Responses_to_Questions_-_RFP_-_14_Mar_17.pdf

Questions and Answers for

Request For Proposal Air Force Geospatial Support As of 14 March 2017

Q1. Para 3.1 (page 117) of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 states “Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with their proposal containing past performance information IAW the format contained in the Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS) (Attachment 9). Your submissions will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposing to perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.” Para 3.3 states “Submit information IAW the PPIS on no more than three recent contracts ……” If our team includes more than three members and only 3 entries are allowed, how will we meet the requirement of providing a PPIS for each member? Alternatively, are we allowed/required to submit no more than 3 PPIS entries per team member?"

A: To clarify, each offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner who is performing “aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance” may submit no more than three PPISs. To reiterate, per paragraph 3.3, “There is no page limit per PPIS; however, the total Past Performance volume shall not exceed 30 pages.”

Q2. RFP References:

• The Final RFP, page 117, Section 3.3 Relevant Contracts, instructions for Volume II Past

Performance of the Seed Task Order, states: “Submit information in accordance with the PPIS (Attachment 9) on no more than three recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your or your subcontractor’s ability to perform the proposed effort.”

• The Final RFP, page 117, Section 3.1 General, states: “Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with their proposal containing past performance information IAW the format contained in the Past Performance Information Sheet (PPIS) (Attachment 9). Your submissions will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in the Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items. This information is required on the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposing to perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance.

Questions:

• Could the Government please clarify whether offerors are required to provide a total of not more than three past performance descriptions for the entire team?

• Or, are offerors required to provide at least one, but not more than three past performance descriptions, for the prime as well as for each subcontractor/teaming partner?

A: To clarify, each offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner who is performing “aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance” may submit no more than three PPISs. To reiterate, per paragraph 3.3, “There is no page limit per PPIS; however, the total Past Performance volume shall not exceed 30 pages.”

Q3. In the Official RFP, Section 3.3, Relevant Contracts, page 117, It is stated that, “There is no page limit per PPIS; however, the total Past Performance volume shall not exceed 30 pages. Submit information in accordance with the PPIS (Attachment 9) on no more than three recent contracts…” How would one even reach the 30-page maximum since Attachment 9 is only 4 pages long, and you can only submit on 3 projects which would equal 12 pages. Can the spaces and lines provided in Attachment 9 allow to be expanded upon to compensate for longer answers, thus equaling more pages (30 max)?

A: To clarify, each offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner who is performing “aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance” may submit no more than three PPISs. To reiterate, per paragraph 3.3, “There is no page limit per PPIS; however, the total Past Performance volume shall not exceed 30 pages.”

While the template for the PPIS is four pages in length, it may be longer (or shorter) depending on the amount of information provided by the company completing it.

Q4. In the Official RFP, Section 4.2 Format and Specific Content & Attachment_8_- TO_Pricing_Worksheet:

a. Do we complete Attachment 8 by inserting 1,920 hours for each person we are proposing?

A: Offerors are to complete Attachment 8 by inserting the number of labor hours that they believe are required to complete the task(s) as set forth in the PWS.

b. Or do we complete Attachment 8 by following the information stated in the Official RFP, Evaluation Section 2.1.3 Factor 3 – Cost/Price, page 129: where it is stated that the “Workload Estimates” tab may be utilized to establish the level of effort. This “Workload Estimates” tab shows hours different than 1,920 for the proposal tasks.

A: Per Attachment 8, the “Workload Estimates” tab was provided as the government’s best estimate cross-walk level of effort in hours between similar historic work and this Task Order’s tasks.

All information herein is provided as a baseline to assist offerors however, offerors are ultimately responsible for proposing the rates they believe are necessary to accomplish the work set forth in the

AMC TO PWS.

Q5. Within the proposal instructions, there is no requirement to address the IDIQ or Seed Task Order PWS directly. Please confirm that the omission is intentional.

A: Per ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

1.0 General Instructions

a. The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by these instructions and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

2.2.1.1 Subfactor 1 – Staffing and Management Approach

… Each offeror shall also provide an integrated solution to demonstrate their approach to meeting the overall Seed TO’s requirements and identify any best practices/innovations proposed.

Q6. Are contractors required to provide pricing for all of the labor categories in Attachment 2? If the answer is no will the evaluation be downgraded if pricing is not provided for all labor categories?

A: Offerors are required to provide pricing for all labor categories in Attachment 2.

Per ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2

2.2 IDIQ Evaluation Factors

2.2.1 Factor 1 – Cost/Price:

…IAW Attachment 2 – IDIQ Pricing Worksheet, each offeror shall submit pricing for the base period and each subsequent ordering period. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. The evaluation will consist of verification that the prices proposed for the labor categories used in the Seed TO proposal are consistent with those proposed under the IDIQ proposal. Those proposed prices for labor categories not utilized in the Seed TO proposal will then be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness as described below.

Q7. Are offerors required to assign a risk rating to their Technical Approach? In the past typically the government has evaluated the risk. It appears though that government wants the offerors to evaluate their risk also?

A: All offerors are required to assign a risk rating to their Technical Approach.

Per ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1

2.2 Format and Specific Content

2.2.1 Technical/Technical Risk – Methodology 1 (Separate Technical/Technical Risk Rating Process) In the Technical/Technical Risk volume, address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.

Address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of your proposed technical approach you consider to have the potential for disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful TO performance. Classify each risk in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures Table 2B, Technical Risk Rating. Provide the rationale for each risk and its rating, including quantitative estimates of the impact on cost, schedule, and performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other TO requirements, whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose a realistic “work-around” or risk mitigators for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

Q8. Will the Subcontractor Consent Letters (Attachment 3) and Client Authorization Letters (Attachment

10) count towards the 30 page limit in the Past Performance Volume? If we have a large team this in itself could exceed thirty pages.

A: The Subcontractor Consent Letters (Attachment 3) and Client Authorization Letters (Attachment

10) will not count towards the 30 page limit in the Past Performance Volume.

In addition, the RFP, Section 3.3 will be amended to include this information.

Q9. Which volume does the information required in section 7.0 Other Information Required go in? Or is this a separate document?

A: Offerors may include “Other Information Required” (referenced in Section 7.0), in IDIQ Volume II – Contract Documentation and Price.

In addition, the RFP, Section 7.0 will be amended to include this information.

Q10. RFP Page 117, Section 3.1 of the Seed TO Instructions for Volume II, requires offerors to include signed Subcontractor Consent Letters (Attachment 3) and signed Client Authorization Letters for commercial customers (Attachment 10).

Will the signed Subcontractor Consent Letters and the signed Client Authorization Letters count toward the 30-page limit for Volume II of the Seed TO proposal?

A: The Subcontractor Consent Letters (Attachment 3) and Client Authorization Letters (Attachment

10) will not count towards the 30-page limit for the Past Performance Volume.

In addition, the RFP, Section 3.3 will be amended to include this information.

Q11. RFP Page 116, Section 2.2.1.2 Subfactor 2 – Mission Essential, requires offerors to provide a Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan in Volume I of the Seed Task Order proposal response.

Will the Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan count toward the 30-page limit for Volume I of the Seed TO proposal?

A: The Mission Essential Contractor Services Plan will count towards the 30-page limit for Volume I of the Seed TO proposal.

Q12. RFP, Pages 113 & 114, Section 1.2, Tables 1.2a and 1.2b, show that five (5) electronic copies on CD are required for each proposal submitted. That number was confirmed in the answers to questions (questions 7 and 8) posted by the Government on FedBizOpps on March 7, 2017.

RFP, Page 115, Section 1.4 Distribution, states that the “original” proposal shall be identified.

Should offerors mark one of the five proposal CDs as an “Original”? Or should we send 1 CD marked “Original” and five marked “Copy” for each proposal submitted?

A: Offerors shall mark one of the five proposal CDs as the “Original”.

Q13. RFP REFERENCES: The Draft RFP, Section 2.2.1.2 Subfactor 2 – Mission Essential, included a requirement for offerors to provide a QCP that would be incorporated by reference into the TO QASP;

however, this requirement appears to have been removed from the final RFP, Section 2.2.1.2 Subfactor 2

– Mission Essential, on pages 116 and 117.

QUESTIONS:

1. Will the Government require offerors to provide a Quality Control Plan (QCP) as part of the Seed Task Order proposal response?

2. If the answer to Question 1 is “yes,” in what proposal volume and section should the QCP be included?

A: The Government removed the requirement to provide a Quality Control Plan (QCP) as part of the Seed Task Order proposal submittal. Therefore, offerors are not required to provide a QCP as part of their proposal submission.