposal” associated with the Team Structure Matrix. Mission Capability is not a Factor. Does the government mean that the narrative for the table citations reference the PWS Functional Specialty as part of Volume II Technical and Subfactor 1 Corporate Management Plan? For the L-0005 reference, does the reference to Mission Capability as Factor 1 in Section M also need to reference the Subfactor 1 Corporate Management Plan?

Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

51 RFP 98 L-0004 Volume II paragraph 3.0 (f) Our experience is that Professional Compensation Plans are standalone documents and they are normally included in the Price or Admin Volume. Because Sec M evaluation provides evaluation of Unbalanced Pricing in paragraph 6.2 and with this LPTA source selection, it appears that for price reasonableness evaluation that the Professional Compensation Plan is an element of the price evaluation vice Workforce Management. Additionally, given that Professional Compensation ties directly to the proposed rates build up for the Labor Category FBLR in the Price Volume, would the government consider moving this requirement to the Price Volume? Section L and M revised. Please see final RFP.

52 RFP 101 L-0005 Volume III paragraph 2.6.1.6.5 Reference is made to the Relevancy Matrix and evaluating the magnitude and complexity of the Past Performance Citation against Sample Task 1 & 2. There are no Sample Tasks provided in the Draft RFP. Will the government be releasing Sample Tasks with the final RFP? Relevancy matrix removed.

53 RFP 105 L-0006 Volume IV paragraph 3.3.1 Pricing information required from Team Members in this paragraph could be considered proprietary information. Will the government accept sealed packages from Team Members as allowed in the Financial Document paragraph 4.2? What is the process to be followed for sealed package submission? Pricing volume requirement updated.

See Section L and M of final RFP.

54 RFP Since there is not an industry day, do you have any suggestions about how we could make contact with potential Primes for this contract? FedBizOpps.gov compiles a list of vendors for an advertised requirement. This can be accessed via "Interested Vendors List" tab.

NOTHING FOLLOWS