Education Advisor and Tester Q_A.pdf

Education Advisor and Tester – QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1) Question: Please confirm the unit of measure associated with the term unit in the RFQ. The RFQ states for the Test Administrator that 1 unit equates to 20hours per week and for the Education Advisor 1 unit equates to 36hours per week. Based upon information in the SOW and the pricing schedule, there seems to be conflict in this information.

Answer: I’m not sure of the use of the word “unit,” but the maximum hours per week for the Test Administrator is 20 hours and the Education Advisor is 36 hours.

2) Question: Can the government confirm if there is an incumbent? If so, please provide name.

Answer: Newpoint Management LLC, FA2543-16-C0002, 1 Oct 2015-30 Sept 2020, 5 year

3) Question: Can the government confirm if resumes are to be submitted.

Answer: Resumes are not to be submitted, however, they may have been to the Contractor

4) Question: Can the government advise if the excel pricing sheet needs to be submitted in addition to the pdf.

Answer: The pricing spreadsheet is optional and may be adjusted accordingly

5) Question: Can the government confirm if there are any adjustments or opportunities for remote work due to covid.

Answer: No, due to the in person necessity for testing. However, we have other COVID precautions in place, such as currently closed to customer traffic and daily cleaning.

6) Question: The RFQ states that EACH “unit equates to twenty (20) hours per week for Test

Administrator and thirty-six (36) hours per week for Education Advisor.” Implying, based on the 248 and 300 quantities on the Pricing sheet, a workload of 4960 hours for the Test Administrator and 10800 hours for the Education Advisor per performance period respectively.

However, in the SOW, it states that for the Education Advisor, “It is estimated that five

(5) full units will be required per week and that each unit will require 6 hours.” And for the Test Administrator, the work schedule in each week implies that each unit requires 4 hours per week: “one four-hour unit two days a week and two four-hour units one day a week.” This leads to a discrepancy in the solicitation in the amount of time EACH individual unit requires per week (6 vs 36 hours for Education Advisor, and 4 vs 20 hours for Test Administrator). Will the Government please clarify how many hours are required for each unit?

Answer: 4 hours for the Test Administrator equals 1 unit. 6 hours for the Academic Advisor equals 1 unit.

7) Question: Will the Government provide the applicable labor categories to be proposed from Attachment 2 – Wage Determination, or is that selection up to bidders?

Answer: Up to bidders

8) Question: SOW page 5, Para 7. States the Period of Performance: Contract start date is 1

October 2020 through 30 September 2021 with 3 option years. Other materials and pricing sheet portray a Base with 4 option years.

Presume Base plus 4 options is correct?

Answer: Yes, please.

9) Question: RFQ Page 2, Para 8 states; “Each unit equates to twenty (20) hours per week for Test

Administrator and thirty-six (36) hours per week for Education Advisor.

It appears that the RFQ document should be corrected to state that a Unit for Test Administrator = 4 hours and a Unit for the Education Advisor = 6 hours.

This correction would make all the documents consistent.

Answer: Yes

10) Question: SOW Page 1, Para 1A) and 1B) Discuss a “Unit” as 6 hours for the Advisor and a “Unit” would be 4 hours for the Test Administrator.

It appears that the RFQ document should be corrected to state that a Unit for Test Administrator = 4 hours and a Unit for the Education Advisor = 6 hours. This correction would make all the documents consistent.

Answer: Yes

11) Question: Both the RFQ provided spreadsheet note 248 Units for Administrator and 300 Units for the Advisor.

It appears that the RFQ document should be corrected to state that a Unit for Test Administrator = 4 hours and a Unit for the Education Advisor = 6 hours. This correction would make all the documents consistent.

Answer: Yes

12) Question: Provisions & Clauses Page 9, 52.212-1 Items, Para (a) states Quotations shall provide

Price & Technical Capability. The LPTA criteria states that best value = quotation meeting the technical capability shown within the PWS.

Q #1: Exactly what information is required in our proposal to meet the “Technical Capability” standard?

- e.g. No Past Performance was requested.

Q #2: Presume the PWS comment should have stated the SOW (which is provided)?

Answer: Yes, the SOW. Please see updated provisions and causes

13) Question: Is there an incumbent for this work? If so, please provide company name, contract number, dates and total contract value.

Answer: See answer for questions 2

14) Question: Each year has a line with this title: “Labor Units Proposed - xxxx Year:” For example:

Cell H11, H18 ,etc.

What number goes in this cell?

Is it just the total QTY requested which would be a fixed number of 548?

Or are you looking for a translation to total hours proposed?

Answer: I think the fixed 548 works best. The pricing spreadsheet is optional and may be adjusted accordingly

15) Question: Units verses Hours, Wouldn’t it be easier for planning, scheduling, bidding and invoicing to just use “Hours” vice “Units” since the project is FFP?

For example: the SOW para 1A) states that the Education Advisor would “normally work 6 units per

Answer: I believe that it should state “work 6 hours per unit.” This contract was originally done around 10 years ago. We’re not sure (those personnel no longer work here) why they were using “units” versus “hours.” We’re comfortable with the “units.” Additionally, the planning docs all reference the units.