SNIM Q A Posted.xls
XLS spreadsheet 177 KB Posted
- Attached to
- SNIM RFP Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA4600-08-R-0025
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| SNIM Q A.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Amendment 2 - SNIM RFP SF30.doc | DOC document | |
| SNIM Q A.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| SNIM Q A.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| Amendment 1 - SNIM RFP SF30.doc | DOC document | |
| SNIM Q A.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| FA4600-08-R-0025 SNIM 29Apr09.doc | DOC document | |
| SPECIAL NOTICE DACS IATAC MSIAC.doc | DOC document | |
| SNIM Draft RFP 2 Q A.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| SNIM Draft RFP 2.doc | DOC document | |
| SNIM synopsis.doc | DOC document | |
| Special Notice to Industry 3Dec08.doc | DOC document | |
| J-3 Ins Cert Final.doc | DOC document | |
| J-1 Draft SNIM IDIQ Master DD 254 w-upd2.pdf | ||
| Ex A CDRL DD 1423.doc | DOC document | |
| J-4 EEOC Clearance Request Information.doc | DOC document | |
| J-2 SNIM Pricing Model.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| FA4600-08-R-0025 SNIM Draft v1.1.doc | DOC document |
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
Text version
Draft RFP
| 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 adddition, 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. | |
| Reference Paragraph C.1.4.3, Modeling & Simulation (M&S): The Request for Information (RFI) dated 23 June 2008 indicated that M&S would be included within the scope of all four multiple award contracts (MACs) that Government was considering. The RFI dated 18 September 2008 indicated that the M&S would be included only in the SNIM MAC. Does the Government’s acquisition strategy still group the current scope of the DTIC Information Analysis Centers (IACs) into the three MACs as indicated in the 18 September RFI (RFI #3)? Further, since R&D in the focus areas indicated for the Defense Systems and Homeland Security MACs often requires M&S (for instance, M&S as a design aid or M&S in lieu of live testing), will the Government consider such uses of M&S to be within the scope of the other planned MACs? If so, what would be the limitations of performing M&S work under those MACs, if any? | The IAC PMO will determine if a requirement submitted fits the parameters of the SNIM or other IAC contract. The strategy to have M&S focus areas within the SNIM acquisition is still current. | |
| RFP, page 13 of 106, 1.4.4 Knowledge Management (KM) and Information Sharing (IS) |
Paragraph 1.4.4.2 states, “Develop and provide SNIM related information products to include software, databases, handbooks, State-of-the-Art Reports(SOARS), critical reviews/technology assessments, research directories, abstracts and indexes”.
Paragraph 1.4.4.3 contains similar verbiage for training products.
| Comment: Please clarify how these items would be paid for through the contract without an ODC /Material CLIN. | ODCs required in the execution of a task order requirements will be delineated in solicited multiple award contract task orders as sub-CLIN(s). | |
| RFP, page 13 and 14 of 106, | ||
| Comment: From Sections 1.4.4.2 and 1.4.4.3, it appears that the BCO and the MAC will both have training and product development in their SOWs. This appears to be an area of conflict and redundancy. | The DTIC IAC Program will manage the program as a whole to ensure contractors do not receive duplicate requirements and to ensure potential conflicts such as these are resolved. | |
| Reference Section C.1.5: It appears that the level of effort required by the Management Support CLIN (X001) may be dependent on the number of TATs awarded. For example, a report summarizing 10 TATs would require far less effort to price each month that a report summarizing 100 TATs. Is it appropriate for such variable effort to be priced as a firm-fixed price? Would the Government consider revising the RFP to allow the offeror to propose a per-TAT fee for Management Support or a percentage of total dollars obligated? | Specific language will be added to the CLIN X001 description identifying SNIM PWS paragraphs 1.5.2.3, 1.5.2.4, & 1.5.2.5. Clarification will also be provided in the Section L Cost/Price instructions for Management Reporting. CLINs X001 will remain FFP. | |
| RFP, page 14 of 106, Section 5.1 Program Management & Reporting. | ||
| Comment: Management Support is a FFP effort. This tasking does not appear to be sufficiently described (See Section 1.5 and 1.4.4.1 of pages 13 and 14). It is estimated this would be 3-4 positions, one of these positions being a Program Manager which is also covered in the CPFF pricing. There is no ODC line item which is a big part of the management of the contract. RFP section 1.4.4.1 (Page 13 of 16) will require travel to “conduct scientific, technical, …throughout the United States and internationally”. | PWS paragraph 1.4.4.1 is not a part of CLIN 0001. The management support for CLIN 0001 consists of collating the data collected at the TAT level into single consolidated IDIQ level reports. This is different than the program/project management support that will be required for each specific TAT requirement, such as a scientific conference/symposium, which will be priced within and at the time of that individual order. | |
| Performance, Cost, Schedule: Referencing Section 1.5.1.4 (Performance, Cost, Schedule), does the Government plan to apply Earned Value Management requirements to Task Orders over $20M in value per Government guidelines? | The requirements of any solicited task order over this threshold will be examined for applicability. | |
| Under paragraph 1.5.2.2 Final Technical Report, who is responsible for uploading the report to TEMS? The MAC Contractor or the relevant IAC BCO center? | The IAC BCO contractor will be responsible for uploading documents into TEMS. | |
| Reference Paragraph C.1.5.1.2.e: Please clarify what kinds of requests are likely to be made of the offeror. If these requests are to be satisfied under the Management Support CLIN (X001), can the Government provide an estimate of the likely level of effort in order to support the development of a firm-fixed price? | These requests are for status reporting, queries on expenditures, etc. They will be administrative in nature and not of extraordinary technical complexity. | |
| Reference Section C.1.5: Paragraph 1.5 requirements appear to jump back and forth between addressing the requirements for the fixed-price Management Support CLIN (X001) and the TATs ordered under CLINS X002 and X003. For example, Paragraph 1.5.2.2 (Final Technical report) appears to impose a requirement for each TAT ordered under either CLIN X002 or X003. Paragraph 1.5.2.3 (Monthly Metrics Report) appears to require both accounting under each TAT plus a compilation of this accounting to be delivered under the Management Support CLIN (X001). Paragraph 1.5.2.4 (Monthly Contract Tracking Report) appears to require a summary report that is required under the Management Support CLIN (X001). Will the Government please clarify which aspects of this part of the PWS apply to which CLIN, and in particular, what the requirements are for the FFP CLIN? | Specific language will be added to the CLIN X001 description identifying SNIM PWS paragraphs 1.5.2.3, 1.5.2.4, & 1.5.2.5. Clarification will also be provided in the Section L Cost/Price instructions for Management Reporting. | |
| RFP, page 15 of 106, Section 1.5.2, Reporting Requirements | ||
| Comment: Many additional items will need to be reported within the Monthly Contract Tracking Report such as total dollars awarded to all subcontractors, total dollars awarded to small business subcontractors, and security clearance requirements. Much of this is proprietary data. Thus, it cannot be stored on the IAC ISS as competing firms will have access to this data. | As with OCI and NDA issues, the Govt. is critically sensitive and bound by acquisition regulations and policies to ensure the protection of proprietary data, business sensitive data, and source selection data. | |
| RFP, page 16 of 106, 1.6 General Information/Administration, 1.6.2 Documentation | ||
| Comment: Section 1.6.2 requires sharing documents between MAC contractors but does not address the need for access to core documents (reports, periodicals, textbooks, etc). This could be problematic. Another issue is how will a MAC contractor know what documents another MAC contractor has available for use? | New "Core" contracts will require the contractor to provide equal access to core documents within an IAC's repository to all multiple award IDIQ holders. | |
| Section 4.2 Glossary |
Recommend that you add after item 7 (page 20 of 106), the following:
| “Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI®) - CMMI is a process improvement approach to improve the usability of maturity models by integrating many different models into one framework. It was created by members of industry, government and the Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute (SEI).” | It is possible there may be CMMI requirments at the task order level. The government will consider adding this to the glossary. |
| We recommend that you add after current item 29 (Page 21 of 106) of the glossary: | |
| TAT Program Manager (TAT PM) - The Government official with program responsibility for operational management of DoD TATs assigned to a DoD component in accordance with the provisions of DoDD 3200.12, DoD Scientific and Technical Information Program. The TAT PM is responsible for the technical accuracy of program decisions, recommendations and for budgeting and management of basic TAT operations funding. | The glossary defines the IAC PM (#14 - responsible for IAC program), COR (#7 - responsible for technical oversight of contractor performance) and Requesting Activity (#20 - responsible for individual TATs assigned as an ACOR). The government will not have a TAT PM. |
| Recommend that you add the following bullets to M3.2.1 Subfactor One – Management Approach Page 101 of 106): |
• Use of CMMI as part of your management approach
| • Use of EVMS as part of your process of controlling cost, schedule, performance and risk | The requirements of any solicited task order potentially requiring CMMI, EVMS, etc. will be examined for applicability. | |
| C.1.2: SNIM Objectives - suggest a fourth objective: “To support the development, use and application of IA technologies into existing or future DoD and military service, the federal government, industrial base, and other capabilities.” | Objectives are not intended to be particular taskings. The SNIM multiple award IDIQ contract is adequately defined, and the objectives of the SNIM efforts describe the overall Software, Networks, Information and Modeling & Simulation (SNIM) advanced level of research and analysis to the DoD Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) and Acquisition communities. | |
| 1.3, page 9, How will contractors get access to existing STI’s? | New "Core" contracts will require the contractor to provide equal access to core documents within an IAC's repository to all multiple award IDIQ holders. | |
| It is unclear what the definition is for “A&AS services as related to R&D focus” (Section 1.3.3). Could this be more clearly defined (i.e., defined by type of funds, 3400, 3600, etc.)? | The Government will make the determination based on regulation and policy prior to issuance of the TAT RFP. | |
| Suggestion: Add 1.3.3.5 to read: “To support the development, use and application of IA technologies into existing or future DoD and military service, the federal government, industrial base, and other capabilities.” | The mission of the SNIM contract is to provide RDT&E and R&D Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) for the vital technical areas delineated in the Technical Scope portion of this Performance Work Statement (PWS). See Technical Scope Sub-paragraph 1.4.1 Information Assurance (IA). | |
| The entire section C.1.4.4 is at the same PWS level as other sections within paragraph C.1.4 (Technical Scope); i.e., C.1.4.1 (IA), C.1.4.2 (Software Data & Analysis), and C.1.4.3 (M&S). The requirements in C.1.4.4 KM and IS seem to be broader and more general than the specifics stated in other C.1.4 subparagraphs. | ||
| Suggestion: Add the following statement to subparagraph C.1.4.4 to read: "The requirements in this subparagraph (KM and IS) shall be considered within technical scope of SNIM.” | The Govt. has stated its minimum needs in this area. | |
| Section 1.4.2 Software & Data Analysis implies a requirement for a standards-based, consistent, integrated systems engineering infrastructure. Is there such an infrastructure in place? Is there also a requirement to design, set up and/or operate this environment as part of this systems engineering work? | It is expected that RAs will have requirements to analyze existing as well as notional systems. These requirements will be fully defined under each solicited task order | |
| Section 1.4.3 Modeling and Simulation, 1.4.3.8 requests “support to aid in the evaluation and improvement of the various models and databases that support IA analysis.” Why is IA specifically identified rather than some other M&S application? It would seem that the application could be weapon design, fluid dynamics, communications, biological agent dispersion models, battlefield management, etc. | The IA reference will be removed from the final PWS. | |
| Regarding section 1.4.3 Modeling & Simulation, are the type of modeling and simulation activities that would fall under this effort limited to discrete event simulation and other simulation techniques? Would there possibly be a need to consider optimization modeling techniques such as linear programming, mixed integer programming, and/or constraint based programming? | 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. | |
| Paragraph 1.4.3.9 refers to the evaluation, development, and implementation of collaborative modeling and analysis tools for the evaluation and development of the collaborative databases and data stores. Can you please clarify whether this includes the actual development of collaborative databases and data stores, or if it just refers to the evaluation of plans to develop such databases and data stores. | The scope includes both development and evaluation of collaborative databases and data stores. | |
| Can the government provide a rough estimate of the percent of the modeling activities in section 1.4.3 that would likely be focused on training activities through simulated scenarios (e.g. gaming) versus being focused on evaluation of new systems or tools? | 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 of individual TATs are unknown at this time and any projection would only be speculation. | |
| Would the modeling tools and analysis currently performed as part of the Army's Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization program (JIEDDO) fall under the scope of this effort? | 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. | |
| Reference page 13, Section C, para. 1.4.4. Many of the activities described in this paragraph appear to be “core” activities more appropriate for a BCO. This seems inconsistent with the new IAC “contract construct.” Which existing BCO does the MAC provide its STI to? Is there a plan to eventually have a BCO in this subject area? | The IAC PMO will determine if a requirement submitted fits the parameters of the SNIM or a BCO contract. The IAC PMO will determine which BCO receives the STI generated. There is no plan to have additional IACs. | |
| 1.4.4.4 - Asks for evaluation of new technologies, applications, and processes. Are there specific tools or approaches already in use? | Since exact R&D TAT efforts are unknown at this time any specific tools and/or approaches already being used would be identified within those individual requirements. | |
| 1.4.4.4 - Alternate enterprise architecture solutions were mentioned. What are the existing approaches being used? | The Govt. is critically sensitive and bound by acquisition regulations and policies to ensure the protection of proprietary data, business sensitive data, and source selection data. Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order. | |
| 1.4.4.6 - A global net centric systems approach was mentioned. Is the use of the Net Centric Enterprise Services (NCES) preferred or encouraged? | Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order. | |
| 1.4.4.6 - Are explicit collaboration tools for information sharing important (such as chat systems, wikis, etc), or is tacit collaboration (implicit collaboration through the software) encouraged? For example, the cooperative creation of social networks, hypothesis management, etc. | The IAC PMO determines which requirements submitted from Requesting Activities (RA) fit the parameters of the IAC program offerings, both under the multiple award IDIQ contracts and the CORE. | |
| Suggestion: Add subparagraph C.1.4.4.7 to read: ”Provide support for the conduct of Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V), outreach and awareness, wargames, and exercises.” | The Govt. has stated its minimum needs in this area. | |
| CLIN 0001 is for management support and indicates PWS section 1.5 applies. Paragraph 1.5.2.1 indicates that management requirements are split between the overall management and the management of the individual TATs and goes on to say that with regard to CLIN 0001, paragraphs 1.5.2.2 through 1.5.2.6 are for summary data for the overall contract. Para 1.5.2.2 however details the final Technical Report. Is the individual TAT Manager solely responsible for the final TR, or does the overall Manager (CLIN 0001) have some responsibility when delivering the final TR for a TAT? | 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. Each task order will require priced proposals. | |
| Page 15, Section C, para 1.5.2.2. Since the STI developed by the MACs is to be made available to all BCOs (para. 1.5.2.6), which BCO will have the task to enter it into TEMS so that there isn’t duplication of effort? | This will be addressed in the PIP attached to the final RFP. The separate requirements of the multiple award IDIQ contracts and the BCO will be discussed therein. Per PWS sub-paragraph 1.5.2.2. The COR will be responsible for coordinating with the RA and submitting documents to the IAC BCO centers for inclusion in TEMS. | |
| Para 1.5.2.6 deals with the STI repository. Is there an estimate of the scope of the STI collection anticipated? Will the existing IACs provide current collections to the IAC BCC? Are there any requirements for access to any classified portion of the collection via the SIPRNet? Is SIPRNet access required? | The amount of STI generated is dependent on the TAT requirments and is variable depending on the volume of TATs awarded. The repository of STI will be transferred from the current IAC holder to a new IAC Core contractor as applicable. Access requirements are contingent on the documents stored and whether those documents are currently available electronically. | |
| 1.7.2 - Is there a requirement for subcontractors and/or small business partners to have a Top Secret facility or is it sufficient that only the prime have such a facility? | The DD 254 attached to the formal RFP will cover the overall requirement. Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order. | |
| Personnel and Facility Clearance: In Section 1.7.2 (Personnel and Facility Security), the DRFP the contractor will be required to furnish employees who already possess the appropriate security clearance level for all related task orders. Given the current Government approach of issuing SCI billets (and some SAP program billets) for those positions on a specific contract that requires them – this statement appears to imply the contractor is expected to use people billeted to another contract to support SNIM. | The DoD Contract Security Classification Specification is not an area where interpreting what a statement "appears to imply" is a valid approach to the requirements. The requirements of the DoD Industrial Security Manual apply. The DD 254 attached to the formal RFP will cover the overall requirement. | |
| C.1.7.2.b states: “the contractor will be required to provide employees who already possess the appropriate security clearance level for all task orders”. | ||
| (a) Comment: The requirement to use the existing pool of cleared resources is understood. Implicit, however, is the requirement to ensure that the pool is realistic and available. As the talent pool grows or as new, valuable, and otherwise qualified staff become available to support the SNIM’s mission the contract should provide for the ability to clear the necessary personnel per DoD 5220.22-R NISPOM. (b) Question: Who has the authority to approve the requirement for clearances at any level for the task orders? c) Comment: Please clarify what clearance level is required of key personnel to manage the IDIQ on CLIN 1? (d) Suggestion: Add: “Prime contractors are encouraged to maintain a cleared pool of staff of up to 10% of the number of staff on the contract to ensure that staff levels can be maintained at awarded levels without unexpected delays based only on security clearances. The Government will be supportive of ensuring Prime contractors maintain an adequate talent pool by approving the use of the clearance process for staff targeted for SNIM. | The DD 254 attached to the formal RFP will cover the overall requirement. Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order. | |
| C.2.1 Quality Assurance States: "The Government will evaluate performance of the services listed in the services summary (SS) to determine if it meets the performance thresholds." (a) Comment: In order for industry to prepare a compliant proposal that is responsive to the Government’s requirements, understanding the Government’s standards and the metrics that will be captured in this process is key. (b) Question: What are the measurements for meeting performance thresholds? | See "SERVICE SUMMARY TABLE 2-1". In addition, each Task Order will require a QASP and the Govt. will detail particular metrics employed per task order. | |
| Comment: C.3.2 and C.3.2.2 conflict with one another. They are listed below: · 3.2 Government-Furnished Property/Equipment. There will be no use of Government-Furnished Property/Equipment under the performance of this contract. · 3.2.2 Government Systems. Unless otherwise indicated, the Government will furnish or make available to the Contractor access to any Government systems required to support performance under this contract. | ||
| Suggestion: Change 3.2 Government-Furnished Property/Equipment to read: “Unless otherwise indicated, the Government will furnish or make available to the Contractor Government-Furnished Property/Equipment under the performance of this contract” | Paragraph 3.2 will be revised in the formal RFP to cover potential use of GFP/GFE at TO level. | |
| See page 20, Section C, para. 4.2. Should references to “IAC” be changed in the Glossary to reflect “MAC” and/or “BCO?” Will the term “IAC” become synonymous with the term “BCO, MAC or will it be abandoned under the new contracts?” | See Figure 1 in the PIP attachment that will be posted with the final RFP. The BCO "Core" contracts will retain the IAC names. The new multiple award IDIQ contracts will be referred to differently (e.g. SNIM TATs) and provide TAT requirements for the focus areas of more than one IAC. | |
| Section F – Deliveries or Performance | ||
| Section F, Bottom of the page under paragraph titled “Federal Holidays Observed: Unless specifically authorized in writing by the CO, no services will be provided and no charges will be incurred and/or billed to any task under this contract on any of the Federal Holidays listed below*…” | ||
| (a) Comment: Some of the federal holidays do not align with industry’s holidays | That may be correct. These are the federal holidays observed by the government. | |
| (b) Question: How should contractors perform work during those days? | Under a cost type contract the contractor can only bill for work performed. If the contractor cannot work because performance is at a government facility the contractor cannot charge costs to the contract for that day. If the contractor is performing work at a contractor offsite facility, the closure for the holiday should not impact performance and invoicing the contract. | |
| (c) Suggestion: Valuable work may be performed during federal holidays; therefore we recommend that contractors be allowed to work during federal holidays per client’s mission schedule. | Contractors can work whenever they choose. The Government is not permitted to manage how contractors allot their time. The Government will, however, examine billed hours to ensure they are properly allocable and allowable. | |
| Section G – Contract Administration Data | ||
| This section states that funding and payment will be made at the task order level. | ||
| (a) Suggestion: We recommend one payment office be used to process and pay vouches for the entire contract and all task orders. | DoD regulation/policy will dictate payment offices. | |
| (b) Suggestion: We recommend adding electronic data interchange (EDI) formats to be permitted by task orders per Section I 252.232-7003. | DFARS 252.232-7003 is in the solicitation and will be applicable to task orders. The Contractor shall submit payment requests and receiving reports using Wide Area Work Flow in an acceptable electronic format unless an the exceptions applies. | |
| (b) Question: Can the government provide a definition of the ACOR’s qualifications and how they are assigned? | ACORs attend the same certification training as a COR. ACORs are normally assigned to large muti-tiered contracts that require (A)ssociate CORs for span of control. | |
| (page 26, Section G, para. c) It seems like assigning a separate “COR” for each contract could result in inconsistent technical management across the SNIM MAC. | Every multiple award contract will have a COR. The Government requires standard training and periodic refresher training for CORs. Each of those CORs will interface on performance/contractual issues with the IAC PMO and Contracting Office. | |
| Section H – Special Contract Requirements | ||
| H-2 ROLLING ADMISSIONS – this section states: “At the end of each ordering period, the government will assess the performance of each IDIQ holder, …” | ||
| (a) Question: How will each IDIQ holder’s performance be assessed? | Contractors will be evaluated based on Performance Metrics associated with the overarching contract and TOs under which the contractor is performing. In addition, input from the RAs / ACORs / CORS and the PMO will be considered. The intent is to process evaluations through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). | |
| We recommend that you add the following as part of your rolling admissions determination process (page 28 of 106): |
“COMPETITION REQUIREMENTS. SNIM imposes few restrictions on the marketplace that might hinder business arrangements or contractor teaming arrangements. The only caveat is that each prime vendor is required to compete on 50% of all tasks issued throughout the year.
| Competition requirement is not considered as a “stand-alone” measure of performance; rather, it is factored into the overall competency assessment of the firm along with technical performance scores, management of team members, revenue, and general responsiveness to the TAT PM direction.” | The Government will take this into consideration. | |
| RFP, page 29 of 106, H-3 Ordering Process, d. Submission of Task Order Proposal | ||
| Comment: The Technical Volume of the TAT Proposal requires quite of bit of staffing detail that is generally not provided on a CPFF R&D effort. Additionally this data is normally not contained in the Technical Proposal but is contained in the Cost Proposal. | H-3 sufficiently describes the process for submitting task order proposals. These are competitions among multiple award IDIQ contract holders and require sufficient detail to award under FAR 16.505. | |
| H-3 ORDERING PROCESS – Ordering process also includes direction under “Travel and Material/other Direct Costs (ODCs) - Cost Reimbursable” – where “All Travel and ODCs shall be approved by the ACOR prior to purchase” | ||
| (a) Question: Would award of the task order constitute approval by the ACOR of the travel and material/ODCs in task order? Or is a separate approval required? | Each task order will address this and the approval requirements may vary among task orders. | |
| (b) Question: In the absence of an approved ACOR, can the COR approve? | In the execution of requirements, there may be a need to examine, on a case by case basis, such proxies. | |
| Page 28, Section H, para. H-3, b. (1) (iv). This provision should be clarified because there don’t appear to be any “minimum guarantees” described elsewhere in the RFP. | See Section I; 5352.216-9000 AWARDING ORDERS UNDER MULTIPLE AWARD CONTRACTS. (AUG 2005); also see revised Section B, Minimum and Maximum Values. | |
| To avoid conflict of interest – will the Government issue appropriate SCI billets to each winning contractor in advance as part of the Management task enabling us to complete the necessary adjudication process of possible staff for future task orders? | The DD 254 attached to the formal RFP will cover the overall requirement. Detailed requirements and pertinent evaluation criteria will be published with each solicited task order. | |
| Recommend the government add to the end of H-3 d.4 (page 30 0f 106) the following sentence after the word RFP: “The Government will consider heavily the past performance of the SNIM primes on previous SNIM task orders as part of the award process.” | If the gov't decides to consider past performance under a SNIM task order, that language will be included in the task order RFP. | |
| H.3. RFP, page 29 of 106, paragraph c. Request for Proposals |
This states that “the government will not solicit the contractor for proposals on any effort unless the cognizant finance office has committed funding”. Also, “In the event funds have not yet been committed for a potential effort, the government may seek to provide the contractors advance notice by disseminating a draft”.
| It is unclear how the requesting activity would know how much funding to send. Suggest that contractor have the opportunity to provide a cost quotation based on the SOW submitted for the specific TAT work, then the Requesting Activity can send funding. | Pursuant to FAR 32.702, Before executing any contract, the contracting officer shall obtain written assurance from the responsible fiscal authority that adequate funds are available or expressly condition the contract upon the availability of funds. This portion of the provision is just providing the vendor community notice that in the event the governement has to condition a requirement subject to the availability of funds it will clearly mark it as such. Details within the normal course of events will occur between the RA, the IAC PMO (analysis of requirements package / IGCE, etc), and the CO. |
| RFP, page 30 of 106, H-3 Ordering Process, 3. Travel- Cost Reimbursable and Material/Other Direct Cost (ODCs) – Cost Reimbursable |
States that both travel or material/ODCs should be approved by the ACOR prior to purchase.
| Comment: It would be beneficial to add the verbiage to be approved by the ACOR or Requesting Activity (RA). This would be more efficient to get the RAs written approval via email and he/she would be more cognizant of the tasking being performed than the ACOR. The ACOR would probably need to ask the RA for their approval anyway before approving the travel/material/ODCs. | The RFP will be revised, however, requirements related to the ODCs will be detailed sufficiently in each solicited task order. | |
| Organizational Conflict of Interest: In Section H4(g), the DRFP says:“The Contractor further agrees that, during the performance of this contract and for a period of three years after completion of performance of this contract the Contractor, any subcontractor, consultant, or employee of the contractor, any joint venture involving the contractor, any entity into or with which it may merge or affiliate, or any successor or assign of the Contractor, shall not participate in a competitive procurement for systems, components or services which were the subject of any task order under this contract. However, with the written authorization of the cognizant Procuring Contracting Officer, the Contractor may be authorized to compete for such procurements subsequent to an intervening procurement.” | ||
| Questions: May we assume that this only applies to the A&AS task orders (that may be involved with Government Planning and Programming Data) and not the R&D Task Orders (that should not be involved with Government Planning and Programming Data)? Would the Government consider using an individual person COI/Firewall approach on individual task orders that would isolate the individuals exposed to Government Planning and Programming data leading to a future acquisition from participating in those acquisitions, versus the current approach that isolates the entire contractor/team? | OCI will be applicable to all orders. This is an area where "assuming" anything without close coordination with the appropriate corporate professionals would be ill advised. Sub-paragraphs (b) and (d) of Section H4 are clear on the OCI constraints and potential mitigation steps governing multiple award IDIQ contract holders. 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. | |
| H.4.g ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST – states: “Contractor, shall not participate in a competitive procurement for systems, components or services which were the subject of any task order under this contract” |
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 .