GECS Combo Questions Answers.pdf

Question 1. Would you please share the list of courses and descriptions for the USSF Joint Professional Military Education curriculum to be integrated into the graduate program? This would help us determine equivalencies and appropriate substitutions. Or, is that to be designed around what we propose as our course offerings?

Gov’t Response:

The JPME core courses will be designed/named to fit into the schedule of the selected partner, and the partner will have an opportunity for coordination and to request modifications, if necessary, within the bounds of our requirements. We will need to meet the requirements outlined in the Officer Professional Military Education Policy («classification» THE JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC (jcs.mil)).

Per this document, content will include: National military strategy, Joint planning at all levels of war, Joint doctrine, Joint command and control, Joint force and joint requirements development, Operational contract support, National security strategy, Theater strategy and campaigning, Joint planning processes and systems, Joint, interagency, and multinational capabilities and the integration of those capabilities. The Joint Learning Areas we must cover are: Strategic Thinking and Communication; The Profession of Arms; The Continuum of Competition, Conflict, and War; The Security Environment; Strategy and Joint Planning; Globally Integrated Operations.

Question 2. Do you have requirements as to what time of day courses will be taught? This will impact which campus spaces we will be able to devote to USSF students.

Gov’t Response:

We are flexible, but generally the classes must be daytime classes that take place during the normal duty day (0800‐1700).

Question 3. Should our budget reflect compensation for USSF faculty who are appointed as visiting scholars/adjunct faculty or will they be compensated outside of this contract?

Gov’t Response:

USSF and other faculty provided on behalf of the Government will be compensated outside of this contract.

Question 4. Attachment 3 is entitled "template" with sample language included in #3. Is your expectation that we use this template and create tailored language for the highlighted portions, or is this something you will provide?

Gov’t Response:

The expectation is that offerors will create tailored language for sections 3, 4, and 5 as appropriate.

See FAR 37.602. Using the Statement of Objectives (SOO), provided by the Government, the Offeror proposes the PWS and describes the work in terms of the required results rather than how the work is to be accomplished.

Question 5. How many terminals do you need for simultaneous use?

Gov’t Response: Access to any unclassified computer labs/cafes would need to be the same for USSF faculty/students as would be for university students/faculty. The government would prefer 3 classified terminals and the government reserves the right to add more terminals at the cost of the government.

There was no requirement for the university to provide unclassified computers to USSF faculty or students.

Question 6. Does access have to be 24 hours/7 days week?

Gov’t Response: Faculty should have access to their offices on the same basis as institution faculty (presumably they have afterhours access to the building). USSF students should have the same access to university facilities as university sponsored students, not just to classrooms, but also internet cafes, libraries, and laboratories. Students generally do not require 24‐hour access but would be beneficial (should have the same access as other grad students).

Question 7. Will classes be held in a TS‐SCI environment? Is a 100+ person classroom sufficient?

Gov’t Response: Yes, a 100+ person classroom would be sufficient. A TS‐SCI classroom is not a part of the minimum requirement of the SOO.

Question 8. What are your requirements and expectations for the 9 month base period for transition?

We acknowledge the need for access to classrooms and offices 60 days prior to Option Year 1 ‐‐ what else? Is this period for joint curriculum design? Anything else?

Gov’t Response:

The 9‐month base period of transition is to allow planning and coordination needed in preparation for admitting USSF students. Curriculum, LMS, and facility access shall be coordinated in this period along with any other prep work needed.

Joint curriculum coordination and approval will be completed during that 9‐month base period.

Question 9. We would like to confirm that for the budget you require only the pricing sheet without additional information to be included in the second tab, FTE Pricing. We are developing our own internal budget in order to establish a unit price, but those costs do not break down in an hourly way as the FTE Pricing tab indicates.

Gov’t Response:

Yes, please disregard the FTE pricing sheet.

Question 10. (Reference 5.1.3) Tuition and fees will be included in Attachment 2 Price Sheet. This Price sheet does not take into account the other associated costs with the program—including housing and supporting the additional faculty and other costs not associated with tuition and fees. Will there be another Attachment/Price Sheet for these costs? If not, how should those costs/budget be shown and submitted.

Gov’t Response:

All the associated overhead costs should be factored into the cost and reflected in the pricing sheet.

Question 11. (Reference 5.1.4) One of the available titles is Adjunct Lecturer—which can be offered at minimum as per the qualifications of the faculty. Generally, faculty hold a single adjunct or ranked title.

If a higher ranked title is warranted can other titles be used in place of this such as Visiting Scholar, Fellow, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer or other agreed upon higher ranked titles as per the university’s Faculty Handbook? This would not be in “addition to” adjunct lecturer, but in place of. In the larger submission document within the, Instructions, Conditions and Notices section and on page 55 under the B. Gate Proposal, Subfactor 4: Faculty it notes, “This subfactor is acceptable when the university agrees to USSF faculty as adjunct/visiting professor appointment in coordination with their policy.” This would apply to that as well. Also wanting clarification that the salaries and benefits of the 18‐22 USSF faculty will be separate from this contract and will not be the responsibility of the university.

Gov’t Response: A higher ranked faculty title is fine, it does not need to be in addition to Adjunct Lecturer. Salaries and benefits of the USSF faculty will be the responsibility of Delta 13 and paid directly to the faculty – the partner university will not provide any pay directly to faculty. The only university provided services for faculty are those articulated in the solicitation.

Question 12. (Reference 5.2.1) Booking space for classrooms, lectures, events and auditoriums is a central university booking activity. Priority scheduling was noted for both the 6 furnished classrooms and the 18‐22 furnished faculty offices/cubicle spaces. As per the 1 furnished auditorium/classroom capable of seating 80‐100 people, the SOO states, “USSF will control scheduling but when not in use can be available for university other events.” This is likely a problem for a central university scheduling operation. Priority would be offered to USSF as per the classrooms/faculty offices. Can this be offered in place of USSF controlling the scheduling.

Gov’t Response: The central university scheduling could control the schedule for classrooms and auditorium/classroom for 80‐100 people with USSF having priority for those spaces in lieu of controlling the schedule. The USSF needs to have priority for flexible scheduling of the large auditorium since it is common for distinguished visitors to request a speaking engagement on short notice, even the same day. The faculty offices should be permanent and not scheduled.

Question 13. (Reference 5.4.3) Can you explain the teacher ratio 18:1. This works for the core USSF courses, but electives have varying class size limits: 20, 25, 30, 35, 50—depending on the type of class.

Some offer teaching assistants. The electives taught by USSF faculty can be a maximum limit of 18. In addition, it states the need for 8 total space‐related STEM electives. Can and will these be taught by the USSF faculty? It also states there needs to be at least 12 total electives from the non‐STEM buckets.

Please explain what is meant by, “the preference is for more than 12 total electives in at least half of the other non‐STEM buckets.” It seems that there is a minimum of 8 space‐related STEM courses and a minimum of 12 total electives from the non‐STEM bucket. Questioning what is meant by “in at least half of the other non‐STEM buckets.”?

Gov’t Response: The student to faculty ratio is the school’s student to faculty ratio as a measure of educational quality – it is not a max of 18 students per class in any given class.

The 8 STEM electives reference in the requirement must be offered by the university partner.

“Buckets” refer to subject categories of electives that are not considered STEM electives but would be relevant to overall program objectives. Electives that will be taught by USSF faculty are in addition to the requirements above. For more information, reference paragraph 5.4.3.

Question 14. (Reference 5.4.4) The university must be able to offer 50% of the degree from the non‐ cohort courses (16 credits of 32). If the university can offer credit for the lab work, that would be additional credits beyond the 32 required for the degree. Can the labs be graded pass/fail? Can the labs be offered on a transcript with a grade, but not be credit and not factored into the GPA? If they must be for credit, can they be in addition to the 32 credits for the degree requirements and a requirement for the USSF designation? Since this is classified, it may pose a problem as to how to verify the academic content and assess the program (accreditation), so it may need to be in addition to the 32 credits to complete a specific degree.

Gov’t Response: Lab credits can count for the students that take them, but not all students will be qualified to take lab credits. If your accreditation standards allow for P/F lab credits, that is fine. They need to be for credit, but how they factor into GPA is negotiable. The credits should be able to be part of the 32 credits for the degree. If students choose to take credits slightly above 32, that is fine for USSF but should not incur any additional charge.

Question 15. (Reference PWS para 2.2) Deliverable shows A001 – Monthly Status Report (MSR). Since this is an educational contract, deliverables are usually offered on an annual basis—not monthly. Would this be acceptable? If not, would a semester status report be acceptable?

Gov’t Response:

This paragraph is part of the Government template and can be modified to this acquisition. If a semester report makes sense that can certainly be part of the proposal to the Government.

Question 16. (Reference PWS para 2.2.3) What is the training required for the PWS from the government?

Gov’t Response:

This paragraph is part of the Government template and likely does not have a role in this acquisition.

This usually pertains to contractors authorized to use Government facilities and computers.

Question 17. (Reference PWS para 2.7.1) Documentation Rights. It states that the government has unlimited rights to data for all deliverables? What specific data is this referencing in this educational contract?

Gov’t Response:

The intellectual work of the USSF‐sponsored students will remain the property of the Government.

Question 18. (Reference PWS para 2.8) Access: It states access to all work areas, records and data used.

What specific data is this referencing in this educational contract? Universities need to abide by FERPA <https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html> for protected student data.

Gov’t Response:

This paragraph is part of the Government template and may need adjustment. The Government would have an expectation to access all data (grades, coursework, etc) for the students provided through this contract. Our students will sign appropriate paperwork allowing access to abide by FERPA requirements. We certainly do not expect any university to violate FERPA. The specifics can be worked out with the university to ensure appropriate FERPA compliance.

Question 19. (Reference PWS para 2.9) Government Furnished: The section references an, “Attachment XX for use by the Contractor in the performance of this contract.” What is “Attachment XX?”

Gov’t Response:

This paragraph is part of the Government template and “Attachment XX” is a placeholder for government furnished items, but this will likely not be applicable since no work is being performed in a government facility.

Question 20. (Reference PWS Section 3 Performance Requirements) On pages 7 through 12, there is missing information that was not updated from a template document—specifically the highlighted areas (“DEFAULT TEXT” included). Is the BOLD statement missing? Is there a Transition plan or is this not applicable (was not “TAILOR TO THE REQUIREMENT”? Example regarding the SCN was not tailored to the requirement.

Gov’t Response:

The expectation is that offerors will create tailored language for section 3, 4, and 5 as appropriate.

See FAR 37.602. Using the Statement of Objectives (SOO), provided by the Government, the Offeror proposes the PWS and describes the work in terms of the required results rather than how the work is to be accomplished.

Your technical approach should consist of a phase‐in transition plan for how you plan to approach the base period of performance.

Question 21. (Reference PWS Section 4 Applicable Publications) We are unaware of any Applicable Publications. If there are, can you verify and explain what is expected.

Gov’t Response:

This is part of the government template, and we are not aware at this time of any unique publication guidance.

Question 22. (Reference PWS Section 5 Deliverables) Shows default text and asks for an outline in the table. How should this be written/utilized for an educational program? Is there a specific template used for this type of program? It references back area 3 or the PWS which was not fully complete (highlighted areas).

Gov’t Response:

The expectation is that offerors will populate what deliverables will be provided to the Government and the frequency of those deliveries in meeting the performance tasks in Section 3.

Question 23. (Reference PWS Section 6 Services Summary) Same question as to how to complete this section. Are there specific PWS requirements that need to be addressed? If so, what are they? There are four spaces, but no specific requirements posted.

Gov’t Response:

The expectation is that offerors will populate with their proposed quality surveillance metrics for the performance tasks populated in Section 3.

Question 24. (Reference Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters) I. General: In the first paragraph, what is Subpart 12.6? Is this the PWS and/or SOO?

Gov’t Response:

That is a reference to the Federal Acquisition Regulation, Subpart 12.6.

Question 25. (Reference Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters) B. Gate Proposal (page 55) Subfactor 2: JPME Curriculum and Degree Track: It asks to accept the USSF/JPME core curricula. Has this been established yet? If so, will the university receive the core curricula prior to submission of the proposal, or will it be reviewed and accepted after the contract has been awarded?

Gov’t Response: The core and JPME curricula is being drafted currently. This will be reviewed and accepted after the contract has been awarded. The curricula will be crafted to fit the schedule and credit break down by course of the university. In accordance with the university’s accreditation requirements, the university will have an opportunity to review and offer modifications for coordination as needed.

Question 26. (Reference Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters) C. Technical Proposal (page 55) As per above, need clarification on the PWS sections 3, 5 and 6. Is this also the narrative for the SOO?

Gov’t Response:

Please reference answers to Questions 4, 20, 21, 22, and 23.

Question 27. (Reference Instructions, Conditions, & Notices to Offerors or Quoters) D. Pricing: (page 55) Pricing only has CLINs for tuition per a set number of students and does not reference other associated costs such as offices, space, additional co‐curricular activities specific to this program, supporting and housing faculty, other administrative support needed to run the program etc. Should the university submit a separate budget for this? Tuition is usually separate from additional costs associated with the program. (Previously referenced above in the SOO section under 5.1.3.)

Gov’t Response: The pricing sheet should show tuition and additional costs with a cost breakdown for each item. The total cost will be rolled up into one final cost. Understand that student and faculty will not require some of the associated costs as a traditional faculty/student. The associated fees that should not be included are meal plans, insurance fees, housing, etc. This is not an exhaustive list, but the type of fees that should be reviewed.