SNIM Q A.xls

XLS spreadsheet 263 KB Posted May 14, 2009

Attached to: SNIM RFP Federal contract opportunity
Solicitation number: FA4600-08-R-0025
Issued by: Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command

View the file

Other files for this federal contract opportunity

Other files attached to SNIM RFP, newest first.
File	Type	Posted
SNIM Q A.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Jun 1, 2009
Amendment 2 - SNIM RFP SF30.doc	DOC document	Jun 1, 2009
SNIM Q A.xls	XLS spreadsheet	May 28, 2009
SNIM Q A.xls	XLS spreadsheet	May 27, 2009
Amendment 1 - SNIM RFP SF30.doc	DOC document	May 14, 2009
FA4600-08-R-0025 SNIM 29Apr09.doc	DOC document	Apr 29, 2009
SPECIAL NOTICE DACS IATAC MSIAC.doc	DOC document	Apr 1, 2009
SNIM Draft RFP 2 Q A.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Mar 10, 2009
SNIM Draft RFP 2.doc	DOC document	Feb 18, 2009
SNIM Q A Posted.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Jan 22, 2009
SNIM synopsis.doc	DOC document	Jan 15, 2009
Special Notice to Industry 3Dec08.doc	DOC document	Dec 3, 2008
J-2 SNIM Pricing Model.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Nov 26, 2008
FA4600-08-R-0025 SNIM Draft v1.1.doc	DOC document	Nov 26, 2008
Ex A CDRL DD 1423.doc	DOC document	Nov 26, 2008
J-4 EEOC Clearance Request Information.doc	DOC document	Nov 26, 2008
J-3 Ins Cert Final.doc	DOC document	Nov 26, 2008
J-1 Draft SNIM IDIQ Master DD 254 w-upd2.pdf	PDF	Nov 26, 2008

Show all 18

On GovTribe

Work with this file on GovTribe

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

RFP 08-R-0025

Questions	Answers
General
Mission Capability is to be submitted in two volumes. Volume I (Subfactors 1 and 2 - Management and Technical Capability and Small Business Participation) is part of the Phase I submission. Volume IV (Subfactor 3 - Sample Technical Area Tasks) is part of the Phase II submittal. Will Mission Capability be evaluated in two parts or will all of Mission Capability be evaluated after submission of Phase II?	This has not yet been determined.
Will all offerors submitting a Phase I proposal be given the opportunity to submit a Phase II proposal? Or will there be a competitive range determination after Phase I?	Offerors submitting a Phase I proposal be given the opportunity to submit a Phase II proposal.
When will the Sample TATs be released?	As stated in L2.0 the Sample TATs will be released after the closing date of Phase I to only those Offerors that have submitted a Phase I proposal. The Government anticipates this date to be on or around 17 June 2009.
Section C - PWS
Para 1.5.2.5, Weekly Activity Report (WAR). The CDRL attachment in section J contains a Standard Operating Procedure for the WAR. It describes this report as being submitted by IAC Directors, special staff, etc. and detailing the IACs most significant accomplishments. This suggests that this procedure is geared towards a WAR to be submitted by IAC Core contractors. Considering that SNIM awardees could have little “significant accomplishments” to report on a weekly basis as many tasks historically have a 24 – 36 month Period of Performance can the Government please clarify if the WAR is required for the SNIM awardees and if possible provide revised instructions that are applicable solely to the TAT program?	WAR will be submitted by each prime contractor on SNIM. See updated SOP for WAR in revised Section J Attachment.
Para 1.7.2.d. It is noted that “Any cost incurred for accreditations or clearances shall be done at the contractor’s expense and shall not be allowed as direct cost against this contract”. In section 4.2 GLOSSARY on page 22 of 109 it states “Accreditation – Formal declaration by the Designated Approval Authority that an IT system is approved to operate in a particular security mode using a prescribed set of safeguards at an acceptable level of risk”. Is it the intention of the Government that any system developed under this contract be Certified and Accredited (C&A) at no cost to the Government?	Para 1.7.2 is revised to read, “Any cost incurred for clearances shall be done at the contractor’s expense and shall not be allowed as direct cost against this contract”. Note, any C&A requirements shall comply with DoD 5220.22M.
Section 2, Services Summary. Would the Government make available the Government’s Performance Plan for bidder review?	Yes, the Government will post this with the amended RFP.
Section F
Period of Performance. Would the Government please confirm that the period of performance start date of 1 April 2010 is correct? This is a much later timeframe than originally stated in draft RFP 2 which stated a start date of November 1, 2009. Should we infer that notification of award will not occur until March/April 2010 or does the Government anticipate awarding the contracts this FY?	The date of 1 April 2010 is the Government's best estimate for the start of the period of performance (ordering period) for the SNIM contracts.
Section G
Page 27, Administrative Authority, states that the first task order will be issued concurrently with the SNIM IDIQ contract award. What response time will the Government establish for responding to the first issued Task Order?	The first task order will be issued for the proposed amount to fulfill the Management Reporting requirements (CLIN 0001). The amount of time the SNIM IDIQ contract holders will have to respond to a TAT request for proposal may vary depending on the size and scope of the specific TAT requirement.
Section H
H.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest, states “An OCI will be present when a SNIM IDIQ prime contractor or subcontractor is also one of the DTIC Information Analysis Center (IAC) contractors responsible for searching and disseminating data from the IAC’s repository of STI.” This statement does not clearly identify either the conflicting roles that might bias a contractor’s judgment, or the unfair competitive advantage created by this situation. Please provide clarification defining the potential conflict perceived by the Government.	An OCI will/would be present if the contractor responsible for searching/disseminating data from the repository of scientific and technical information (STI) is also a SNIM contractor, or subcontractor to a SNIM contractor, competing for a TAT that is a follow-on to an inquiry or analysis provided by the Basic Center Operations (BCO) contractor.
H.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest. The Government has identified that the potential for OCI is present when a BCO prime contractor is engaged in a MAC team, either as a prime or a sub. As all members of a MAC team, both the prime and its subs, benefit from increased TAT volume awards, please clarify why the Government believes this same potential for OCI would not be present when a BCO subcontractor is engaged on a MAC team.	The Government recognizes that the potential for this type of OCI may exist and if it becomes present a mitigation plan would be required. The precise details and characteristics of such OCI, along with any restraints or other necessary actions, shall be determined as specific OCI are identified. The example set out in H.4.a of the SNIM RFP is simply a representative example, and should not be considered all inclusive.
H.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest. Can an existing or contending SNIM large business also be BCO subcontractor as long as the BCO small business prime contractor meets the requirements of FAR 52.219-14?	Yes. However, this would require an OCI Mitigation Plan. The precise details and characteristics of such OCI, along with any restraints or other necessary actions required for mitigate, shall be determined as specific OCI are identified. (See also the answer the above.)
H.4 Organizational Conflict of Interest, states “An OCI will be present when a SNIM IDIQ prime contractor or subcontractor is also one of the DTIC Information Analysis Center (IAC) contractors responsible for searching and disseminating data from the IAC’s repository of STI”. As written, this suggests there would be a conflict if any DTIC IAC contractors participate in the SNIM Procurement; not just those IACs that are associated with the SNIM technology areas. Is this the Government’s intent under this procurement?	No, this was not the Government's intent. H.4 is revised to read, "An OCI will be present when a SNIM IDIQ prime contractor or subcontractor is also one of the DTIC Information Analysis Center (IAC) BCO prime contractors for DACS, IATAC, or MSIAC responsible for searching and disseminating data from the IAC’s repository of STI."
Section J
J-1 DD254. Page 1, Block 7, of the DD254 requires subcontractor information. For the IDIQ proposal is it acceptable to only provide the information required in Block 6 for the prime contractor and leave Block 7 blank, or does the Government need this information for all planned subcontractors/teammates?	Block 6 is required to be completed at the time of proposal. Block 7 would be completed by the Prime for each subcontractor after award of the SNIM IDIQ contract.
Section L
L2.1.9 Classified Information, states “Proposals shall not contain classified information.” Some clients require that past performance references be marked “For Official Use Only” because nature of the organization and the work accomplished. Will the government accept past performance with this marking?	Yes, past performance information marked “For Official Use Only” will be accepted.
L4.2.2 Organization Structure Change History, states that to determine what past performance is relevant for this acquisition, the Offeror will include a “roadmap” describing changes in the organization of its company, teaming partners, and major subcontractors, as necessary. Is the Government requiring change histories only on those major subcontractors for which past performance information sheets are provided?	Yes.
L4.2.4 Past Performance Information Sheets. In previous RFPs, the Government has defined “major subcontractor” as a teaming partner/subcontractor that will perform major or critical aspects of the acquisition. Is this the definition for SNIM?	Yes.
L4.2.4 Past Performance Information Sheets. Was it the the Government's intention, per L4.2.4 ("Past performance on IDIQ type contracts should be submitted at the delivery/task order level, unless performance is only assessed for the IDIQ contract as a whole") to require the incumbent IAC contracts, or similar style contracts held by non-IAC primes, to be referenced solely at the individual TAT or Task/Delivery Order level? If IDIQ vehicles have received assessments/CPARs/etc. at select individual TAT/task order levels would this preclude past performance submission at the aggregate ID/IQ level? If this was not the Government's intent, would you consider changing the sentence above to read "Past performance on ID/IQ type contracts may be submitted at the aggregate ID/IQ level but relevance must be justified for inclusion per L4.2.4 instructions. "	Yes, the Government has intentionally specified that "Past performance on IDIQ type contracts should be submitted at the delivery/task order level, unless performance is only assessed for the IDIQ contract as a whole". If the IDIQ contract vehicle receives a single performance then the past performance submittal can be at the IDIQ contract level. If task/delivery orders receive individual assessments then the individual orders shall be submitted separately and each delivery/task order will be counted as one contract.
L4.2.4 Past Performance Information Sheets. This attachment does not appear to provide for inclusion of responses to certain mandatory response requirements found in various areas of the RFP. For example:

a. Paragraph L 4.2.4 (age 80), the last few sentences "Where problems existed, clearly demonstrate what management actions were employed in overcoming the problems and the effect(s) those actions had rectifying the problem and improving performance."

b. Section M, Paragraph 3.2.4 Relevancy of Past Performance, under Small Business Participation (Page 101, for Large Business respondents), "Provided technical roles of performance for small businesses."

c. Section M, Paragraph 3.2.5, Performance Quality, Cost Performance Criteria. a. See paragraph J. of revised Attachment L-1, Past Performance Information Sheet.

b. See paragraph D. of revised Attachment L-1,Past Performance Information Sheet, which is also where performance as a Prime or Subcontractor is identified. The Government may assess information from CPARs, Questionnaires and/or other sources.

c. Paragraph M3.2.5 provides the past performance cost criteria, which the Government may assess from CPARs, Questionnaires and/or other sources. Paragraph D. of revised Attachment L-1, Past Performance Information Sheet, has been revised to allow for any unique technical/cost performance to be addressed.

Note: The spacing and content of the Attachment L-1 template may be expanded for inclusion of requested/required information.

L4.2.5 Past Performance Questionnaire, provides instructions for the completion of Past Performance questionnaires, but does not address whether those completed questionnaires are to be included in the Offeror’s Past Performance Volume. Is it the Government's intent for completed questionnaires to be returned to the Offeror by the respondent for incorporation into the Past Performance Volume, or should completed questionnaires be forwarded by the respondent to the Contracting Officer only? Please clarify if the completed Past Performance questionnaires are to be included in the Offeror's Past Performance Volume.	The completed Past Performance Questionnaire should be forwarded to the Contracting Officer for inclusion in the Offeror's Past Performance Volume. See revised paragraph L4.2.5.
L4.2.6 Alternate Past Performance Assessment Forms, seems to imply that copies of CPARs or similar evaluation forms are to be included in the proposal. However, there are no requirements in L.4 Past Performance to include, nor are any pages allocated for the inclusion of CPARS, Award Fee Letters, etc. in the proposal. Clarify if offerors are to include copies of CPARs [alternative or otherwise], Award Fee Letters, 3rd Party Assessments, etc. in the Past Performance Volume. In addition, if this material is to be included will the Government exempt these documents from the 5-page page limit for each contract citation?	CPARs or alternative assessment forms should not be submitted in the Past Performance volume. L4.2.6 is revised to remove the reference for inclusion of this information.
L5.0, Volume III – Contract Documentation. This section refers to a section J Attachment as a “Pre-Award Audit Information", however, the attachment in section J is titled “DOL EEOC Clearance Request Information”. Section L9.3.5 references the DOL EEOC clearance form. Can the Government confirm that the Pre Award Audit Information form is the same as the DOL EEOC clearance form? If not would the Government please provide the Pre Award Audit Information attachment?

Instead of the (missing) “Pre-Award Audit Information" attachment, may the Offeror submit the point of contact of the cognizant Federal agency having the necessary information to complete a preaward survey and/or validate the status of the contractor's accounting systems, financial competence, etc.?" The reference in L5.0 is revised to read, "DOL EEOC Clearance Request Information”.

The DCMA and DCAA points of contact shall be identified within the Cost/Price volume. (Reference the revised L7.4.1 paragraph)

L7.1 Cost Volume Instructions, states “All cost/price information shall be address within the cost/price volume only.” In section L3.3.4 of the RFP, under the Management and Technical Capability Volume, the instructions call for cost and schedule to be provided for management of the IDIQ and TAT’s. For the Phase 1 proposals, where does the government wish to have the management task cost/price & schedule information included, in the management volume or a separate cost volume for Phase 1. Also, if it is to be included in the management volume, will the cost/schedule information be counted against the page limit?	The instruction in section L3.3.4 is informing offeror's to identify those things that will be used in the management of the SNIM contract requirements, which will include monitoring and reporting cost and schedule performance. This should not include any of the associated cost/price proposal data.
L7.2 Management Reporting (CLINs X001), says, “Based on historical data there is a total combined average of 35-45 TATs issued per year within the focus areas of DACS, IATAC, and MSIAC”. Is it the Government’s intention for all proposals to use the 35-45 annual average number of TATs/DOs as the average number for management and cost proposals to ensure an equal basis for comparison across proposals?	No, this represents the annual average number of TATs issued and was not intended to be an estimate of the average number of TATs a SNIM contractor may be awarded and have to provide consolidated reporting on.
L9.0 Other Proposal Information. In which proposal volume should the information required in RFP Section L9.0 be included?	This information should be submitted as part of the Contract Documentation volume. The instruction(s) of L9.0 are moved under L5.0, Contract Documentation.
Section M
M3.1.3 Subfactor 3 – Sample TATs. Are the sample TATs identified in this paragraph comprised of entirely new statements of work unrelated to previous or existing IAC TATs? If the answer is no, then how does the Government intend to ensure that fair and open competition will be achieved for the TAT evaluation?	The sample TATs are related, but not the same as previous or existing IAC TATs.
M3.1.3 Subfactor 3 – Sample TATs. Sample TAT 1 is in the area of USAF MAJCOM Information Assurance. Department of Defense Directive 8570 requires that all DoD Information Assurance (IA) work must be performed by certified IA professionals. DoD Directive 8570 is currently being phased into use over the course of the next few years with a requirement to increase the use of certified IA professionals. The use of certified IA professionals increases the cost of performing DoD IA work and therefore has the potential to effect the cost associated with the sample task. For the purposes of this procurement will DoD Directive 8570 be considered in full effect?	Yes.
M3.3.1. Factor 3 – Cost/Price. states that, “The Offeror’s Compensation Plan, setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees, will also be evaluated in accordance with FAR 52.222-46,” yet there is no Section L requirement to include a compensation plan in any of the proposal volumes. Will the Government please clarify if Offerors are required to submit a compensation plan?	Yes, per FAR 22.1103 and 52.222-46 Offerors shall submit a compensation plan. Instruction on the submittal of this plan has been added as L7.4.3.
M3.2.4 Past Performance Relevancy Table. Under the Rating for “Very Relevant” the Definition states that the past performance must involve “essentially the same tasks”. Does the government define the “same tasks” as only those tasks that are currently or have been previously performed on IAC contracts such as the IATAC, MSIAC, or DACS? If the answer is yes, then it would appear that only existing IAC service providers will be able to achieve a “Very Relevant” past performance rating.	No.

&RSNIM RFP Q&A

Page &P

Draft RFP 2

	Disclaimer: If there is a conflict between the answer posted here and the formal RFP, the formal RFP takes precedence.
	Questions	Answers
	General Questions
	Contract type for all TAT’s is stated as being either CPFF or FFP. T&M’s (Time and Materials) are specifically excluded from TAT’s. It is unclear whether the Government intends to pass this requirement down from Prime MAC holders to its various subcontractors. Given the nature of the TAT subject matter areas, the Prime MAC holders will most likely need to engage small businesses or individual consultants for subject matter expertise. As these partners my not be CAS compliant, a CPFF subcontract would be inappropriate. Many of these types of services also do not fit with the FFP methodology. Will the government specifically allow for T&M subcontracting in the resultant MAC awards?	The Government will not state at the IDIQ level that it will allow nor disallow a specific subcontract type since this could depend on varing factors and need to be made on a case by case basis at the individual TAT level.
	Will Subscription Accounts for multiple training sessions or purchase of bulk quantities of products be available in the new contract?	Subscription accounts will not be available under SNIM. All requirements will be awarded through task orders.
	Section B
	RFP Page 2, CLIN 0001 - CLIN 0001 specifically covers the reports for Section 1.5.2.3, 1.5.2.4, and 1.5.2.5. Are the activities in Section 1.5.2.2 and 1.5.2.6 required to be bid into each TAT?	Yes, these requirements/costs will be at the individual TAT level.
	PWS
	Reference Section 1.3.1.2
Which international agreements for military or related operations are there in place? Are there any international agreements for military or related operations in the works? If so, with which nations?	If these become applicable they will be specified in the individual TAT requirement.
	Reference Section 1.4.4.2
Please describe where data may be from "existing sources?" Please provide those respective platforms, architectures and inner-connected components.	Specific details such as the "data of new or existing sources", which could vary requirement to requirement will be identified in the individual TAT.
	RFP, Page 14, Section 1.4.4. Knowledge Management - Are these activities funded through the CPFF CLINS 002 or 004? There is insufficient detail to provide a FFP price as the number of trips, locations, number of SOARS, etc. have not been specified. Additionally, is the plan to have a Net Billing process for training and product development as is utilized on the current IAC contracts?	PWS section 1.4.4. provides the areas of Knowledge Management that may be included in an individual TAT requirement. The CO will determine at the time of the TAT competition, depending on the individual requirement, which CLIN the TAT order will be issued against. No Net Billing process will be used for the SNIM IDIQ contracts.
	RFP, Page 14, Section 1.5 Program Management - Are these activities to be bid as part of CLIN 0001 Management Reporting or under each individual TAT under CLINS 0002 through 0005?	As specified in the CLIN x001 description the proposed price shall be for the Management Reporting requirements of Sections 1.5.2.3, 1.5.2.4, 1.5.2.5 of the SNIM PWS. All other costs will be proposed per TAT requirement.
	Reference Section 1.6.1
Are there any current SNIM published standards or standards that are being re-written in regards to this initiative not listed in the PWS? Currently stated are http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives <http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives> and http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html <http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html> which do not address most foreign solution platforms. For instance governance of records in the United States for DoD policy is through the use of the DoD 5015.2 http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/recmgt/ <http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/recmgt/> .	Any standards and/or regulations not identified in the SNIM IDIQ PWS will be specified in the individual TAT requirement.
	The draft RFP Section H.3 Ordering Process, subparagraph e. Cost/Price for travel and materials, sub 1. Travel Cost reimbursable specifies " When Government quarters are available the contractor employees shall use them."
In the past this has posed a significant cost issue when the Government Quarters are no longer available when the contract employee arrives at the Travel location. As a result the Contractor employee must use Commercial facilities at rates that are not within the GSA specified Per Diem for the location. Will the Contracting Office provide any protection for reservations made at Government quarters? Will the Contracting office provide contractual adjudication for non-GSA Per Diem hotels when Government quarters were reserved and then the reservation was not honored?	The contractor shall follow the guidenance and requlation specified in FAR 31.205-46 and the Joint Travel Regulations. The subject sentence regarding "government quarters" will be removed from RFP paragraph H.3.
	Reference H.4 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. This is listed as “Under construction.” Will the OCI issue be finalized before the RFP release?	The H.4, OCI, clause will be issued when the formal RFP is released.
	Will REQUIRED INSURANCE guidelines be included in Section H of the Final RFP to assist offerors in completing J-3: Notification of Compliance with Contract Insurance Requirements?	The "Notification of Compliance with Contract Insurance Requirements" attachment will be removed from the SNIM RFP.
	Section I
	Sould FAR 52.227-11, Patent Right – Ownership by the Contractor be included in the RFP? Research and development contracts typically contain this clause.	DFARS clause 252.227-7038, Patent Rights—Ownership by the Contractor (Large Business), is included instead of FAR 52.227-11, per DFARS 227.303.
	Would the Government consider removal of FAR 52.215-17, Waiver of Facilities Capital Cost of Money and Replace with FAR 52.215-16 to allow contractors to propose this item where appropriate under SNIM IDIQ TAT proposals?	FAR 52.215-16 is included in the RFP, Section L. FAR 52.215-17 will be removed from the solicitation but may be included in the resultant contract if the prospective contractor does not propose facilities capital cost of money in its offer.
	Would the Government consider removal of FAR 52.227-3, Patent Indemnity, since this will be a research and development contract and this clause is typically included in contracts that involve the delivery of commercial items?	FAR clause 52.227-3, Patent Indemnity, is included since a commercial item may be an incidental component of TAT performance or generated STI.
	Section L
	Reference L2.0, PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS. Please provide clarification on response date. The RFP states that the Phase I proposals are due 30 days after RFP release and that Phase II proposals are due 60 days after RFP release. This infers that offerors will have 30 days to write the Phase II proposal because the Sample TATs won’t be released until 30 days after the RFP release date. Is that correct?	Yes, that is correct.
	Section L2.0 limits responses to Subfactor 1 – Management & Technical Capability to 25 pages. In order to allow offerors to provide complete responses, will the Government increase the page limits for Subfactor 1 to 35 pages?	No.
	Reference Section L2.1.1 Page Limitations. Would the Government consider adding “cover letter” to the list of items not counted in the maximum page limits?	The Government considers a "cover letter" and "cover page" to be synonymous, in which this would not be counted per instruction in L2.1.1.
	Section L3.1 at the bottom of RFP page 76 - Offerors are asked to provide information including basis of selection for “each planned subcontract”. Does this apply to only the subcontractors proposed on the Sample TAT’s or does this apply to the entire proposed team for the IDIQ contract?

Please clarify “planned subcontract”. It would seem that “planned subcontract” is only relevant to the Sample Tasks since a reference to subcontractor involvement in the mission capability section is purely speculative. There are two separate subcontracting/teaming arrangement requirements for Mission Capability and TAT responses. Section L3.1 applies to the information to be provided as part of the Mission Capability volume. L7.4.2.c provides instruction on the information to be include for subcontracts within the Sample TATs proposal volume.

This is intended to include any subcontractor/teaming partner the Prime Offeror may be including as part of it Mission Capability proposal. This will be changed to read, "For each planned subcontractor/teaming partner..."

Reference L3.1 GENERAL. The last paragraph in L3.1 states “At a minimum, the Mission Capability proposal shall consist of the following sections Table of Contents Executive Summary Management and Technical Capability – Subfactor 1 Small Business Participation (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) – Subfactor 2 Sample Technical Area Tasks (excludes price) – Subfactor 3

The above guidance is inconsistent with L2.0 where Sample Area Tasks are excluded from Phase I. Shouldn’t the instruction be changed to display Phase I sections as above but excluding Sample Area Tasks? Is there guidance for the Phase II sections?	Correct, the reference to Sample TATs will be removed from L3.1.
	If an organizational chart is included in the Mission Capability Subfactor 1, is it included in the 25 pages? The Executive Summary also asks for an organizational chart and this section is unscored.	Section L3.2 specifies that the Offeror's organizational chart is to be included as part of the Executive Summary with the Mission Capability volume. The table in L2.0 specifies a 5 page limit for the Executive Summary. If an organizational chart is also included in the proposal information for Subfactor 1 it will be counted.
	Is it acceptable to include the organization chart in the Executive Summary and refer to it from Subfactor 1 and still be evaluated?	Yes.
	For Volume I, subfactor 1, the general instructions in section L3.3 request demonstrating technical ability in the SNIM mission areas identified in section M. However, the more specific instructions (L3.3.1 through L3.3.4) focus on management-related topics only. Section M3.1.1 for subfactor 1 adds specific PWS capability requirements for each technical area. Sections L and M seem inconsistent in their requirements. Does the government desire a discussion of technical capabilities in Volume 1?	Yes, the Government will evaluate the offeror's capability to meet the SNIM requirements identified in M3.1.1. Applicable instruction will be added to L3.3.
	If the answer to the question above is yes, where a technical capabilities discussion as outlined in section M3.1.1 is desired in Volume 1, does the government still intend for the technical and management discussion to be limited to 25 pages?	Yes.
	Reference L3.4 SUBTACTOR 2: SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION. The RFP requests the offeror to provide a small business subcontracting plan demonstrating how it will achieve small business goals of 15% for Base Period, 20% for Options 1&2, and 25% for Options 3&4 and a distribution of VOSB 3%, SDVOSB 3%, SDB 5%, WOSB 5% and HubZone 3%. Since the Phase 1 submittal will not include cost other than Program Management functions related to STI shouldn’t the Small Business Plan be a Phase 2 submittal so that the Small Business Plan will reflect the estimated proposal costs from the sample tasks?”	The subcontracting plan will remain a part of the Phase 1 proposal. The Government realizes that Offerors cannot estimate the total dollars that may be awarded them over the life of a multiple award IDIQ contract. Thus, dollar amounts are not expected in the subcontracting plan. Rather the subcontracting plan shall define the Offeror's approach (e.g. the Offeror’s known small business teaming partners, technical roles of performance, focus areas and/or types of work anticipated to be subcontracted to small business, etc.) that will be utilized in meeting the small business participation goals.
	Section L4.1 indicates that the government will use “various sources, which may not be limited to Past Performance Information Documents submitted, CPARs, questionnaires, and interviews” to assess Past Performance. If a contract does not have CPARs or other alternate assessment documentation as defined in Section L.4.2.6 (“e.g., an Award Fee notification letter, a subcontractor’s prime Contractor performance evaluation”), would Attachment J-6, Past Performance Questionnaire, be a sufficient form of alternative assessment documentation?	Attachment J-6 is the questionnaire being referenced in L4.1.
	Reference L4.2 CONTENT OF PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME. The requirement for 10 past performances references appears excessive. Would the government be amendable to making the requirement five references?	The offeror is not required to submitt 10 past performance references. This is the maximum number of references that can be submitted.
	Section L4.2.4 states “Past performance on IDIQ type contracts should be submitted at the delivery/task order level, unless performance is only assessed for the IDIQ contract as a whole. The Offeror shall explain that performance on individual orders is not assessed and provide the using activity’s single point of contact that can verify the Offeror’s performance”. Question - If an ID/IQ contract is submitted for past performance assessment on the contract as a whole in support of the offeror’s management capabilities, can an individual delivery order under that contract also be submitted to demonstrate technical capability?	If the contract is assessed at the IDIQ level as a whole it would likely cover all management and technical aspects the offeror performed in the orders under it.
	There appears to be an inconsistency in the descriptions of the component capabilities that make up each of the four technical areas across different portions of the RFP and the Past Performance questionnaire. For example,

• the description in 1.4.3.8 does not match the MS-8 description in the Past Performance Questionnaire – the MS-8 description appears to address only improvement based on combat exercises or actual combat, while 1.4.3.8 does not restrict the improvement;

• 1.4.3.9 restricts the purpose of the tools discussed while MS-9 does not;

• for the Software Data & Analysis technical area, Section 1.4.2 enumerates 8 areas of expertise, and the Past Performance questionnaire mirrors that organization. However in Section M3.2.4.1 Relevancy Criteria there are 9 areas of expertise for SDA - this section splits the capability description in SD-2 and in 1.4.2.2 into two separate capabilities.

Question – Would the Government consider using the same wording to describe the technical capabilities in all RFP sections and in the Past Performance questionnaire in order to be consistent throughout the RFP?	The Government will take this into consideration.
	Section M
	Reference M3.1 FACTOR 1 – MISSION CAPABILITY. The PWS references listed for evaluation are a subset of PWS 1.4 and 1.5. Please confirm that this is intentional.	Yes.

&CPosted Draft RFP&R&P of &N

Draft RFP 1

Questions	Answers
Note that significant changes have taken place since the posting of the Draft RFP. Sections L and M will be revised reflecting changes in the PPT process and pricing/technical evaluation. Sample TATs are expected to be added. The final RFP will incorporate changes and is estimated to be released 17 Feb 2009.

Disclaimer: If there is a conflict between the answer posted here and the formal RFP, the formal RFP takes precedence.

General
Will there be an industry day?	The government is not planning to have an industry day at this time.
What is the anticipated date for RFP release?	The government expects to release the formal RFP in the first quarter of Calendar Year 2009.
The 55th has not published any OCI information relative to a contractor being a prime for the MAC and Core contract. It would seem that guidance on the MAC/CORE OCI issue should be published before an RFP is released for either. If a contractor bids on the SNIM MAC it may be eliminated from future Core competitions. Contractors should be aware of this.	RFP Section H 4 clearly reflects the OCI constraints related to multiple award IDIQ contract holders. An attachment will be added to the RFP (Proposal Information Package (PIP)) which will discuss the OCI and NDA provisions envisioned for the CORE contractors. The Government would have to address each situation on a case-by-case basis and will always make every effort to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest in accordance with FAR 9.5.
The $2B 5-year ceiling appears to be low given the recent history of funds placed on IACs.	This figure is the Government's best estimate at this time.
Will you evaluate pricing without fee?	No, the cost/price proposal and subsequent evaluation will include a method to calculate fee.
What will be the assumed priority of evaluation criteria for each individual TAT?	It may vary depending on the type of requirement. Since each TO stands on its own in terms of evaluation, this information is subject to FAR 3.104 until published in a solicited TO.
What is the anticipated date of contract award?	The Government anticipates award in the fourth quarter of the calendar year 2009.
Will there be multiple categories (F&O, small business) for award?	No.
Is the NAICS code 541712 for the prime contractor?	The size standard applies to the prime and it depends for the subcontractor. Reference FAR 19.102 (b) Small business size standards are applied by -- (1) Classifying the product or service being acquired in the industry whose definition, as found in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Manual (available via the Internet at http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html), best describes the principal nature of the product or service being acquired;

(2) Identifying the size standard SBA established for that industry; and

(3) Specifying the size standard in the solicitation so that offerors can appropriately represent themselves as small or large.

	Is this a new procurement; and if not, who are the current primes?	It is a new procurement; however, it represents the consolidation of focus areas for TAT requirements currently performed under DACS (ITT), IATAC (BAH), and MSIAC (Alion).
	In the past, how many TAT orders have been procured annually on this contract?	For DACS, IATAC, and MSIAC combined, approximately 35-45 orders annually.
	Does this contact have separate TATs from those performed by the Information Analysis Centers (IACs)? Will an IAC contractor be able to propose on this contract’s TAT orders?	The focus areas currently performed under DACS, IATAC, and MSIAC will be performed under SNIM TATs. Only SNIM multiple award IDIQ contract holders will be allowed to compete for SNIM TATs.
	What percentage of the work is anticipated to be accomplished on government sites?	Performance locations will be specified per individual TAT and the government does not have an estimate regarding place of performance for future requirements.
	Does the Price Model assume contractor or government site rates?	The SNIM Pricing Model published in the draft RFP will not be used. This approach has been revised.
	Do all subcontractor rates need to be shown in the Price Model, or can the prime develop a single rate that is inclusive of all subcontractors?	The SNIM Pricing Model published in the draft RFP will not be used. This approach has been revised.
	How many award winners are anticipated?	The Government anticipates award of approximately 6 (+/-) contracts IAW RFP Section M.
	What will be the % awarded to Small Business primes?	The SNIM acquisition is Full and Open Competition with no small business set asides.
	If there will be Small Business primes, will the number of past performance needed be reduced?	All Offerors are required to submit the same information IAW the RFP.
	If a Small Business submits as a prime, will they be able to be a sub to a Large Business prime too?	This will be decided on a case-by-case basis. Teaming in general will be addressed in the final RFP.
	If there is a HUBZone preference at the prime contract level, why is the Small Business subcontracting goal for HUBZone not differentiated as well, perhaps as the highest Small Business goal percentage?	IAW FAR 19.1307(b), The contracting officer shall give offers from HUBZone small business concerns a price evaluation preference by adding a factor of 10 percent to all offers, except— (1) Offers from HUBZone small business concerns that have not waived the evaluation preference; or (2) Otherwise successful offers from small business concerns. The HUBZone preference in this acquisition is a price evaluation preference only and is not tied to Small Business Subcontracting goals
	Will the technical areas (IA, SW & Data analysis, M&S, and KM) be broken down into separate contracts? Or will they continue to be grouped as one?	Each SNIM multiple award contract will contain all areas.
	In earlier versions of IAC requests, one of the recommended activities was to prepare a TAT response and submit the proposed response as an example of work product that could be expected from the offeror were they to receive an award.
Question: Has this exercise been replaced by the requirement to more generally demonstrate capability across the broader set of SNIM TAT requirement areas?	Sample TATs will be considered in evaluations. This will be addressed in the final RFP.
	The RFP does not explicitly include language about FFRDCs (national laboratories), and it is unclear as to whether bidders would be encouraged, discouraged, or even precluded from trying to leverage an FFRDC. Question: Would it be possible to amend the RFP to encourage collaboration with FFRDCs for the SNIM?	Barring any exclusions from the FFRDCs charter with the sponsoring agency, and/or other applicable laws or regulations, DTIC would allow teaming between contractors and an FFRDC. However, as the charter for each FFRDC is different the best source for an answer would be the specific FFRDC with whom you are intending to team. The prime and FFRDC should work together to ensure that 1) the FFRDC's sponsoring agreement and applicable regulations allow its participation; 2) the FFRDC has unique capacity to do the work; 3) the work isn't otherwise available in the private sector; and 4) the FFRDC is not directly competing with industry. Note, the soliciting office may request documentation supporting the above. In addition, the prime would be responsible to pay the FFRDC as a sub and DTIC would not fund the FFRDC directly.
	By clearly delineating the RDT&E and AA&S scope of work, is SNIM effectively precluded from handling transition activities? Transition is only mentioned as a sub-requirement for Knowledge Management and Information Sharing, but we feel that it is a critical function for the success of any of the services SNIM provides.	The PWS specifies the Government's expected requirements for SNIM efforts. More detailed requirements will be provided in the PWS for each individual TAT.
	With regards to the BCO awardees and the MAC awardees, please delineate the relationship(s) and expectations, i.e., the operational relationship, product deliverables, etc.	This will be addressed in the PIP attached to the final RFP.
	The OCI issue between being a MAC and a BCO for the same contract area has not been addressed.	This will be addressed in the PIP attached to the final RFP. CORE contractors will have OCI and NDA provisions in their contracts that will ensure that the Government addresses each situation on a case-by-case basis. The Govt. will make every effort to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest in accordance with FAR 9.5.
	Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices
	Section B, Page 2, Is a CAS compliant system a mandatory requirement to bid on CPFF based contracts?	See Section I - 52.230-2 Cost Accounting Standards (Also see FAR Appendix Subpart 9903.201 -- Contract Requirements and 9903.201-1 -- CAS Applicability.)

52.230-6 Administration of Cost Accounting Standards // Section K Full Text 52.230-1 COST ACCOUNTING STANDARDS NOTICES AND CERTIFICATION (OCT 2008)

	Section B, Item No. 0002, There is a place for the contractor to supply pricing information for this CLIN. Should this line be removed, since it is the Government’s intent to complete this after contract award?	The government will supply the figure to be used. This will be addressed in the final RFP.
	Section B, Item No 0002, The description for CLIN 0002 allows for CPFF & FFP TATs, however the contract type listed is CPFF. Should this be modified to read CPFF and/or FFP?	This will be addressed in the final RFP.
	Section B, Item No 0003, A&AS, The description for CLIN 0003 allows for CPFF & FFP TATs, however the contract type listed is COST. Should this be modified to read CPFF and/or FFP?	This will be addressed in the final RFP.
	CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001 and 4001 - The RFP states that FFP task orders will be issued against CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001 and 4001 to provide management support and meet reporting requirements specified in 1.5 of the SOW. Since the number of TATs is unknown and could vary widely, it would be difficult to price a firm fixed price amount for required support and reporting for an unknown number of TATs. Request the Government consider another method of pricing this support since there are too many unknowns to commit to fixed pricing over a 5 year period.	Please read the description in PWS sub-paragraph 1.5.1.1. The program management required to manage the requirements within an individual TAT will be proposed at the TAT level. Historically, the estimated average is 35-45 new TATs per year based on 3 single award contracts (DACS, IATAC, MSIAC) combined.
	CLINs 0001, 1001, 2001, 3001 and 4001 - These CLINs cover the effort to provide management support and meet reporting requirements specified in 1.5 of the SOW for the base ordering period plus the optional ordering periods. They do not account for any management support that will be required or reporting requirements that will need to be met for TATs whose execution periods extend beyond the ordering period of the fourth option year. Suggest the Government include a CLIN for management after the close of the fourth option period through the end of the execution period for TATs.	The Government will take this into consideration.
	Will management costs of individual TATs be covered by funds received under CLIN 0001? This would include costs associated with developing management reports, such as technical status reports, of individual TATs and other support functions.	No. The cost to manage an individual TAT to include the cost of deliverables required by each specific TAT will be priced within the individual order.
	Reference Section B, CLINs X002 & X003 (i.e., 0002 & 0003, 1002 & 1003, 2002 & 2003, etc): What criteria will the Government use to determine whether a particular effort is RDT&E (CLIN X002) versus A&AS (CLIN X003)? Is this distinction important? If so, how? Does a potential offeror need to address this distinction/difference in their proposal?	The Government will make the determination based on regulation and policy prior to issuance of the TAT RFP. No input from the offerors is required.
	RFP, Page 2—of 106, Section B, Supplies or Services
Comment: Is the Program Manager priced under the Management Support CLIN (0001) or the TAT CLINS (0002 and 0003)? The SNIM Pricing Model appears to have the Program Manager in both places	CLIN 0001 should include the offeror's FFP to provide requirements defined in PWS paragraphs 1.5.2.3, 1.5.2.4, and 1.5.2.5 as well as costs associated with management and oversight of the contract as a whole. CLINs 0002 and 0003 represent TATs that will be competitively awarded under individual orders and are expected to include all costs associated with the individual requirements, to include management costs and final technical report costs (PWS paragraph 1.5.2.2.) specific to that order. The pricing evaluation for SNIM has been revised and will be addessed in the final RFP.
	PWS Section C
	Operations: In Section 1.1 (Paragraph 2, Basic Center Operations) and DRFP Section 1.4.4. (Knowledge Management and Information Sharing), These two areas appear to somewhat overlap in responsibility for information dissemination. Questions: Is it the Government’s intent to include the offeror’s capabilities for this area as part of the Management Support CLIN? In not, how will this scope be covered? If the answer above is yes, how will the Government best value evaluate the relative cost component of the FFP bid for this CLIN when one offeror may have significant capabilities in this area (and thus higher costs) and another offeror may have little capabilities in this area (and thus a lower evaluated cost)?	A FFP task order will be issued against CLIN 0001 to cover the base ordering period. Solicited task orders will include evaluation of all costs. The final RFP will more clearly define the Management Support CLIN.
	See page 9, Section C, para. 1.1. The relationship between the SNIM MAC and the BCOs is not clear. Based on the four technical areas of SNIM, it seems obvious that the DACS, the MSIAC and the IATAC are related IACs, but which specific BCOs cover the Networking and Information sharing and Knowledge management? Additional clarification should be included regarding the MAC-BCO relationships so that STI can be effectively transitioned to the appropriate BCOs and so that the appropriate BCOs can promote their related MAC(s) capabilities.	Network requirements are generally applicable to DACS and IATAC focus areas. Information Sharing and Knowledge Management apply to all focus areas. Additional clarification regarding the MAC-BCO relationships will be included in the PIP, which will be an attachment to the RFP. Note that the government's intent is for the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) to coordinate with the requesting activity (RA) and individual IACS to determine which BCO will receive the STI.
	C.1.1 Background, 2nd paragraph, last sentence states: “The Software, Networks, Information and Modeling & Simulation (SNIM) TATs provide this advanced level of research and analysis to the DoD Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) and Acquisition communities.”
Will the government allow all DoD and Federal customers to use the SNIM IDIQ Contract?	The IAC PMO will determine which requirements submitted from the RA(s) fit the parameters of the IAC program offerings, both under the multiple award contract IDIQs and the CORE. Requirements from both DoD and Federal RAs will be accepted if the parameters are met.
	C.1.1 Background, 3rd paragraph; and C.1.4 Technical Scope:
There is no detailed section on “networks” similar to the sections for Information Assurance (C.1.4.1), Software Data & Analysis (C.1.4.2), and Modeling & Simulation (C.1.4.3). Will there be a section to specifically address the “networks” technical area of interest as has been included in the other mission areas called out in the draft RFP?	The PWS describes a "broad technical scope ... and/or other IT related RDT&E and R&D related A&AS services" for placement of multiple award IDIQ contracts. Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order.

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.