DCRIOS_RFP_FA877316R8002_Questions_ _Responses.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 48 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Defensive Cyber Realization, Integration & Operational Support (DCRIOS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8773-16-R-8002
About this file
DCRIOS RFP FA8773-16-R-8002 Questions Responses
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Defensive Cyber Realization, Integration & Operational Support (DCRIOS) has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions & Responses
| FA8773-16-R-8002 - (DCRIOS) RFP Questions & Responses | |||||
| Question # | Subject | Solicitation Location | Reference | Questions/Comments | Response |
| 1 | Task Order #1 | Section L - Attachment 9 | Paragraph F.5 TO Pricing Table (Section J Attachment 2) | Since all labor categories are not included in the Section_J_Attachment_2_-_FFP_Task_Order_Pricing_Table.xlsx Task Order 1 pricing table, all sections of the PWS must not be relevant to TO 1. Please clarify which PWS sections are relevant to TO 1. | Amendment to the RFP will be issued to update Section J Attachment 2 - FFP Task Order Pricing to include the Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Forensics Analyst) and Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Incident Response) labor categories/tasks. The revised FFP Task Order Pricing Table includes all but two Labor categories/tasks and those are identified in the CPFF Labor Rate Table in Section L Attachment 7. |
| 2 | Task Order #1 | Section L - Attachment 9 | The labor categories in the Section_J_Attachment_1_-_DCRIOS_PWS_27_Apr_2016.pdf, 8.4 APPENDIX D: (page 46) do not match the pricing table located in Section J Attachment 2 or Section L Attachment 7.1. Please identify where the pricing will be shown for the Weapons and Tactics Innovation (Assessment Analyst and Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Forensics Analyst). | Amendment to the RFP will be issued to update Section J Attachment 2 - FFP Task Order Pricing to include the Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Forensics Analyst) and Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Incident Response) labor categories/tasks. The revised FFP Task Order Pricing Table includes all but two Labor categories/tasks and those are identified in the CPFF Labor Rate Table in Section L Attachment 7. | |
| 3 | Reading Room | Section L - Attachment 8 | Paragraph 2 | Can we bring 3 individuals per company per teammate? If not can we bring 3 individuals including teammates? | Visit is limited to 3 individuals including teaming partners. |
| 4 | Reading Room | Section L - Attachment 8 | Paragraph 5 | Would the government please provide the entire list of documents in the Reading Room? | The documents available for review in the reading room are listed in Section L Attachment 8 para 5a. |
| 5 | Reading Room | Section L - Attachment 8 | Paragraph 1 | We are requesting an appointment to the Reading Room. If we have an option we are requesting 3 Jun. | The reading room is scheduled for 2 June 16. |
| 6 | Technical proposal page count | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph C.2 | The referenced section limits the page count to 50 pages. With the font size and line spacing requirements of paragraph C.3 combined with the required content of paragraph D, we believe 50 pages to be too little to adequately demonstrate our approach and understanding of the mission. We believe the Government will receive a more robust response allowing for a lower risk source selection if an increased page count i spermitted. We would recommend increasing the page limit to 100 pages. | Page count of 50 is believed to be adequate for vendors to demonstrate their approach and understanding of the requirement. |
| 7 | Proposal line spacing | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph C.3 | The formatting instructions in Section L, Attachment 9 provide contradictory information: "Pages shall be single-spaced/typed with 1.5 line spacing,…." Can the government please confirm that paragraphs in the proposal are to be single spaced. | Pages shall be single spaced. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.3.a shall be updated in Amendment 0002 to read as such. |
| 8 | Task Order #1 Pricing Table | Section J, Attachment 2 | Contractor Labor Category Column | The cells associated with the Contractor Labor Category column are protected in the TO #1 Pricing Table and cannot be edited. If the offerors are to complete this column, please provide an Excel file where this column is not protected. | Pricing Table will be unprotected and reposted in Amendment 0002. |
| 9 | Electronic Proposals | Section L - Attachment 9 | Paragraph C.8 | For portions of the proposal submission not required to use MS Excel, may we submit in Adobe pdf format? This will ensure the intended number of pages and page format will be preserved regardless of printer settings. It will also result in smaller files to email for submission. | Adobe pdf format is acceptable for portions of the proposal submissions not required to use MS Excel. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.8 shall be updated in Amenemdnet 0002 to read as such. |
| 10 | Cost Volume binder size | Section L - Attachment 9 | Paragraph C.2 and C.7 | The referenced paragraphs require all binders to not exceed 2 inches in size. The material required to be placed in the Cost Volume Section L, attachment 9, paragraph F (such as the FPRA called out in paragraph F.3.v) will not fit in a single 2 inch binder. We would recommend allowing a 5 inch binder for the Cost Volume or allow for the use of multiple 2 inch binders. | Multiple 2 inch binders are allowed. |
| 11 | Transition Planning | Section M Factor 1 Technical, Subfactor 1: Management / Staffing Plan | Section M Factor 1 Technical, Subfactor 1: Management / Staffing Plan - v Transition Plan. This subfactor is met when the offeror provides a transition plan including a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions, and deliverables required to ensure a smooth transition and continuity of services between the current contracts and this effort IAW PWS Section 2 and 3 requirements. | Since the governemnt is now making the transition plan an eveluated fact would the government add 5 pages to the page count of Volumn I, to account for this requirement? | Page count of 50 is believed to be adequate for vendors to demonstrate their approach and understanding of the requirement. |
| 12 | FAR CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE | RFP Page 26 FAR 52.215-21 | Is it the Governments intention to require "Certified Cost or Pricing Data" as part of the submittal | Provide Other Than Certified Cost supporting data for CPFF burdened labor rates, to include estimating methodology. See Section L Atch 9, Para F.1.b | |
| 13 | Transition Planning | Section M Factor 1 Technical, Subfactor 1: Management / Staffing Plan and PWS 4.6 Transition Planning | PWS 4.6 Transition Planning :The contractor shall provide a Transition Plan 180 days prior to contract completion and provide status to the COR weekly throughout the transition period. The Plan shall include a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions required to ensure a smooth transition to ensure continuity of services. Throughout the transition periods, it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. The contractor shall plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the transition period". | If PWS 4.6 Transition Planning is asking for a Transition In Plan as an evaluated part of the Proposal (per Section M), and the plan requires “The Plan shall include a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions required to ensure a smooth transition to ensure continuity of services. Throughout the transition periods, it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. The contractor shall plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the transition period". This would seem to require a detailed internal knowledge of the existing program schedule which would only be known by an incumbent contractor. The 4.6 transition planning addresses Phase Out activities, the evaluation criteria Management criteria appears to address Phase In transition planning. Please clarify what elements should apply to the Phase In portion. Please provide the incumbent's Work Breakdown Structure and phase out milestones. | RFP Section M will be amended by deleting subfactor 1 v. and PWS para 4.6 will be changed to clarify the requirement for transition out planning. |
| 14 | Transition Planning | Section M Factor 1 Technical, Subfactor 1: Management / Staffing Plan | In two previous questions and answers the government stated "Transition is not a evaluation factor" and "The transition plan is not an evaluation factor. " | In Section M "v Transition Plan." the government states "This subfactor is met when the offeror provides a transition plan including a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions, and deliverables required to ensure a smooth transition and continuity of services between the current contracts and this effort IAW PWS Section 2 and 3 requirements." As written it appears to favor any incumbent company. Why did the government change the previous answer to one that now favors an incumbent contractor? | RFP Section M will be amended by deleting subfactor 1 v. and PWS para 4.6 will be changed to clarify the requirement for transition out planning. |
| 15 | Transition Planning | PWS 4.6 Transition Planning | 4.6 Transition Planning :The contractor shall provide a Transition Plan 180 days prior to contract completion and provide status to the COR weekly throughout the transition period. The Plan shall include a work breakdown structure (WBS) that identifies parties, dates, critical actions required to ensure a smooth transition to ensure continuity of services. Throughout the transition periods, it is essential that attention be given to minimize interruptions or delays to work in progress that would impact the mission. The contractor shall plan for the transfer of work control, delineating the method for processing and assigning tasks during the transition period". | In PWS 4.6 Transition Planning The text references “180 day prior to contract completion”. This would indicate a “Transition Out” plan. Further, the text references “transition periods” plural. Which transition periods is the government referencing, a “transition in”, a “transition out”, or both? | RFP Section M will be amended by deleting subfactor 1 v. and PWS para 4.6 will be changed to clarify the requirement for transition out planning. |
| 16 | Technical Proposal content | Section L - Attachment 9 | Paragraph D.2 | The last section of the referenced paragraph states: "Failure to provide technical and past performance volumes on each vendor in a subcontracting / teaming arrangement shall render Offeror’s proposal non-responsive and unacceptable.". |
| Please clarify the meaning of this sentence. Are we to provide separate Technical and Past Performance volumes for each subcontractor on our team? That is, if we have 3 subcontractors / teammates, we would provide a prime technical proposal plus 3 subcontractor technical proposals for a total of 4 separate technical proposals? | Section L Attachment 9, Para D.2. will be changed by Amendment 0002 to read: "Failure to provide a technical volume that includes the requirements of this paragraph shall render Offeror’s proposal non-responsive and unacceptable". | |||||
| 17 | Task Order #1 | N/A - General | N/A - General | In the Questions and Answers to the Draft RFP, questions 53 and 54 indicated the first awardable task order would be issued after contract award. Is task order #1 in the final RFP awardable? | Task order #1 will be the FFP portion of the requirement and will have a 12 month period. | |
| 18 | Delivery Date in RFP Section F | Section F - Delivery Information | CLINs 0001 and 0002 | In RFP Section F, the Period Of Performance (POP) for CLINs 0001 and 0002 spans the period of time from 28 Apr 2017 to 27 May 2018. That is a 13 month period. RFP Section B indicates that CLIN 0001 has a 1 month POP and CLIN 0002 has an 11 month POP for a total of 12 months. |
Please clarify the POP.
| Note that if Section F is incorrect, the change will have a ripple effect across the POP for all CLINs in Section F. | CLIN 0001 is a 1 month transition period and CLIN 0002-0006 is an 11 month period for a total of 12 months. RFP Section F will be updated by Amendment 0002 to reflect the corresponding 12 month POPs. | ||||
| 19 | Inclusion of CLIN 5002 in the Total Evaluated Price | Section J, Attachment 2 | CLIN 5002 | While CLIN 5002 makes use of half of the hours from CLIN 4002, CLIN 5002 has $0.00 entered for all rate data. Because the rate data cells are protected, they can not be altered by the offeror. |
Also, the GRAND TOTAL cell in CLIN 5002 does not make use of the TOTAL PER PERIOD for CLIN 5002.
Considering the resulting Excel file calculations, it does not appear that CLIN 5002 is included in the TEP. Please clarify, does the TEP price include or exclude CLIN 5002?
| If the TEP is to include CLIN 5002, please provide a revised Section J, Attachment 2. | TEP includes CLIN 5002, the cells are protected to auto calculate from CLIN 4002. A revised Section J Attachment 2 will be included in Amendment 0002. | ||||
| 20 | Desired Labor Rates | Section J, Attachment 1 PWS | PWS paragraph 8.5 Appendix E | Neither TO #1 Pricing Table (Section J, Attachment 2) nor the CPFF Labor Rate Table (Section L, Attachment 7) ask for labor rates for the following 2 labor categories: 1) CND Incident Response, 2) CND Forensics Analyst. |
Are rates for these two labor categories required?
Follow on question:
| Which pricing table should contain these rates? | Section J Attachment 2 "TO Pricing Table" will updated in amendment 0002 to add labor categories: 1) CND Incident Response, 2) CND Forensics Analyst. | ||||
| 21 | Technical Proposal Evaluation | Section M, Attachment 2 | Paragraph C. Technical Acceptability | The referenced section begins with the following sentence: "Initially, the government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the technical proposals on a pass / fail basis, assigning ratings of Acceptable or Unacceptable." |
| The wording implies that additional evaluation will be performed beyond a pass / fail basis. Please clarify what additional evaluation will be performed. | Additional evaluation may be performed beyond the initital evaluation IAW Section M Para C. which states "Only those technical proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award" | ||||
| 22 | Technical Proposal Evaluation | Section M, Attachment 2 | Paragraph C. Technical Acceptability | Please clarify what factors and the criteria that must be met to receive a pass rating for the Technical Volume. |
| Are the three subfactors weighted evenly? | All three subfactors under Factor 1 shall be met in order to receive a pass rating for the technical volume. There is no order of importance at the subfactor level. | |||||
| 23 | Cost / Price Evaluation | Section M, Attachment 2 | Paragraph E.3 and Paragraph E.3.c Cost Realism | The referenced paragraphs indicate that the Pricing Model of Attachment L-7 and the cost CLINS will be evaluated for Cost Realism. Will the Task Order #1 FFP cost / price be evaluated for cost realism? | The FFP TO will not be evaluated for cost realism. Only price reasonableness will be assessed. Cost realism will be performed on the CPFF Labor Rate Tables (Attachment L-7). | |
| 24 | FY Budget Data | Section M, Attachment 2 | Paragraph E.3.f Affordability | Please provide budget data by FY in an amendment to the Final RFP similar to what was in the DRFP to allow the offeror to validate that our cost / price is affordable. | The budget data provided stands as written in the RFP. | |
| 25 | Budgeting other direct labor categories | Section J, Attachment 2 | Contractor Labor Category Column | Some of our team have Cost Accounting Standards and Data Disclosure Documents that require labor categories such as Security, Contracts and Finance to be priced as direct labor. Please provide unprotected pricing tables to allow for additional labor categories to be added. | We can not leave the cells unprotected to allow additional labor categories. Section J Attachment 2 lists the FFP labor categories applicable to this effort. | |
| 26 | Technical Proposal Evaluation | Section M, Attachment 2 | Paragraph C. Technical Acceptability | Please clarify what factors and the criteria that must be met to receive a pass rating for the Technical Volume. |
| Technical Acceptability criteria is listed in Section M, Attachment 2, Paragraph C, Factor 1, Subfactor 1, Subfactor 2 and Subfactor 3. | ||||
| 27 | Labor Categories | Section J, Attachment 1 PWS | Paragraph 8.5 Appendix E: Knowledge Requirements | As written, the knowledge requirements for each labor category (LCAT) are a single level without requirements on years of experience or educational background. The Government will achieve a more optimized and cost efficient staffing solution if each labor category was further decomposed into junior, intermediate and senior levels. This would also provide contract flexibility to adjust the needed skill mix across time to suit the dynamic nature of the cyber environment. |
| Recommend the government amend its pricing model to allow junior, intermediate and senior LCATS pricing. | Offerors are to propose as indicated in the RFP. | |||||
| 28 | Total Compensation Plan | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph F.2.F | Various benefit structures are utilized to achieve successful program staffing. Would the Government expect a weighted average blend of Fringe/Healthcare benefits by labor category or labor categories distinguished by benefit structure? | The Government expects labor categories distinguished by benefit structure. | |
| 29 | CPFF Labor Rate Tables (Attachment L-7) | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph F.2.F | What is the proposal preparation expectation for T&M subcontract partners participating on the CPFF CLINs? | The Government expects offerors to propose IAW Section L Attachment 9 instructions. | |
| 30 | Labor Categories | Section J, Attachment 1 PWS and Section L, Attachments L-7 and L-7.1 | Paragraph 8.5 Appendix E: Knowledge Requirements Labor Category Column | Can additional labor categories be added to the two pricing models (Attachments L-7 and L-7.1)? | Only 2 labor categories apply to the CPFF table and model. | |
| 31 | Labor Categories | Section J, Attachment 1 PWS and Section L, Attachments L-7 and L-7.1 | Paragraph 8.5 Appendix E: Knowledge Requirements Labor Category Column | Can the offeror further subdivide the labor categories by experience and education levels within the two pricing models (Attachments L-7 and L-7.1)? | Only 2 labor categories apply to the CPFF table and model. | |
| 32 | Indirect Loads | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph F.3.d. | Labor rate tables do not accommodate indirect cost (G&A or Materiel Handling) loads for prime/ subcontractor relationships. Can the rate models be modified to account for the additional costs? | The CPFF Labor Rate table does accommodate indirect costs for prime/subcontractor relationships by allowing indirect rates input at "Indirect Rate applicable to Subcontracts" | |
| 33 | Early Proposal Information | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph E.3 | Paragraph E.3 states "Each offeror is requested to submit the information…..for each relevant contract 14 days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals." Given the current submission due date of June 28, 2016, are we correct in our assessment that the Government is requesting the Early Proposal Information be submitted by June 14, 2016? | As stated in RFP, Section L, Para E, "Each offeror is requested to submit the information shown in paragraph 6 below for each relevant contract 14 days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in offeror disqualification." | |
| 34 | Early Proposal Information | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph E.3 | Please confirm that the submission requirement for the Early Submission Information is via email only. | Early submissions for email/hard copies is identified Section L Attachmen 9, Para C.8. | |
| 35 | Early Proposal Information | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraph E.3 | Please confirm the statement "Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in offeror disqualification" is correct. | This is a correct statement. | |
| 36 | Relevancy Assessment Matrix | Section M, Attachment 1 & Attachment 2 | Section M, Attachment 2, D2 | In Section M, Attachment 2, D2, the attachment includes "Management Support" among the criteria for evaluating relevancy. In the Relevancy Assessment Matrix, "Management Support" is not included. Can the government please confirm that "Management Support" will not be included in the government's evaluation of past performance relevancy. | Management Support will not be included in the government's evaluation of past performance relevancy. Section M will be updated in Amendment 0002 to reflect the change . | |
| 37 | Page Size and Format | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraphs C.3.a and C.3.b | Paragraph C.3.a states "Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 12-point, Times New Roman, Arial or Courier type." Paragraph C.3.b specifies "For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than ten-point." Please confirm that Times New Roman, Arial or Courier type fonts are acceptable for tables, charts, graphs and figures. | Times New Roman, Arial or Courier type fonts are acceptable for tables, charts, graphs and figures. Paragraph C.3.b will be updated in Amendment 0002 to reflect the change. | |
| 38 | Page Size and Format | Section L, Attachment 9 | Paragraphs C.3.a and C.3.b | Paragraph C.3.a states "Pages shall be single-spaced/typed with 1.5 line spacing, and at least double-spaced between paragraphs and factors or sub-factors." Please confirm that tables, charts, graphs and figures may use single line spacing and are not subject to the line spacing requirements for text in Paragraph C.3.a . | Pages shall be single spaced. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.3.a shall be updated in Amendment 0002 to read as such. "Tables, charts, graphs and figures may use single line spacing and subject to the line spacing requirements for text in Paragraph C.3.a ." | |
| 39 | Discrepancies | Section L Attachment 9 | Section B General Information | Attachment 9 L-1 Section B is missing subparagraph B.5. Request that the Government provide an Amended version of Section L Attachment 9 containing subparagraph B.5. | Section L, Attachment 9, Section B numbering will be corrected with an Amendment to reflect B.1. thru B.8. | |
| 40 | Authorized Offeror Personnel | Section L Attachment 9 | Paragraph B.2 | Paragraph B.2 requires offerors to "Provide the name, title, e-mail address, voice and fax telephone numbers, street and mailing address (if a PO Box is used) of the primary and alternate company/division POC regarding decisions made with respect to Offeror’s proposal and who can obligate Offeror’s company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government." | ||
| In which proposal volume/section does the Government want the offeror to provide this information? | This information should be included in offerors cover letter, not within the proposal volumes. | |||||
| 41 | Page Limitations | Section L Attachment 4 and Section L Attachment 9 | Attachment 4 PPI Questionnaire Tracking Record and Attachment 9 Paragraph E.5.a | Request the government confirm that the PPI Questionnaire Tracking Records are excluded from Volume II - Past Performance page limitations. | PPI Questionnaire Tracking Records are excluded from Volume II - Past Performance page limitations. | |
| 42 | Page Limitations | Section L Attachment 9 | Paragraph E.8 | Request the government confirm that Consent Letters are excluded from Volume II - Past Performance page limitations. | Consent letters are excluded from Volume II - Past Performance page limitations. | |
| 43 | CI Poly requirement | PWS Section 4.0 Special Requirements | Paragraph 4.1.1.1 | Section 4.1.1.1 states In addition to the security clearance requirements listed above, contractor employees supporting National Cyber Protection Teams will be required to pass a Counter Intelligence (CI) Polygraph examination. Can the government identify which positions will require a CI Polygraph? | CI Polygraphs will be applicable to National CPTs at no cost to offerors. The exact number of positions aren't available at this time, but are anticipated to be as high as 50% of the contracted CPT positions. | |
| 44 | Formula error on CPFF Pricing Model | Section_L_Attachment_7.1_-_CPFF_Pricing_Model | Cells H5:H6 | The formulas in cells H5 and H6 of the CPFF Pricing Model utilize the Excel =AVERAGE() function. This function will ignore cells in a range which contain the NULL character or TEXT characters but will include a numeric value of ZERO as part of the calculated average. Thus, if a bidder without teaming partners were to propose a $100/hr rate, the Average rate would be calculated as $16.67. One possible solution would be to utilize an =IF() function within cells B5:G6 in lieu of the direct cell references currently utilized. The =IF() function would record the referenced cell's value if greater than ZERO, but would insert text characters (e.g. "N/A") if the referenced value was equal to ZERO. | Agree, the Model will be updated in Amendment 0002. | |
| 45 | Pricing for FFP 6-month extension | Section_J_Attachment_2_-_FFP_Task_Order_Pricing_Table | Cells AJ4:AJ21 | Did the Government intend to include the pricing for the six month extension in its evaluation of offeror's pricing? The cells related to the number of hours in the extension period are calculated from the final option period. However, the bid hourly rate is hard coded as $0.00 rather than referencing the rate in the final option period associated with each labor category. | Pricing table will be updated in Amendment 0002. | |
| 46 | Task Order Pricing Table Correction | Section_J_Attachment_2_-_FFP_Task_Order_Pricing_Table | Task Order #0001 Pricing Table for Base Period | Recommend adding a column between the Description column and Qty for Base column for the CLIN#. This added column will make the table format consistent with the other Task Order #0001 tables on pages 132, 134-138. The CLIN # should be CLIN # 0002. | Pricing Table Description Title will be changed to (Task Order) in Amendment 0002. | |
| 47 | Administrative Correction | Section_J_Attachment_2_-_FFP_Task_Order_Pricing_Table | Section 5. TO Pricing Table (Section J Attachment 2) - "Offerors will complete the TO Pricing Table with proposed Firm Fixed Price (FFP) ceiling labor rates and annual labor hours per labor category in accordance with each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN). Price CLINs 0001 and 0002." | Please confirm that offerors should price all FFP CLINS (0001 and X002). If the above statement is true, please revise the second sentence of the reference to read "Price CLINs 0001 and X002." | Offerors are required to price all FFP CLINS. Section L, Attachment 9, Para F.5.a will be updated in Amendment 0002. | |
| 48 | Administrative Correction | Section_J_Attachment_7-1_-_CPFF_Task_Order_Pricing_Table | Section 3. CPFF Labor Rate Tables (Attachment L-7) - "a…If needed teaming partners may submit their Labor Rate Tables and labor rate backup/support documentation directly to the CO." | Please confirm that labor rate backup/support documentation includes the cost narrative, and thus a Teammate may submit their Cost Narratives directly to the CO. | Yes, if needed teaming partners may submit their Labor Rate Tables and labor rate backup/support documentation directly to the CO as stated. | |
| 49 | Task Order #1 Pricing Table | Section J, Attachment 2 | Contractor Labor Category Column | Can the offerors propose additional labor categories? For example a Program Manager position. | Offerors are to propose the labor categories indicated in the RFP. | |
| 50 | Past Performance Contracts Value | Attachment 1 DCRIOS Relevancy Matrix | Past Performance Relevancy | The Past Performance Relevancy Assessment Matrix definitions states to be relevant contracts must have an annual cumulative amount of $5M, somewhat relevant contracts must have an annual umulative amount of $4M. Must each contract reference meet the dollar threshold or are the contract values a total of all past performance references submitted? | This is a cumulative total amount for all referenced contracts submitted. | |
| 51 | Past Performance Evaluation Criteria | Attachment 1 DCRIOS Relevancy Matrix | Past Performance Relevancy | We understand the relevancy criteria for both the Mission Operations and Mission Support sections of the Relevancy Assessment Matrix. Will relevancy be assessed for each contract separately to meet the relevancy criteria i.e. Mission Operations items A through E and Mission Support items A through C, or will relevancy be assessed cumulatively across all references submitted? | Relevancy be assessed cumulatively across all references submitted. | |
| 52 | Past Performance Contract References | Section L Attachment 9 page 5 | Volume II Past Performance Relevant Contracts | May we submit and IDIQ or BPA contract as a past performance reference? | Yes, you may list a IDIQ/BPA contract as long as you list the applicable Task Order(s) relevant to this requirement. | |
| 53 | Organizational Structure | Section M Attachment 2, Subfactor 1 Management/Staffing Plan | Subfactor 1 Management/Staffing Plan | Evaluation criteria for an acceptable organizational structure includes ensuring the avilability of labor categories with experience, security clearance, and minimum acceptable qualifications necessary to meet PWS Sections 2.3.3, 3 and 4. Is the Government looking for a corporate organizational structure or an explanation of an organizational structure that provides the experience, qualifications, and certifications for each position? If the Government is asking for the organizational structure that provides experience, qualifications and certifications, can you provide the experience, quaifications and certifications as a guideline to ensure consistency across all proposal submissions? | The Government is requesting an organizational structure explaining/addressing their management/staffing plan that ensures the availability of labor categories with experience, security clearance, and minimum acceptable qualifications necessary to meet the requirements IAW PWS Sections 2.3.3, 3, and 4. | |
| 54 | Response to Scenario 1 | Section L Attachment 9 Subfactor 2 Mission Operations, Section M Attachment 2 Subfactor 2 | Subfactor 2 Scenario 1 | Both Section L and M Subfactor 2 Scenario 1 specifically states: “A CVA has been dispatched to assess a space system being developed.” Can the Government provide further clarification on the type of space system related to the CVA, e.g. payload, ground system, etc. | Subfactor 2 Scenario 1 will be updated in Amendment 0002 to include "GPS Ground System to clarify the type. | |
| 55 | Proposal Spacing | Section L, Attachment 9 Proposal Instructions | Page size and format | Proposal instructions state "Pages shall be single-spaced typed with 1.5 spacing and at lease double-spacing between paragraphs and factors or sub-factors." Setting spacing between paragraphs, factors and sub-factors at double-spacing is impossible when setting each paragraph at 1.5 spaces between each line. Would the government consider setting spacing between paragraphs, factors and sub-factors at 1.5 spacing? | Pages shall be single spaced. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.3.a shall be updated in Amendment 0002 to read as such. Tables, charts, graphs and figures may use single line spacing and subject to the line spacing requirements for text in Paragraph C.3.a . | |
| 56 | Transition Plan Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) | Section M, Attachment 2 Evaluation of Offerors | Transition Plan | Part of our Transition Plan is to provide a WBS that identifies parties, dates, critical actions, and deliverables to ensure a smooth transition. Due to the size of the WBS required, can the Government exempt the WBS from the Technical page limit? | RFP Section M will be amended by deleting subfactor 1 v. and PWS para 4.6 will be changed to clarify the requirement for transition out planning. | |
| 57 | Volume I - Technical Proposal | Section L, Pg. 4 | Para 2 | It states "Failure to provide technical and past performance volumes on each vendor in a subcontracting/teaming arrangement shall render Offeror’s proposal non-responsive and unacceptable.” Please clarify how we can provide past performance volumes on each vendor, when on pg. 5 of Section L, Vol II - Past Performance (para 4) it states "no more than three of recent contracts shall be submitted on your teaming partners." | ||
| Our team has more than 3 teaming partners - please clarify what we need to submit. | Section L, Para 2, last sentence will changed to read: "Failure to provide a technical volume that includes the requirements of this paragraph shall render Offeror’s proposal non-responsive and unacceptable" in Amendment 0002. | |||||
| 58 | Volume II - Past Performance | Section M, Relevancy Assessment Matrix | Attachment 1 | In order to reach the "at least an annual amount of $5M" to be consider Relevant in both Mission Operations and Mission Support areas, please clarify offerors are to sum total the annual contract values of the respective past performances cited for each area and that if the totals are greater than $5M (to include experience being met) then Relevancy would be achieved. | Correct, offerors are to sum total of the annual contract values of the respective past performances cited for each area and if the totals are greater than $5M (to include experience being met) then Relevancy would be achieved. | |
| 59 | B. General Information | Section L, Pg. 1 | Para 2 | Which volume do we provide the Authorized Offeror Personnel information? | This information should be included in offerors cover letter, not within the proposal volumes. | |
| 60 | Cross Referencing | Section L, Pg. 3 | Para a | Please clarify that the Cross Reference Matrix is not part of the Technical Volume page count. | Cross Reference Matrix is not part of the Technical Volume page count IAW Section L.C.1. | |
| 61 | Page Size and Formatting | Section L, Pg. 3 | Para a | It states "Pages shall be single-spaced/typed with 1.5 line spacing…" We have noted that when enetering data into the PPI tool the result provides single-spaced output for the past performance write-ups. Please confirm that single spacing (vs. 1.5 line spacing) is also desired for the Techical volume response. | Pages shall be single spaced. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.3.a shall be updated in Amendment 0002. Tables, charts, graphs and figures may use single line spacing and subject to the line spacing requirements for text in Paragraph C.3.a . | |
| 62 | Page Size and Formatting | Section L, Pg. 3 | Para a | It states "Pages shall be single-spaced/typed with 1.5 line spacing…" Is single-line spacing acceptable for tables and graphics? | Pages shall be single spaced. Section L Attachment 9, Para C.3.a shall be updated in Amendment 0002. Tables, charts, graphs and figures may use single line spacing and subject to the line spacing requirements for text in Paragraph C.3.a . | |
| 63 | Volume I - Technical Proposal | PWS | 4.1.1.2 | Reference states 90% of contractor personnel working in Bldgs 178/179 shall have a TS/SCI at contract start. It also says the remaining 10% must have a TS/SCI “within 90 days of contract award”. Shouldn’t this state contract start (vs award)? | As referenced in the PWS, it shall be within 90 days of contract award. | |
| 64 | Volume I - Technical Proposal | PWS | 6.0 | CDRLs A005 and A006 state their delivery date is, “Per request by Government lead/COR, but NTE request date”. Does this imply same-day turn around? If not, what are the minimum number of days/hours notice we should expect to be provided? | Should read "NTE requested completion by date". PWS will be updated in Amandment 0002 to relect the changes. | |
| 65 | Task Order #001 | RFP / Section L Attachment 9 / Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices | Section A - Solicitation / Contract Form & F. VOLUME III.2.e.Affordability / CLIN structure | Section states: "The minimum guarantee for this contract is three months of Recurring Support Services. This will be fulfilled under Task Order 0001" / "DCRIOS budget Estimate for Task Order #001: $61.6M" / Each CLIN states "Individual Task/Delivery Orders will be issued to the basic contract." | ||
| Which CLIN(S) will comprise Task Order #001? | Task Order#001 will consist of the FFP CLINs | |||||
| 66 | Available funding | RFP | 252.232-7007 LIMITATION OF GOVERNMENT'S OBLIGATION (APR 2014) | States: "(a) Contract line item(s) TBD is/are incrementally funded. For this/these item(s), the sum of $ TBD of the total price is presently available for payment and allotted to this contract." | ||
| Please clarify the TBD values. | TBD values will be provided if incremental funding is provided by the requiring activitiy. | |||||
| 67 | Past Performance | Section L - Attachment 2 / Section M - Attachment 1 | Para 15 / Page 1 | Section L states: "Explain how your performance on this contract is relevant for each applicable factor or subfactor, as instructed under Past Performance in Section M of the RFP. Include any unique aspects that demonstrate relevancy in this effort. Provide evidence to support such relevance to the requirements as described in the RFP." | ||
| Specific guidance is provided in Section M - Attachment 1 Relevancy Matrix on what to address for SF 2 and SF3 for the past performance write-ups to ensure relevancy. Please clarify what to specifically address to ensure relevancy for SF1 Management/Staffing in our past performance write-ups. | Management/Staffing is not part of the relevancy criteria. Only Mission Operations and Mission Support are identified in determing revelancy as instructed under RFP Section M, Past Performance Matrix. | |||||
| 68 | Past Performance | Section L, pg. 6 | Para E.6 | Section L states: "Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical subfactors and Cost/Price factor used to evaluate the proposal." Please clarify what to specifically address to ensure relevancy for Factor 3 Cost/Price in our past performance write-ups. | In RFP Section L, Para E.6, "Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical subfactors and Cost/Price factor used to evaluate the proposal" will be deleted in Amendment 0002. | |
| 69 | Past Performance | Section M - Relevancy Assessment Matrix | Attachment 1 | To be considered relevant, the offeror must show "contracts with at least an annual amount of $5 million." Are we to take the total dollar value during the period of performance, divide this by the number of months, and then multiply by 12 to obtain an annual figure? To ensure all offerors use the same formula, please advise how to calculate the annual contract amount. | Offeror determines how they calculate annual value, but this should be substantiated by the relevant past performance information provided. This is a cumulative total amount for all referenced contracts and the offeror must show experience in the criteria identified in Section M Attachment 1. | |
| 70 | Volume I - Technical Proposal | PWS | 5.1, 3.2.3.7.8.4, 3.2.3.7.8.6 | Paragraph 5.1 in the PWS states "...support the Firm Fixed Price (FFP)Recurring Support Services for 92 COS’s Funded Projects IAW PWS Section 3…" However, PWS paragraph 3.2.3.7.8.4 states we need to use Task Requirement Notice (TRN) process. Since this work falls under the FFP CLIN, using TRNs is an additional administrative burden on the static, FFP workforce. Are TRNs necessary? | TRN's are not necessary and PWS references to this will be deleted in Amendment 0002. | |
| 71 | Volume I - Technical Proposal | PWS | Appendix D | The estimated work hours listed in Appendix D show 3840 hours for the "CPT - Network Infrastructure", (~2 FTEs). However, "Network Infrastructure" tasks are called out for five squads. Is the Government's vision to have those hours in a pool that works remotely and does not deploy; or was the estimate based on deploying with the CPT squads and can be adjusted? | Estimate was based on deploying a CPT squads. | |
| 72 | Pricing Evaluation | Section M - Evaluation of Offer | E. | When evaluating Cost/Price, will the Government normalize all the proposals to a 1920-hour standard to ensure a realistic and reasonable cost comparison? | 1920 hours are the estimated annual per task and labor category. | |
| 73 | Past Performance | Section L, Attachment 9 | E.2 | The government states: “New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving officers, employees, and key personnel who have relevant experience and/or data of efforts that will depict performance of major or critical aspects of the requirement. Discuss the roles and responsibilities of personnel involved in the prior contracts cited.” Is this data considered a part of the past performance section but not a past performance reference in and of itself and therefore would not need an associated questionnaire? If this is a Past Performance reference, does this data also require submission/formatting via the PPI tool? | This is part of the past performance section and would require a questionnaire if it's relevant. Provide submissions IAW the format contained in Attachment 2 that contains instructions for use of the PPI Tool. | |
| 74 | Past Performance | Section L, Attachment 9 | We have Past Performance supporting a Prime contractor who is a competitor on this solicitation that has stated that they are unwilling to provide a past performance questionnaire for competitive reasons. Even if compelled to provide a reference, it places them in a conflict of interest to subjectively evaluate the performance of a current competitor. Given the challenges associated with obtaining a subjective evaluation for the prime/sub in this situation, will the government allow the evaluation to be submitted directly to the Government customer (CO and COTR) for an unbiased evaluation of the work performed? | Yes, questionnaires can be submitted directly to the Government. | ||
| 75 | Section B, CLIN 0002 Quantity | Section B | CLIN 0002 | The period of performance for CLIN 0002 is one year (28 May 17 - 27 May 18); however the quantity is 11 months. Please confirm the correct quantity for CLIN 0002 should be 12. | CLIN 0001 is for 1-Month and CLIN 0002 for 11-Months for a total of 12-months for the transition and base year. RFP Section F will be updated to reflect the correct Period of Performances. | |
| 76 | Section B, Emerging Contingency Requirements, Other Direct Cost and Travel CLINs | Section B | CLINs X003, X005 and X006 | The quantities for these CLINs is 40 yet the POP for each is one year (or 12 months). Please clarify the Government's intent on using a quantity of "40" for these CLINs. | This is an estimated amount of requirements we project to have in a given year. | |
| 77 | Emergency Contingency Requirements | FA8773-16-R-8002 page 4 of 51 Emerging Contingency Requirements CPFF | Emerging Contingency Requirements are Cost Plus Fixed Fee (Term) (CPFF Term) negotiated requirements when an effort is needed that is not covered by recurring support services. These are one-time efforts that are within the scope of the contract and will be accomplished IAW the terms and conditions of the contract. | By "one-time efforts" does this indicate these are temporary positions? | These are one-time efforts utilizing the Labor Rate Tables that are within the scope of the contract and will be accomplished IAW the terms and conditions of the contract. | |
| 78 | CND Auditing (Vulnerability Assessments) and CND Auditing (Pen Tester, SME) | Section J attachment 2, Column A and Section J, Attachment 1, APPENDIX D | Section J attachment 2, Column A Does not include CND Auditing (Vulnerability Assessments) and CND Auditing (Pen Tester, SME); Section J, Attachment 1, APPENDIX D: Government estimated tasks and hours, the last two rows list CND Auditing Tasks and hours. | The PWS estimates 67200 hours of CND auditing tasks, however no CND Auditing is included in the Section J, Attachment 2 FFP Task Order Pricing in Column A. Please explain. | These two Labor categories/tasks are identified in the CPFF Labor Rate Table in Section L Attachment 7. | |
| 79 | Early Proposal Information | Section L, Attachment 9, Paragraph E.3 | Volume II, Past Performance | Please specify the format and method which the Government would like offerors to use when submitting the requested Early Proposal Information. | Submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing Past Performance Information (PPI) IAW the format contained in Attachment 2 that contains instructions for use of the PPI Tool. Ref Section L Para E.1. | |
| 80 | Proposal Submission Clarification | Section L, Attacchment 9, paragraph C.2 | Table 1, Proposal Organization | Please clarify if the proper submission format is to submit a total of 1 original + 5 copies or 1 original + 4 copies in printed format. | The number of volumes are identified at RFP Section L, Atch 9, Para C.2, Table 2. | |
| 81 | How to submit Classified Past Performance information | Section L, Attacchment 9, paragraph E4 | Volume II, Past Performance | If an Offeror has relevant experience performing classified work on a contract, may a sealed addendum to the proposal be submitted along with the original response volumes for evaluator review and consideration? If so, will this addendum be counted against the page count of original volume. | We cannot accept Classified addendums; request offerors provide relevant experience supporting data without revealing any specific tasks that are classified. | |
| 82 | Position Titles | Section J, Attachment 2 | The position titles found in Section J Attachment 2 are different from the Position Titles found in PWS Section 8.5 Appendix E: Knowledge Requirements | Please clarify which Position Titles the Government would like Offerors to use. | Offerors to use Section J Attachment 2 - FFP Task Order Pricing Table that corresponds to PWS Appendix D. | |
| 83 | Incomplete Position Listing | Section J, Attachment 2 | A number of positions (in the Task Column) from PWS Section 8.4 Appendix D: DoD 857.01M IAT Levels/Estimate Work Hours are not included in the list of position titles found in Section J Attachment 2 as follows: |
- CND Auditor (Vulnerability Assessments)
- CND Auditor (Per Tester, SME)
- Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Forensics Analyst)
| - Weapons and Tactics Innovation (CND Incident Responder) | Please confirm whether or not these four positions should be added to Section J, Attachment 2 | Section J Attachment 2 "TO Pricing Table" updated in Amendment 0002 to add labor categories: 1) CND Incident Response, 2) CND Forensics Analyst. Positions, CND Auditing (Vulnerability Assessments) and CND Auditing (Pen Tester, Subject Matter Expert) are identified in Section L Attachment 7 - CPFF Labor Rate Table. | ||||
| 84 | Labor Catgory Skill Levels | Section J, Attachment 2 | The labor categories in Section J Attachment 2 do not appear to consider levels (entry, mid, senior, etc.). | Would it be possible to include the years of experience and education requirement? | Years of experience and education requirements are not included as the offerors are required to meet the required certifications/training stated in the PWS to perform the required tasks. | |
| 85 | Knowledge Requirements | PWS Section 8.5, Appendix E | In selected cases, there seems to be inconsistencies when comparing some of the Knowledge Requirements from PWS Section 8.5 Appendix E: Knowledge Requirements with corresponding sections in the PWS. For example: |
- Network Infrastructure (e.g. Section 3.2.4.2.5 in PWS) “The contractor shall detect and emulate network infrastructure adversary TTPs to defend against physical or logical access to network components including wireless technologies.”
| - Appendix E Network Infrastructure Specialist – “Knowledge of: basic communication methods, principles, and concepts (e.g. crypto, dual hubs, time multiplexers, etc.) that support the network infrastructure; capabilities and applications of network equipment including hubs, routers, switches, bridges, servers, transmission media, and related hardware; IT security principles and methods, such as firewalls, DMZ, and encryption; local area and wide area networking principles and concepts including bandwidth management; network architecture concepts including topology, protocols, and components; network communication protocols such as TCP/IP, Dynamic Host Configuration, Domain Name Server (DNS), and directory services; network systems management methods including end-to-end systems performance monitoring; remote access technology concepts; systems administration concepts; telecommunications concepts” | Is it the Government's intent that the Knowledge Requirements in this two different sections be consistent? The first appears to be cyber related while the second seem more of a network admin/engineer role with some cyber | Appendix E is general and broad based and PWS section 3.2.4.2.5 is CPT specific to task performance. | ||||
| 86 | Offeror Compensation Spreadsheet | Section L, Attachment 6 | In Section L Attachment 6 Offeror Compensation Spreadsheet, Col C appears to be asking that each partner (Prime and subcontracts) will need to identify the hours by labor category by team. | Is this Column N/A or does the Government want each partner (Prime and Subcontractors) to identify the hours by labor category and by team | Government wants each partner (Prime and Subcontractors) to identify the hours by labor category | |
| 87 | PWS Reference Anomalies | Instructions D,Volume 1-Tech, Item 3 (Format and Specific Content) | when reviewing the instructions D. Vol 1 – Tech, item 3 Format and Specific Content. Each Subfactor has a list of PWS sections. Here are some anomalies with the referenced section: |
-SUBFACTOR 1 – MANAGEMENT PLAN/STAFFING PLAN (“PWS sections 2.3.3, 3, and 4) – PWS includes sections 2.3.1 & 2.3.2 -SUBFACTOR 2 – MISSION OPERATIONS (“Section 3.2.3 and 3.2.4”) – PWS includes section 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 3.2.5 & 3.2.6 (are these considered part of Subfactor 1? If so, seems more like Mission Operations vs Management plan/staffing plan)
| -Subfactor 3 – MISSION SUPPORT (“PWS Sections 3.1.1- 3.1.7”)- the PWS includes section 3.1.8 | Should the referenced PWS sextions remain as presented or be adjusted to resolve the anomaly? | Referenced PWS sections remain as presented |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .