Questions_and_Answers__1.pdf

Questions and Answers

Solicitation FA8601-16-R-0023

Date: 2/24/2016

1. When the RFI was released, potential providers were required (or recommended) to have instructors with graduate degrees from AACSB. Why did the requirement increase to only allow for institutions with AACSB certification after the RFI?

a. The Government requires highly credible and experience instructors to teach this course. The technical requirement that the performing organization is AACSB accredited was selected to reduce the risk associated with hiring an individual or individual(s) whose tenure might not last the entirety of the period of performance. Extending the requirement to the organization should provide for a larger and more consistent pool of instructors to meet this need.

2. AACSB accreditation is a very high standard and may be a) causing the government to spend more than needed to meet requirements and b) unnecessarily restricting competition. Can you please explain the motivation behind the AACSB requirement? And would you consider broadening the requirement to AACSB accredited or affiliated with an AACSB accredited institution?

a. The quality of education is a function of a number of factors including instructor professional experience, instructional experience, and credibility. The Air Force has already a number of internal education providers. For this requirement, the Air Force is seeking a source more credible than its current options. Additionally, performance is more important than cost and, based on the industry interest, there appear to be a number of highly qualified offerors that meet this technical requirement.

3. Is there an Incumbent? If so, does the current curriculum provided meet the requirements in the RFP?

a. To the PCO’s knowledge, there is no contract with the exact requirements. There has in the past been a similar requirement. However, that requirement was part of a contract that encompassed a substantially larger scope and is not comparable to this solicitation.

On that basis, there is not an incumbent.

4. Why is this being competed? (e.g. new requirement, contract expiration)

a. The Government advocates for competition. This solicitation is in compliance with FAR

Part 6.

5. Will this be a best-value or LPTA evaluation?

a. This acquisition is in accordance with FAR Part 12 and FAR Part 13. The Government will evaluate proposals based on Price Reasonableness and Technical Capability with Technical Capability being more important than price. This is a trade-off approach. The Government will award (if an award is made) to the offeror with the proposal that meets the requirements of the solicitation and represents the Best Value to the Government.

6. Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number FA860116R0023 contain requirements similar to a current contract?

a. NO

7. If possible, please provide the current contract number or is this a new requirement for the government?

a. There is no current contract for this requirement.