RISE RFP QA.pdf

No. Question Answer Change

Section L-1.4c states that for the oral proposal material, "Font stipulations do not apply to figures, diagrams, tables, and other items as long as the content is legible".

Please confirm that this stipulation also applies to section L-1.4b for the written proposal material.

The L&M was previously drafted to only allow exceptions to font stipulations in oral presentation material, not written material.

However, the L&M has been amended to state that font stipulations do not apply for figures, diagrams, tables, and other items. L-1.4(b)

Please confirm that the fonts sizes for graphics and figures in Volume II are also the same for Volume I.

Refernce Answer 1. Font size for graphics are the same in Volume I and II. L-1.4(b)

L-1.4 paragraph c states that oral presentations shall use 14-point Times New Roman font, but that these “font stipulations do not apply to figures, diagrams, tables, and other items as long as content in legible.” Can an offeror include graphics with unreadable text if the text is not intended to be readable and the figure is marked “for illustration purposes”?

Yes, graphics unreadable text intended to be used for illustration purposes may be included. N/A

L-1.4 paragraph c states that oral presentations shall use 14-point Times New Roman font. Do these font restrictions apply to required text in the headers and footers of the document (e.g. RFP number, page number, proprietary information notices, etc)? No, the font restrictions DO NOT apply to required header text N/A

Per L-1.5 "The Government intends to conduct presentations virtually; however, the Government reserves the right to conduct in person presentations at Hill AFB, UT if deemed appropriate."

If the presentations end up being virtual, can the government confirm what format they will allow these virtual presentations to be given in (such as Cisco Webex or Microsoft Teams) so that the offerors can have adequate time to practice the presentations using that format to elimate/reduce technical glitches during the presentation.

Government intends to utilize Microsoft Teams via the Government CVR platform used during the RISE industry day. N/A

Attachment 8, paragraph L-1.5(b) states that “presentations will be presented by key personnel responsible for contract performance.” Please confirm 1) that subcontractor team members anticipated to play a key role in performance are permitted to participate in the oral presentations and 2) that there are no formal restrictions on the number of presenters allowed per offeror team.

Key members of a subcontractor team are permitted to participate in oral presentations as the proposal will be evaluated as one complete team. There are no formal restriction on the number of presenters allowed per offeror team provided that the presentation can be accomplished in the allotted time period. L-1.5(b)

Will the offeror or the Government be presenting and controlling the presentation slides. For virtual presentations offerors shall present and control slides. L-1.5(c )

Per Section L-1.5.c, “Offerors shall structure their oral presentations to follow the order of items in Section M-3 and M-4.” M-4 contains the Small Business Participation portion of the proposal. However, L-1.3 states that the Small Business Participation portion is “written”.

Please confirm if the Small Business Participation portion of the proposal is required to be only written and is not required in the oral presentation?

Small Business Participation portion of the proposal only needs to be written and is not required to be submitted in the oral presentation. L-1.5(c )

Per L-1.8, “Following these discussions, the Government will request Final Proposal Revisions (FPR) to be incorporated into their PowerPoint Presentation document to be submitted to the Contracting Office within the time frame expected for final review from the evaluation team.”

Please confirm that the Government will provide guidance on the format and timing of the Final Proposal Revisions.

Government will provide additional guidance for FPR’s if applicable when the time comes. If the offeror is initially determined qualified and no revisions are required as a result of discussions then no FPR may be required. L-1.8

Attachment 8, paragraph L-1.10 states that “exchanges with industry may be written and transmitted via encrypted e-mail...” Please clarify whether all email communications require encryption, or if encryption applies only to the transmission of technically descriptive and/or proprietary information.

All email communications do not need to be encrypted; however, emails should be properly marked for source selection information.

Encrypted email may only be required for proprietary information or CUI. In these cases exchanges will likely be accomplished via DoD

SAFE. N/A

Per Section L-1.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS, subsection L-11.1 Instructions, offerors may be providing all deliverables of the RFP via DoD Safe on or before the 12:00 pm Mountain Time, 15 March 2021. Therefore, please advise how much advance notice is needed for offerors to request the DoD Safe link.

The DoD Safe link can be provided up to a week or a few days prior, if the deliverables are ready prior to the proposal due date. N/A

RISE RFP Questions and Answers

Per L-2.3, “Offerors shall meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors shall clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions. Each exception shall be specifically related to a specific paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Offerors shall provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Please be aware that if any exceptions are taken to the solicitation and award without discussions is made your proposal will be deemed unawardable. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table L-2.3 below:” This paragraph and associated Table L-2.3, appear to indicate the submission of the L-2.3 Table is necessary even if an offeror takes NO exceptions.

Please confirm if the offeror does not take any exceptions to the RFP, that the offeror can provide a statement for Volume I, Section III stating that no exceptions are taken without submitting “Table L-2.3 Offeror Solicitation Exceptions Compliance Matrix”.

The offeror does not need to submit a compliance matrix if no exception is proposed. If no exception is proposed it is understood that the offeror can meet all proposal requirements. L&M updated to more clearly reflect this. L-2.3

L-2.3, Table L-2.3 If the offeror does not take any exceptions, is a submission of the Compliance Matrix required for the proposal? Refernce Answer 10. L-2.3

Are the vendors required to respond to PWS 1.4.5 through 1.4.7 for each of the two selected ‘Effort Categories’?

Correct, as PWS sections 1.4.5 through 1.4.7 have varying levels of involvement for each category of effort the offeror should address hardware, software, and range infrastructure with regards to the respective effort categories.

Paragraph below Table L-3.1.1A

Addressing each of the PWS areas listed in 1.4 requires the offeror’s proposal to choose incompatible responses. For example, if the offeror chooses “Studies and Analysis” as one of the two Effort Categories, Table Section L-3.1.1 and Table M.3.1.1.B requires the response to address not only PWS 1.4.4 Studies and Analysis Projects but also address PWS 1.4.1 Prototyping, PWS 1.4.2 Production, and PWS 1.4.3 Sustainment Projects.

Question: Would the government accept a suggestion to modify the RFP so that the effort categories chosen apply to the relevant areas of the PWS? Suggested edits:

• Section L-3.1.1, 4th Paragraph: Offerors shall provide a legible, clear, and coherent narrative (in PowerPoint format) in the oral presentation package describing their specific approach to fulfill the relevant technical requirements in accordance with the PWS paragraphs 1.4. through 1.4.7.

• Table M.3.1.1.B – Technical Competence in RTS Subject Area: Offeror shows examples that they have technical specialties for performing efforts as described in across the relevant areas of the PWS section 1.4. (must demonstrate capability for at least two of the four effort categories listed in Table M-3.1.1A)

Offerors should assume that offerors will address only the relevant areas as you have noted. Our understanding of the statement in Table M3.1.1.B referencing PWS Section 1.4 is that this assumption is made through the parentheses statement “(must demonstrate capability for at least two of the four effort categories listed in Table M-3.1.1A)”.

Based upon this language offerors only need to address applicable/relevant categories of effort as outlined under 1.4.

Similarly, categories of effort that are not relevant for which an offeror will not be proposing need not be addressed.

Revisions incorporated in L-3.1.1 and Table M-3.1.1B

Utilize System Engineering Process |Offeror will discuss their company process standards for systems engineering and compare to an established standard such as IEEE 12207. Their process standard will cover the minimum areas of:

Requirements Analysis, Functional Analysis and Allocation, Design Synthesis, Verification

The PWS clearly references the IEEE 12207 in the development of software.

Section L references 12207 as a standard for a "system engineering process"

The IEEE12207 document itself is a standard for "software life cycle processes"

Please clarify if the government wants the contractor to explain its software development process or system development process.

The IEEE 12207 standard covers both system and software engineering. It is appropriate for both locations it is used. In the PWS it, or an equivalent, is a requirement to be followed to complete software efforts. In section L, it is used as a guideline to identify good Systems Engineering processes; as a guideline for systems engineering processes the more software specific portions will be less important and focus will be on the systems engineering processes outlined in the document.

Lastly, the IEEE 12207 standard is provided as a reference to those types of engineering; however, possessing the certification itself is not required to become qualified on the basic.

N/A

Understanding that a signed SF33 is required as part of the proposal submission, we noticed that the draft SF33 had a total value of $950,000,000.00 noted in Box 20, however, this box is blank on the formally released document. Can you please offer some guidance on how a proposer should proceed?

It was identified prior to official RFP release that Box 20 should not be filled in until the day of award, as such this block will be filled in later by the Government. N/A

Page 61 of the RFP (Section K) includes provision 252.2215-7009 Proposal Adequacy Checklist. As the IDIQ proposal submission does not include cost data, a PAC is not applicable at this time. Will the government remove this requirement from Section K, or provide written confirmation that this requirement is for reference only as a requirement for future task/delivery order proposals?

The proposal adequacy checklist does not apply to the basic RISE IDIQ. This requirement is for reference only as a requirement for applicable task/delivery orders in the future.

N/A

19 Is the Government OK with a password protected copy of the DD Form 2345?

Yes, it can also be submitted via DoD Safe. All email communications do not need to be encrypted; however, emails should be properly marked for source selection information. Encrypted email may only be required for proprietary information or CUI. In these cases exchanges will likely be accomplished via DoD SAFE. N/A

20 What does the Government mean by Facility Code?

If it is known that all the work covered by the order is to be performed at an address different from the address represented by the contractor's code, and any contract administration function will be required at that facility, enter in the facility code block the organizational entity code for that facility, i.e., H8-1/H8-2 code for a non-Government entity or DODAAD code for a Government entity. (Use DODAAD codes only to indicate “performed at” locations for orders specifying services at a Government location.) If it is known that multiple facilities are involved, enter the codes for all facilities at which work is to be performed, including the contractor's code if work is performed at that address. So if award is made at home office with CAGE Code and performance is at a different location that will have a separate facility code. N/A

Please confirm that the Subcontracting Plan is submitted in Volume I and the SBPCD is submitted with Volume II?

Confirmed, the subcontracting plan is expected to be submitted with Volume I of the proposal and the SBPCD with Volume II. N/A

22 Please confirm that the SBPCD is not in the Oral PowerPoint presentation.

Small Business Participation portion of the proposal only needs to be written and is not required to be submitted in the oral presentation. N/A

In the Draft RFP, the Small Business Participation (Factor II) was included in the Oral Presentation. Based on Table L-1.3 the Small Business Participation is now required to be written. Does that mean Small Business Participation is no longer a part of the Oral Presentation? Reference Answer 20. N/A

Section L-3.2 Factor II Please clarify your expectation from Offerors for completing the SBPCD as part of the Base IDIQ response; and, provide rationale for requiring a binding commitment from Offerors for small business participation as part of the Base IDIQ response. In addition, if a binding commitment is required, please also provide details for the required scope of work that we, and our competitors, should use as a basis to perform source selections and ensure only QUALIFIED small business partners are proposed.

With regards to the SBPCD the Government’s intent is to have offerors outline and provide an estimation for how they plan to utilize small business and reach small business goals. As such, the SBPCD is illustrating small business involvement that the offeror can potentially commit to; however, without a defined task/delivery order we can’t ultimately set in concrete the required participation nor would the document result in a binding commitment on the IDIQ level. As task/delivery orders that will be placed on RISE are developed, actual small business goals for that order will be created and included (as applicable) in the proposal request where offerors will need to demonstrate their commitments with subcontractors to fulfill the goals.

At that time, those binding commitments will become contractually enforceable upon award of the task order.

L-3.2(4) - removed binding commitment language to prevent confusion in basic

L-3.2 Last paragraph

Does the Contractor only need to provide the SBPCD to be compliant with Factor II: Small Business Participation?

The offeror only needs to provide the SBPCD to comply with Factor II. This should outline estimates the offeror anticipates to meet with small business involvement. The SBPCD shall adhere to the requirements of the factor to demonstrate how the offeror anticipates meeting the levels with explanations or other documentation (if necessary). N/A

L-3.2(4) and L-3.2 (Last Paragraph) Without knowing the task order types or functional areas for the 5 year period, it is difficult to estimate percentage and dollar amount allocations. For instance, if we intend to award all training effort to a SDVOSB, we will not know how many dollars nor the percentage of dollars that will be. We do know that we would give that SDVOSB 100% of training work to them, but cannot quantify how much in value that is. Would the USAF considering changing the quantification to percentage of Prime Contractors awarded effort?

Rather than estimated exact dollar amounts or percentages offerors should provide anticipated levels of small business involvement based upon the scope of the RISE effort. No exact numbers need be submitted at this time as individual orders are yet to be developed. Any reporting of small business involvement would be done at the order level if applicable. N/A

This “binding commitment” referenced in Section L-3.2.4 and in the SBPCD attachment requirement is contrary to FAR 52.219-9(a) that specifically excludes small business prime contractors from having to submit a SB Subcontracting Plan and then – more importantly - report on the prime’s goals.

In this case, the Government is merely changing the name “Subcontracting Plan” to “Participation Plan”, to circumvent the entire intent of this exception to the reporting requirement.

We request this “binding commitment" sentence be removed from the solicitation and PWS.

The small business participation plan is an independent requirement from the subcontracting plan. Offerors other than a small business must submit both a subcontracting plan IAW FAR 52.219-9 and a small business participation plan required under FAR 15.304(c)(4) while small business offerors must only submit a small business participation plan IAW FAR 15.304(c)(4). It is expected that a small business offeror will/would include its own participation as part of the small business participation plan.

L-3.2(4) - removed binding commitment language to prevent confusion in basic

L-3.2 Last paragraph

Given the contract results in a MA IDIQ contract and given the fact that the government logically removed any pricing requirements from the solicitation, how do Offerors determine the percent of contract value going to the various Small Business types. That is, the percent is based on SB contracted dollars divided by total contract value. If the total contract value is unknown and not specified, how do Offerors identify the percentages for Small Business utilization.

In its stead, we suggest the Offerors provide their methodology and history of how they intend to meet any later task order small business goal.

Rather than cited dollar values and exact percentages it is expected that offerors will provide a best percentage estimation for any involvement from other SB types based on the general scope of the RISE solicitation. L-3.2(4)

Does the Government expect these goals to be met at the TO level or at the IDIQ level over the total life of the award (paragraph 4)? The SBCPD states the goal will be evaluated at the TO level. Paragraph 5 above states the total life.

The Government expects these estimated percentages and goals to be met at the IDIQ level. However, any reporting of actual small business involvement will be identified at the TO level is applicable. N/A

Is the Government accepting offerors best efforts or good faith to establish and identify estimated small business involvement levels?

Offerors should submit estimates anticipated in the future. Firm levels not required at this time as individual requirements are not yet identified. However, reporting of actual small business involvement may be required on individual task or delivery orders if applicable.

L-3.2(4) and last paragraph

L-3.2(5) What are considered acceptable forms of documentation to quantify substantiation of SB participation (i.e. MOU, MOA, etc…)?

You may provide anything that can show that you have worked with small businesses or intend to work with small business. Some possibilities include written documentation of any teaming arrangements/agreements you may have or contract information on previous work that has been accomplished with a small business partner. L-3.2(5)

Does the Government intend for SB to pursue teaming arrangements at this point with other SB concerns (WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB, SDVOSB, SDB (8a)) and define a percentage of subcontracting goals? Depending on the TO requirements

– the companies we list may not be the ones best suited for the scope. At that point, we will have to go find other SB concerns that are capable of meeting the requirement.

Small Business concerns need not solidify teaming arrangement or subcontracting arrangements at this time for the basic. However, the SBPCD should indicate expected percentages to the various socioeconomic SB categories in addition to anticipated teaming arrangements if applicable. In accordance with the template any changes to anticipated SB concerns to be used in fulfilling requirements need not be approved by the PCO. Also please be advised that the participation of a small business prime is applicable to the overall MQR goal N/A