Solicitation_Q A__1_3_Sep_13.pdf

FA4600-13-R-0001

USAMS III Solicitation Questions and Answers

Round 1

USAMS II Awarded Task Order List Attached.

Question: We respectfully ask the Government to remove the inclusion of the Key

Personnel resumes from the Subfactor 1 – Program Management 15 page max limitation set forth in DRFP L2.0. Excluding the Key Personnel resumes from page count will allow for a better representation of the skill sets and capabilities of these individuals to be presented for evaluation.

Answer: Key Personnel qualification summaries are not included in the 15 page max limitation.

Reference L2.2.1 Page Limitations – Each page shall be counted except: cover pages, tables of contents, cross-reference matrix, tabs, glossaries, and skill set matrix and qualification summaries.

Question: The PPI form (Attachment 7; Section J) was modified from the DRFP to the

FRFP by adding a checklist for the 10 Mission Areas. This caused the form to be greater than 3 pages in length (pages 177-180). The form also states, “Insert additional pages as necessary” on page 180 of the RFP. However, under the page allocation for the PPI forms in Section L 2.0, the maximum page count for each form is 3 pages. Can our PPI forms can be greater than the 3 page maximum? If not, are we able to modify the forms to provide adequate detail of our experience for the reviewers and still be compliant with the 3 page limit per PPI?

Answer: The maximum page count for each PPI form is increased from 3 pages to 5 pages. This change will be reflected in Amendment 1 of the solicitation.

Question: Are we correct in assuming the government’s instruction to use the format at attachment 7 is literal and meaning exactly as printed in the RFP (Offerors will be required to adhere to the current “PPID form”, leaving only 9 lines of space for information to provide mission relevancy input to while remaining within 3 pages total

PPID length per contract.) Currently there is a significant amount of contract identification data that can be placed in a table at 8 pt font to provide consistent and easy reference for all contracts while saving more than 1 page of form space. May we reproduce the text of the document and alter the word form of Attachment 07, without deleting content information, to create a table at 8 pt for formatting purposes that would provide the same info? We have provided a Common PPID sample format table below, that when filled out typically consumes 1 PPID page for items 1-12, leaving 2 pages to address 13 and

14.

Suggested PPID in Table format:

PPID#: 1-10 1. Contract

Title:

2. Contract #

4. Cage

Code/Dun s

3.

Company/Divi sion

Address/Phon e/Email

5. Contract Type

6.a Original

Value

b. Current Value

c. Why if

Different

8. Where Performed

7.a/b. PoP

Start/End

c. If changed, Why

9.

Nature/locatio n of Work

Performed

9 a. Prime or Sub

9c. if Sub, Prime

Contractor

Name, Address, Phone, E-mail

9b. % of Work

10. Contract

Agency/

Customer

Msn Areas performed

11. POC 1:

Name, Position, Org/Office, Phone, email

POC 2: Name, Position, Org/Office, Phone, email

12. Scope Summary of Work related to USAMS

13. Provide a brief description of services provided under this contract.

14. Describe in detail how your experience on this program applies to the Relevancy

Criteria identified in Section M. Clearly link the past performance information to the

USAMS III Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Section M, paragraph 3.2.

Answer: Attachment 7 is an example format that offerors may use. Offerors have the option of providing their own format of Attachment 7 as long as every item included in the example format is addressed. Font size shall be 10 pt. font or greater. In addition, amendment 1 of the solicitation will reflect an increase to the maximum page limit of Attachment 7 (from 3 pages to

5 pages).

Question: The final RFP added a large bulleted list of Mission Area information to

“check” for which areas each PPID covered. May we consolidate the added bullet as a new table or shorter list either within the PPID to save space, or better, in a single matrix in

Past Performance volume (not in page count) showing the government each PPID in summary with “x” for each mission area that each PPID covers?

Answer: Offerors need only to list the mission areas that apply to that specific PPID (an offeror may remove mission areas that do not apply to that specific PPID). The applicable mission areas must be provided in each PPID and not in a single matrix.

Question: PPID item 5 requests a listing of all other task orders on the contract performed by the task owner. May we place the task order list, a very long list for several of the

PPIDs, in a separate table for all PPIDs with the Overview or Summary section, and again, not in page limit count?

Answer: The reference to list task orders will be removed. Each PPID will reflect a single contract or task order. Any list of task orders shall count toward the maximum page count of 5 pages per PPID.

Question: Ref: PPID instructions (Describe in detail how your experience on this program applies to the Relevancy Criteria identified in Section M. Clearly link the past performance information to the USAMS III Performance Work Statement (PWS) and

Section M, paragraph 3.2. ) PPID items 1-12 contain mainly contract data collection and organization information that has grown significantly with the addition of the “mission area bullets check-off list”. The “meat of the relevancy explanation” is found in Items 13 and 14 which now appear to be approximately 9 lines, (3 for item 14) in the government

Attachment 7 format leaving little room to respond to the L requirement for M 3.2.2.2.1 criteria for mission area relevancy (more than 2 pages in the RFP and 14 pages of items in the PWS). Since past performance is significantly more important in selection, may the offerors use up to 2 pages of each PPID, staying with the government format in attachment

7, to provide the answers to items 13 and 14 in order to support relevancy information for the scope, complexity, and mission area support descriptions for each citation. If the current Attachment “format” rather than “form” remains, this suggestion essentially extends the PPID page count limit to no more than 5 pages overall per PPID, but it allows for 2 pages of “offeror content” to support evaluation of up to 10 subfactors and the associated details from PWS material.

Answer: Offerors may provide their own format of the PPID as long as it contains the same information of the example format and is within the 5 page limit (10 pt. font or greater).

Question: Ref RFP L5.3(page 219) states: “The offeror and subcontractors shall provide in the USAMS III Price Model the name, mailing address, telephone, fax number and branch codes of the cognizant DCAA / Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Office, as well as the status of Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA).” Since the subcontractors do not submit sealed packages, a price “xls” file, or cost proposals, may the prime offerors provide the lists of subcontractor DCAA, DCMA, and FPRA information requested on a separate sheet or table in the narrative portion of our Volume III – Price Proposal?

Answer: Yes, it is acceptable to provide this information on a separate sheet or table within the narrative portion of Volume III – Price Proposal.

Question: In Q&A previously, the government stated its intention to remove the multi-site and OCONUS checks for relevancy yet PPID format at attachment 07 Item 8 still requests that information. Should offerors delete item 8 from the PPID format? If not, how will the information be applied to relevancy and confidence ratings in evaluation?

Answer: The Government will remove all boxes from item 8 and allow offerors to identify the place of performance by text. Amendment 1 of the solicitation will reflect the deletion of the

CONUS and OCONUS references.

Question: Ref L2.0 and Table 2.0 page limits, and instructions to “use” the format at

Attachment 07 PPID. The PPID format at Items 13and 14 still includes statements to” insert additional page(s) as necessary”. Are those statements now the intended instructions for offerors to provide up to 3 additional pages as a PPID for offeror text in answering just those two questions in the format (meaning PPID page limits only apply to Items 13 and 14 responses), or are those erroneous entries?

Answer: These are erroneous entries. Amendment 1 of the solicitation will remove the following language from items 13 and 14 “Insert additional page(s), if necessary”.