Questions and Answers_2_ FA701424R0013_4 Dec 23.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 31 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA7014-24-R-0013_FSS_Solicitation
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a solicitation for force structure support services. The solicitation is issued by the Department of the Air Force Headquarters District Washington for configuration management and logistics modeling support. Key details include that the solicitation seeks proposals for configuration management of the Brawler, CFAM/GAMS, and other logistics modeling code and tools. Experience requirements include five years of experience modifying and testing Brawler code, four years of experience modifying and testing CFAM code, and experience administering and modeling Air Force logistics processes. The period of performance is a five-year base period from February 2024 to January 2029. Pricing will be cost-plus-fixed-fee for labor rates and cost reimbursement for travel. The proposal due date is December 18, 2023.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions – FA701424R0013
| Question No. | Applicable Document Name | Page Number | Section Number | Para Number | Question |
| 1 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Will the Government please confirm that individual NDAs are in place between the Government and non-government advisors? |
| Answer: Yes there is a NDA in place. | |||||
| 2 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Will the Government please provide the prime contract number under which the non-government advisory support is being provided by Peridot Solutions? |
| Answer: FA7014-19-F-A130 | |||||
| 3 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Will the Government please advise if the non-government advisor support being provided by Peridot Solutions includes any subcontractors to Peridot Solutions? If support includes subcontractors, will the Government please identify the company name(s)? |
| Answer: The non-government advisor support being provided by Peridot Solutions is not a subcontractor to Peridot. | |||||
| 4 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Will the Government please provide the point of contact (POC) information for Peridot Solutions so that Offerors may enter into non-disclosure agreement(s) with the non-government advisors? |
| Answer: Gyanchander Gongireddy, President, ggongireddy@peridotsolutions.com (202)288-0471. | |||||
| 5 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Will the Government please change the requirement of providing a copy of any such agreements to the Contracting Officer from "no later than 10 days of RFP issuance" to "with proposal submission" to allow the Offeror the appropriate time to enter into such agreements with the non-government advisors? |
| Answer: The Government has agreed to amend the submission date from 10 days after RFP issuance to the RFP submission deadline. | |||||
| 6 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 3, 4 | Section B | N/A | Will the Government please confirm that CLINS 0001-0004 will only have 10 months in Ordering Period 1 whereas CLINS 0005 and 0006 will have 12 months in Ordering Period 1? |
| Answer: There is a five-year ordering period for CLINS 0001-0006, broken out into 12-month increments for the sake of pricing. The SF 33 has been updated. | |||||
| 7 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 3 | Section B | N/A | The IDIQ Ceiling is listed as $43,910.777. Will the Government please confirm this should be $43,910,777? |
| Answer: The ceiling amount has been corrected in Section B of the Solicitation. | |||||
| 8 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 3, 29 | Section B / Contract Clauses: 52.216-18 Ordering. | N/A / (a) | Based on the Schedule B, Supplies or Services & Prices & Costs start date for Ordering Period One for CLIN 0001 as 1 February 2024, could the Government please clarify the sentence on page 30 of 56 of the Solicitation under Contract Clause, 52.216-18: "Such orders may be issued from 1 December through 30 November 2028" is correct or not? |
| Answer: 52.216-18 has been updated to reflect the following dates 1 Feb 2024 through 31 Jan 2029. | |||||
| 9 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 4, 5 | Section B | N/A | Pricing Arrangements for both Travel CLINS 0005 & 0006 listed on the Schedule B: Both "Cost Reimbursement" and "Firm Fixed Price" are listed there. Could the Government please clarify on the Section B which pricing arrangement applies to these Travel CLINS? |
| Answer: The correct pricing arrangement is Cost No Fee and has been corrected on the solicitation. | |||||
| 10 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 11, 12 | Section F | N/A | Will the Government please deconflict Ordering Periods, Delivery Periods, and Period of Performance data? |
CLIN 0001 Delivery Period 1 Dec 2023 to 30 Nov 2028 (Ordering Period 1 starts on 1 Feb 2024 per Section B) and Period of Performance is shown as 1 Feb 2023 to 30 Nov 2028 CLIN 0002 Delivery Period 1 Dec 2023 to 30 Nov 2023 (Ordering Period 1 starts on 1 Feb 2024 per Section B) and Period of Performance is shown as 1 Feb 2024 to 30 Nov 2028 CLIN 0003 Delivery Period 1 Dec 2023 to 30 Nov 2028 (Ordering Period 1 starts on 1 Feb 2024 per Section B) and Period of Performance is shown as 1 Feb 2023 to 30 Nov 2028 CLIN 0005 Delivery Period 1 Feb 2024 to 30 Nov 2028 (Ordering Period 1 starts on 1 Dec 2023 per Section B) and Period of Performance is shown as 1 Feb 2024 to 30 Nov 2028 CLIN 0006 Delivery Period 1 Feb 2024 to 30 Nov 2028 (Ordering Period 1 starts on 1 Dec 2023 per Section B) and Period of Performance is shown as 1 Feb 2024 to 30 Nov 2028
| Answer: Correction made, see solicitation. | ||||||
| 11 | Solicitation - FA701424R0013 | 40 | Section J | N/A | Section J - List of Attachments starts with number 03, are we missing number 01 and 02? If they are not missing, can the Government please correct the List of Attachment? | |
| Answer: Section J has been corrected, all of the correct attachments were uploaded on to SAM.gov. | ||||||
| 12 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 3 | 4.3 | 4.3.2 | Section L directs Offerors to utilize DOD safe, https://safe.apps.mil, for proposals that are too large to email. DOD safe states that it "is NOT to be used for contract solicitation or proposal submission. Use the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) for time-sensitive submissions." Will the Government please provide alternate submission options should a proposal be too large to email? | |
| Answer: Offerors may submit their proposals through the AFDW/PKH emails specified in the solicitation. If the file is too large, you can use Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE). Section L has been updated. | START HERE 12/1 | |||||
| 13 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 4-6 and 8-14 | 4 and 6 | 4.4 and 6.0 | The Proposal Volume Requirements in Section 4.4 do not match the layout of Section 6.0 Evaluation Factors. Will the Government please clarify which layout is required for the proposal response? | |
| Answer: Section 4.4. outlines the proposal layout while section 6.0 speaks to the Evaluation Factors. | ||||||
| 14 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 5 | 4 | 4.4 | The transition plan is not included in the proposal layout table. Will the Government please add this requirement to the proposal layout table and consider a 3 page limit for the transition plan (excluding the work samples from this page limit)? | |
| Answer: The Transition-in Plan has been added to the Technical Volume, Section L has been updated to include a limit of 5 pages. | ||||||
| 15 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 5 | 4 | 4.4 | Can the Government please clarify if there is a template that is intended for use for the work sample cover sheet listed in the proposal layout table? If so, can the Government please provide this template? If not, can the Government please clarify what is required to be included in the work sample cover pages? | |
| Answer: The template has been attached. | ||||||
| 16 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 5 | 4 | 4.4 | Past performance reference narrative write-ups were not included in the proposal layout table. Will the Government please consider including a 3-page per past performance reference write-up in place of the PPQ and adding this requirement to the proposal layout table? | |
| Answer: The past performance requirements will remain the same. | ||||||
| 17 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 6, 13 | 6.4 | N/A | Please confirm that no Cost Narrative is required? Accordingly, on page 6 of the chart, please clarify why a Table of Contents would be needed for the Uniformed Cost and Pricing Schedule since that may be the only document that is required under Section 6.4? | |
| Answer: The price volume allows the offeror to submit any necessary documentation to support their price. Please use the table of contents to guide the evaluation. | ||||||
| 18 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 8 | 5 | 5.1 | Will the Government please clarify the proposal due date as Solicitation - FA701424R0012 document lists due date as 10am EST on 18 December 2023 but Section L lists due date as 10am EST on 13 December 2023. | |
| Answer: The proposal is due by 18 December 10 AM EST. Section L reflects that change. | ||||||
| 19 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 9 | 6.2 | 6.2.1 | The Government has indicated that there are four submission parts required for the technical past experience factor. Will the Government please confirm these are the following four components with the correct subsequent requirements: |
1. Transition Plan which consists of the following elements: Transition Plan, Years of Experience, and up to 10 work samples
2. Self-Rated Scoring Matrix
3. Cross Reference Matrix
4. Team Structure
| Answer: Yes that is correct. | |||||
| 20 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 9 | 6.2 | 6.2.1.1 | In order to demonstrate years of experience across the full program requirements, will the Government please confirm that offers should also include the number of FTEs and years of experience for FTEs with Logistics Modeling? |
| Answer: This is reflected in the Self-Rated Scoring Matrix by requesting years of experience as a local Configuration Manager with Air Force specific C++ Logistics tools and/or experience as a local Configuration Manager for non-Air Force C++ Logistics tools (or Air Force Logistics tools in languages other than C++) | |||||
| 21 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 9 | 6.2 | 6.2.1.1 | The government has qualified that experience tied to Brawler can relate to past experience as a Configuration Manager or as an assistant to a Configuration Manager that has modified Brawler code for efforts not tied to the government or SAF/SA specifically. Will the Government please confirm that this exception is only applicable to Brawler and not to CFAM and/or GAMS code and/or Linear Programming/Optimizers? |
| Answer: This exception is NOT only applicable to Brawler. The government would also consider time spent as a local Configuration Manager for CFAM and/or GAMS and/or complex linear programming as qualified experience, even if it was not for a government user or SAF/SA. | |||||
| 22 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 9 | 6.2 | 6.2.1.2 | Will the Government please confirm that resumes are an acceptable work sample? In Section L it states that work samples shall consist of only contract documentation (including, but not limited to, Performance Work Statements, Statements of Work, Contract Data Requirements Lists, Government Furnished Property Lists, Subcontracts, and Invoices). However, in the cross-reference matrix template provided by the Government the example shows a resume as a work sample. Resumes should be accepted as work samples to enable offerors to adequately demonstrate their depth and breadth of offeror personnel experience with the models as required in the cross-reference matrix. |
| Answer: Resumes may not be used as a work sample or included in the work sample. The government needs to be able to evaluate the work that was completed by the Offeror; a resume does not provide us with the ability to understand the Offerors past technical experience. The cross-reference matrix has been updated. | |||||
| 23 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 11 | 6.2 | 6.2.4 | Can the Government please clarify the requirements for team structure format and provide a copy of Appendix D to offerors to that we can ensure compliance with the necessary format? |
| Answer: The reference to Appendix D has been removed. Please provide this information in the Offerors chosen format, ensure it meets the requirements laid out in Section L 6.2.4 | |||||
| 24 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 12 | 6.3 | 6.3 | If a past performance submission has CPARs, will the Government consider not requiring a PPQ? |
| Answer: No. | |||||
| 25 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 13 | 6.4 | N/A | The Government states that offerors must present pricing for the transition-in plan for each of the five (5) ordering period years. Will the Government please confirm that pricing for the transition-in plan should only be included for ordering period 1? |
| Answer: Yes, that is correct. The Transition-in Plan is for the first 60 days of Ordering Period 1. Section L has been updated. | |||||
| 26 | Attachment 1 - Section L | 13 | 6.4 | N/A | Section L states that the "hourly rates proposed shall represent fixed amounts". Considering CLINS 0001 thru 0004 are CPFF and do not represent "fixed hourly rates", and the rates in the Uniform Pricing and Cost Schedule are to be CPFF rates used to determine future Task Order ceilings, could the Government please rephrase the sentence in Section L, page 13, to clearly represent what is meant? |
| Answer: The expectation is to establish fully burdened labor rates as ceilings at the IDIQ level. Labor hours and Labor categories will be negotiated at the Task Order level. The task orders will be established as Cost Plus Fixed Fee. | |||||
| 27 | Attachment 2 - Section M | 3 | 2.1 | Step 3 | Will the Government please clarify if Step 3 should refer to Transition Plan vs. Staffing Plan as there is no requirement per Section L for a staffing plan. |
| Answer: The government will validate self-rated scores using the Technical Volume. | |||||
| 28 | Attachment 2 - Section M | 4 | 2.2 | 2.2.2 | Will the Government please confirm that offerors may highlight and/or add comments to work sample documents to identify areas of relevant information? |
| Answer: Highlights can be made to work sample documents; however, additional comments are NOT allowed. | |||||
| 29 | Attachment 2 - Section M | 5 | 2.2 | 2.2.3 | In assessing past performance relevance as it relates to key personnel will the Government please confirm that key personnel and therefore the past performance example are considered more relevant if it includes the same personnel who performed the work referenced in the past performance example and possess qualifications specific to Brawler, CFAM/GAMs or Other Linear Programming, and Logistics Modeling? |
| Answer: Relevancy remains defined as it is in Section L and will be evaluated as written in Section M. | |||||
| 30 | Attachment 2 - Section M | 7, 8 | 2.2 | 2.2.4 | Based on Section M's wording that "the rates proposed by the Offeror will become contractually binding, and shall be used to price all future Task Orders," CLIN 0007, Transition-In for all Firm Fixed Price labor rates for all future task orders is not equal in risk to the proposed CPFF IDIQ labor rates. Could the Government please clarify the Contract type for CLIN 0007 task order pricing based on the risk difference in the CPFF labor rates proposed on Schedule B? |
| Answer: CLIN 0007 will utilize contract type Firm Fixed Price for the 60 day period. CLIN 0007 will only be used if necessary. | |||||
| 31 | Attachment 3 - Performance Work Statement | 16-17; 22-23 | 4.0, 5.0, 9.0 | 4.1, 5.1, 9.1.1 | Paragraph 4.1 does not list a contractor place of performance or mile proximity to any government location; Paragraph 5.1 and 9.1.1 states that the contractor's facility shall have capacity to store and process appropriately cleared ADP up to Secret/Collateral level. If proximity to government location is required, will the government specify where the contractor facility must be located (i.e. within 5 miles of SAF/SA 1570 AF Pentagon, Washington, DC and walking distance from a metro station)? |
| Answer: Office proximity is not a requirement as long as timely support (telephone, VTC, TEAM/Zoom, etc.) is available. Secret/Collateral-level processing and storage ADP at the contractor facility is a hard requirement. | |||||
| 32 | Attachment 6 - Uniform Pricing and Cost Schedule_V1 | TASK ORDER PRICING | N/A | N/A | Could the Government please provide some guidance as to how to price up our Subcontractors in the TASK ORDER PRICING of the Pricing Template? Would the Government permit offerors adding additional column(s) in the TASK ORDER PRICING that indicates what Teammate is being priced, as well as an additional supporting Subcontractor/Teammate cost worksheet? |
| Answer: Yes, please adjust the Attachment 6 as necessary. | |||||
| 33 | Attachment 6 - Uniform Pricing and Cost Schedule_V1 | TASK ORDER PRICING | Other Direct Costs - Travel CLIN | N/A | The TASK ORDER PRICING worksheet indicates only the one TRAVEL CLIN 0005. Should the Offeror edit the fields to also include TRAVEL CLIN 0006? |
| Answer: Travel will be awarded with a NTE price of $100,000 on both CLINs 0005 and 0006 and pricing will be in accordance with joint travel regulations. Yes, you can edit the field to include Travel CLIN 0006. The separate travel CLINS are to account for the color of money used. | |||||
| 34 | Attachment 9 - Cross Reference Matrix | N/A | Logistics Modeling Experience | N/A | This sections says “for Configuration Manager”, should the "for" be updated “as” to be consistent with requirements for Brawler and CFAM/GAMS or Other Linear Programming Experience? |
| Answer: Corrected. | |||||
| 35 | Attachment 9 - Self-Rated Scoring Matrix and Attachment 10 - Cross Reference Matrix | N/A | N/A | N/A | For the purpose of this evaluation of skill level with the code, "modify" is defined as entailing a familiarization with the code sufficient to modify the inner workings of the code, to generate new effects or behaviors, without introducing errors elsewhere in the code. Can the Government please confirm that offerors who can demonstrate experience modifying code and servicing as the Configuration Manager (CM) for the assigned models and being responsible for modification that are released by the Government's Model Manager is more relevant than those that may use the code and deploy changes within their own office/organization/company and do not modify the code for deployment by the Government's model manager. |
| Answer: Experience working for the government or SAF/SA is NOT more highly rated than experience obtained outside the government or SAF/SA. | |||||
| 36 | Attachment 9 - Self-Rated Scoring Matrix and Attachment 10 - Cross Reference Matrix | N/A | N/A | N/A | Will the Government please confirm that offerors will be considered relevant and meeting the necessary experience as a configuration manager for Brawler only if their Configuration Manager or Assistant Configuration Manager can meet the necessary qualifications as described in PWS Section 8.3.1 "Capabilities consistent with software engineering reflecting five (5) or more years of experience in the working-level modification and testing of Brawler code (i.e., over 500,000 lines of Fortran 2005 code written over 40+ years). The contractor's experience with Brawler and the associated software tools shall include demonstrated capacity for code maintenance; modification* without introducing errors elsewhere in the code; configuration management of those software changes; integration and testing; and verification and validation, consistent with industry standards for software management."? |
| Answer: The technical experience proposed will need to meet the requirements in the PWS and will be validated by the Technical Evaluation Team. | |||||
| 37 | Attachment 9 - Self-Rated Scoring Matrix and Attachment 10 - Cross Reference Matrix | N/A | N/A | N/A | Will the Government please confirm that offerors will be considered relevant and meeting the necessary experience as a configuration manager for CFAM only if their Configuration Manager or Assistant Configuration Manager can meet the necessary qualifications as described in PWS Section 8.3.2 "Contractor shall possess capabilities consistent with software engineering reflecting four (4) years of experience in the working-level modification and testing of CFAM consisting of over 600,000 lines of Visual Studio (C#, Visual Basic (VB) codes) and GAMS (5000 lines of GAMS linear programming code), written over the past 30 years. The contractors experience with CFAM and associated data support utilities shall include demonstrated capacity for code maintenance; modification* without introducing cascading code errors; configuration management of directed software changes; integration and testing; and verification and validation, consistent with industry standards and USAF requirements for software management."? |
| Answer: The technical experience proposed will need to meet the requirements in the PWS and will be validated by the Technical Evaluation Team. | |||||
| 38 | Attachment 9 - Self-Rated Scoring Matrix and Attachment 10 - Cross Reference Matrix | N/A | N/A | N/A | Will the Government please confirm that offerors will be considered relevant and meeting the necessary experience as a configuration manager for Logistics Models only if their Configuration Manager or Assistant Configuration Manager can meet the necessary qualifications as described in PWS Section 8.3.3 "The contractor shall have Intermediate or Advanced level experience in C#. Contractor shall be familiar with modeling Department of Defense logistics systems processes, data systems, and terminology to support working with the developers on the government model requirements. Experience in modeling Air Force logistics is preferred, and 5-years of administering Air Force logistics processes is also preferred. The contractor shall have experience in developing, modifying*, and enhancing existing applications and programs modeling logistics processes."? |
| Answer: The technical experience proposed will need to meet the requirements in the PWS and will be validated by the Technical Evaluation Team. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .