Attachment_9_-_Q A_(as_of_07_Jun).pdf

Attachment 9

FA7000-16-R-0003

Q&A – As of 07 June 2016

1. Question: Is there any chance that the final RFP may be released via the OASIS SB contract?

Government Response: No.

2. Question: Will the Government consider removing Option Periods, and instead allow for a single, three-year ordering period.

Government Response: Yes, the Government has revised the period of performance to replace the use of options with a single, three-year ordering period.

3. Question: Is there is an incumbent?

Government Response: The incumbent on the current USAFA A&AS contract can be found by visiting https://www.fpds.gov and searching contract number FA7000-14-D-

0006.

4. Question: With regard to Past Performance Information (page 39), please explain the difference between the “Recent/Relevant Contracts Citations” requested in (c)(i) and

Performance Surveys requested in (c)(ii).

Government Response: The Proposal Instructions (52.212-1) and Evaluation Criteria

(52.212-2) related to Past Performance Information have been revised to incorporate a variety of clarifications and changes, including a revision to the information requested for each of the references provided. The revision clarifies in para (c)(i) the Government seeks Recent/Relevant Contract References for no more than 8 citations (including all prime, subcontractor and/or joint venture citations). For each citation provided, Offerors will be expected to mail Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), for completion and return to the Government. The Government will utilize all information provided, PPQs received from respondents, and other past performance information (via

PPIRS CPARs, etc.) to evaulate Past Performance Information in accordance with

52.212-2.

5. Question: Part III – Past Performance Information (page 40 of 46). Recent/Relevant

Contracts Citations refer to eight (8) citations. Performance Surveys refer to eight (8) citations. Please confirm that the eight (8) citations for Recent/Relevant Contracts

Citations should be the same as the eight (8) Performance Surveys.

Government Response: Eight references is the maximum allowable for all aspects of the

Past Performance volume. See Question 4 for additional clarification on the Past

Performance Information requirements.

https://www.fpds.gov/fpdsng_cms/index.php/en/

6. Question: Part III – Past Performance Information (page 40 of 46). Paragraph (iv) states the offeror shall mail Attachment 7 - Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), to the list of submitted contract references. To reduce the onus on our Government client references, may Offerors provide a copy of a recent, previously completed PPQ in lieu of having our clients fill out a new PPQ? If so, will the previous PPQ be excluded from page count?

Government Response: No. As stated in para (iv)(2), “(2) Any past performance questionnaires sent directly from a proposing offeror will not be accepted or evaluated.”

See Question 4 for additional clarification on the Past Performance Information requirements.

7. Question: Part III – Past Performance Information (page 40 of 46). Paragraph (1) on page 41 says the questionnaire need not be sent to customers where past performance records exist in the Government’s Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS). Should offerors provide a copy of the PPIRS CPAR evaluation, if available, with the proposal? If so, will the CPAR evaluation be excluded from page count?

Government Response: No. Copies of CPARs are not required. The Government is able to retrieve PPIRS CPAR information.

8. Question: Who is the Directorate of Office that this contract supports at USAFA?

Government Response: The primary mission of the USAFA A&AS IDIQ is to support various functions and programs within the USAFA Research Office (USAFA/DFRO).

The secondary mission of the contract vehicle has been installation-wide support of various advisory and assistance services as required.

9. Question: In the RFP on page 40 of 46 section i), what contract identification information (see list 1-9 in section ii) would the Government like included with the 8 past performance citations description in section i?

Government Response: The requirements for Past Performance Information have been revised. See Question 4 for additional clarification on the Past Performance Information requirements.

10. Question: In the RFP on page 43 of 46, the example pricing table lists values that do not show escalation across the base and option years. Would the Government consider a fixed annual escalation rate (2%) for Option Years? This has been adopted with other Air

Force contracts, such as Engineering, Professional, and Administrative Support Services

(EPASS). This fixed data point directly promotes long-term employee welfare and reduces unrealistic low-pricing bidding. This value is less than the average escalation rate per Global Insight of 2.91% for 2017-2019 (www.ihsglobalinsight.com

<http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com> ).

Government Response: Fixed escalation rates will not be provided by the Government.

Offerors are permitted to use their own escalation rates.

11. Question: In the RFP on page 39 of 46 section b) i) (1), given the size, scope, and complexity of A&AS contracts such as USAFA, would the government consider adding an evaluation subfactor for a Management and Staffing Approach within the 20-page technical describing the Prime Contractor’s approach to task order management and response, quality control, and staffing? The use of a ID/IQ management and staffing approach evaluation criteria has been adopted across other Air Force A&AS contracts, such as Engineering, Professional, and Administrative Support Services (EPASS), Contracted Advisory and Assistance Services (CAAS) IV, and Professional Acquisition

Support Services (PASS).

12. Question: In the RFP on page 40 of 46 section i), to adequately assess Prime Contractor relevancy in past performance size, scope, and complexity, would the Government consider requiring four (4) of the citations to be submitted from the Prime Contractor

(50% of citations), with two (2) citations to be Prime-level contracts, with one (1) Prime citation demonstrating ID/IQ management? The use of Prime-level evaluation criteria demonstrates the Prime Contractor’s ability to perform 50.1% of the contract and prevents the government from receiving proposals that may violate the Ostensible

Subcontractor Rule where a Prime Contract is “unusually reliant” upon subcontractors to perform the contract.

13. Question: Can we only submit the commercial past performance or we have the submit the government past performance as well? Please clarify.

Government Response: Past performance can be for either commercial or Government as long as it meets the definition of recent and relevant outlined in the Addenda to FAR

52.212-1 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS, section (c)(i).

14. Question: Is this new or follow on requirement, if this is a follow-on requirement, please let us know the current incumbent name and contract number?

Government Response: This is a follow-on contract. Please search contract number

FA7000-14-D-0006 in www.fpds.gov <http://www.fpds.gov> for incumbent contractor information.

15. Question: Is incumbent eligible to bid?

Government Response: The incumbent is eligible to compete.

16. Question: The release of the solicitation appears to be over a year before the contract ends. Can you provide insight as to why the release of solicitation is so early?

Government Response: The solicitation for the follow-on contract is being released early as we anticipate reaching our $6.5M ceiling this summer. The follow-on contract will be awarded so as to avoid any lapses in service.

17. Question: The wording in the RFP states that the evaluation is Best Value, however, it also states that the evaluation will be based upon Lowest Price Technically Acceptable

(LPTA). Can you provide clarification as to whether the evaluation is best value or

LPTA?

Government Response: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) is a best value source selection method. This acquisition is using a combination of LPTA with a past performance tradeoff, known as a performance price tradeoff. For more information regarding the source selection procedures for this acquisition, please reference the addendums to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2.

18. Question: Reference ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, 3. a) states, “PART I – PRICE

PROPOSAL- No page limit". Submit one (1) hard copy and one (1) compact disk (CD) with electronic data files, in accordance with paragraph (e) below:” There is no paragraph

(e) listed below. The instructions for Part IV – Contract Documentation goes back to b) with the formatting instructions labeled c). Can you please clarify what is paragraph (e) and renumber this section to reflect this?

Government Response: The numbering/lettering in the ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-

1 has been updated/corrected. Paragraph (e) is the correct reference.

19. Question: Can the government provide the PPQ (Attachment 7) in MS WORD format?

Government Response: Word version provided in FBO attachments.

20. Question: Reference ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, 3. c) i). Based on the estimates for labor costs for this opportunity, can the government please confirm that for a contract reference to be deemed relevant, a Recent/Relevant Contract Reference needs to meet or exceed $3.15M per year in the evaluation of the magnitude of the contract's value?

Government Response: Reference ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2, Step II – Past

Performance Proposal Evaluation, a), Table 3 – PAST PERFORMANCE RELEVANCY

RATINGS. A “Relevant” rating will be assigned to “present/past performance efforts involving similar scope and magnitude of the effort and complexities this solicitation requires”.

21. Question: Reference ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, 3. d). Part IV – Contract

Documentation states, “Complete the necessary Representations and Certifications in

SAM.gov and supplemented in full text within this solicitation.” Can you please clarify if the government is requesting a copy of the complete Reps and Certs from SAM.gov to be included in our response to Part IV – Contract Documentation? Will including paragraph (b)(2) of the Reps and Certs in our response suffice (see below)?

Government Response: A complete hardcopy is unnecessary so long as your

Representations and Certifications are completed in SAM.gov. Including paragraph

(b)(2) of FAR 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications—Commercial Items, is sufficient.

22. Question: Reference FAR 52.212-1, 3. a) i) – “Complete blocks 12, 17a, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 30(a) (b) and (c) of the SF 1449.” Box 20 states “See Schedule”. Can the government confirm boxes 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 of the SF 1449 are to be filled out?

Government Response: Blocks 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 of SF 1449 are not required to be filled out. FAR 52.212-1, 3. a) i) has been updated to remove this requirement. Pricing information is to be included in Attachment 2 – A&AS Labor Rate Pricing Schedule.

23. Question: FAR 52.219-14 requires the prime contractor to perform at least 51% of contracted labor work on small business set-aside contracts. How does the Government wish for offeror’s to prove their ability to provide at least 51% of contracted labor IAW

FAR 52.219-14?

Government Response: There is no solicitation requirement for contractors to prove their ability to meet FAR 52.219-14.