Amd_5_Question_Log.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 14 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Science and Technology Fellowship Program (STFP) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA9550-17-R-0002
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 37
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
Sheet1
| QUESTION NUMBER | QUESTION | RESPONSE |
| 1 | Please confirm that AFRL wishes only to receive Volume IV of the proposal, as all other volumes previously submitted cannot be amended. | Confirmed. AFRL wishes only to received Volume IV, the Cost/Price volume, of the proposal |
| 2 | For the final cost/price proposal, is the Air Force requesting an entire revised Volume IV, or only portions of the Volume? | For the final cost/price proposal, the Air Force is requesting an entire revised Volume IV |
| 3 | There appears to be an error in the CLIN prices for CLINs 1003AA and 1003AB. For an assumed 100 associates per CLIN for 6 months, should those numbers be $3,827,100 for CLIN 1003AA and $4,602,852 for CLIN 1003AB? | Yes, SubCLIN 1003AA should have shown an NTE value of $3,827,100 and SubCLIN 1003AB should have shown an NTE value of $4,602,850. However, also see the response to question no. 6 below. These values will be corrected by the government. |
| 4 | The revised CLIN document states that for CLINs 0003AA, 0003AB, 0004AA, 0004AB, 0004AC, 1003AA, 1003AB, 1004AA, 1004AB, and 1004AC, “No fee/profit or indirect costs can be charged on pass through funds.” Does this mean that no indirect costs may be charged on those amounts at all, or does it mean that any indirect costs must be included in a separate CLIN, e.g., in CLIN 0005/1005, so long as those costs are in accordance with the awardee’s negotiated indirect cost rate agreement? | The revised CLIN document language is correct. No fee/profit or indirect costs can be charged on pass-through funds. 100% of the dollars on these CLINs will pass through to the selected Fellows. Any costs for the contractor to perform the contract requirements shall be priced in the appropriate firm fixed price CLIN. |
| 5 | The PWS (para. 1.13.2) states, “the cost reimbursement CLINS under this contract shall constitute a relatively insignificant part of the total contract value”. Please clarify this statement as the cost reimbursable CLINS total $111,549,500. | The first sentence in PWS paragraph 1.13.2, Cost Reimbursement CLINs will be changed to read, "This contract includes deliverables and is not intended to acquire a mere level of effort." |
| 6 | The cost of performing this effort will be based, in large part, on the number applicants and the number of postdoctoral research associates awarded/on tenure. The PWS indicates a range of 120-200/annually. Answers to questions provided on September 5, 2017 indicate that there have historically been up to 84 active associates. These projected numbers are significantly (2.0-3.5 times) higher than the historical number of AFRL postdoctoral associates, and even with a well-defined and executed plan for increasing the number of research advisers and associates, it is unlikely that the number of AFRL postdoctoral associates will approach 200 within the first 2-3 years of the contract. The cost/price estimate for attracting, selecting and managing the tenure of 200 associates would be much higher than the historical cost of the program or even raising the program to 120 fellows. The difference between the actual cost of administering the program at the historic number of associates, and the eventuality of 200 annual postdoctoral associates can approach $1M annually. Using a Firm Fixed Price CLIN type for such a broad range makes pricing for contractors difficult, because in order to ensure submission of an offer that reflects an understanding of the proposal and reduces risk of underperformance, the contractor should bid to the highest number of associates even though those numbers may not accurately reflect realistic estimates for the program. We believe it is in the best interest of the Government to provide a more narrow range of Associates for each year of the agreement (e.g., 90-110 for year 1, 110 – 130 for year 2, etc.), so that the Government may accurately compare contractor price proposals. Please provide the number/range of Associates that should be proposed for each contract year. | The range of research associates to be provided and supported each fiscal year is revised as shown below. PWS paragraph 1.4 and the CLINs will be updated to reflect these estimates. |
FY Research Associates 2018 80 - 120 2019 80 - 140 2020 80 - 160 2021 80 - 165 2022 80 - 165
| 7 | Has an award been issued under solicitation FA9550-17-R-0002? If not, has the incumbent’s contract FA955017D001 been extended beyond 5/31/2018? | This question is not relevant to the submission of a revised cost/price proposal. A response is not appropriate at this time. |
| 8 | Has work begun under a new contract? If so, with the solicitation re-opened has a stop work order been issued? | This question is not relevant to the submission of a revised cost/price proposal. A response is not appropriate at this time. |
| 9 | Could the government clarify why the Contract Award Dollar Amount reported in GovWin differs significantly from what was disclosed in the debriefing? | This office cannot speak to what is reported in GovWin as it is not our system. |
| 10 | Amendment 5 PWS Section 1.13.2 states all cost reimbursement CLINS shall be straight cost reimbursable with no provision for fee (profit) or indirect costs; however, this issue was specifically addressed by the government on September 5 2017 in the Q&A (question #27) where the government stated that Cost Accounting Standards-Disclosure statement burdens as approved by the government could be applied but not fee (profit), which is in accordance with FAR Clause 52.216-11 Cost Contract – No Fee. Which clause in the solicitation (Clauses_and_Provision__15_AUG_2017) prohibits indirect costs on cost reimbursable CLINs? | The Government has intentionally chosen to omit a provision for any indirect costs or profit on the cost reimbursable CLINs as they are strictly “pass through funds” from the Government through the prime contractor and directly to each research associate selectee. All costs associated with the Contractor's effort to managet & execute the program shall be proposed and accounted for on the FFP CLINs. |
| 11 | Where ENs issued to clarify proposer’s cost/pricing during the evaluation period? If not, what prompted a change in the cost/pricing requirements now? | This question is not relevant to the submission of a revised cost/price proposal. A response is not appropriate at this time. |
| 12 | New CLINs 0006 and 1006 for DATA have been inserted into the CLIN structure with contract type FFP and is not separately priced. Does the government anticipate the cost associated with 0006/1006 DATA to be included in CLIN 0005/1005 Manage and Execute Program? | CLIN 0006 is a new CLIN (it was inadvertently omitted previously). CLIN 1006 was included in Amendment 0002. The government anticipates the cost associated with providing data will be included in the fixed price CLIN(s) determined appropriate by each offeror. |
| 13 | Section L-3.2.6 specifies submission of the entire proposal (Executive Summary, Technical Mission Capability, Relevant Past Performance, and Cost/Price), not just the Volume IV Cost/Price. The removal of allowable indirect rates such as G&A/M&H on certain CLINs does have an impact on an offerors overall approach to provide a turnkey FFP solution to the government which is reflected in the offerors technical approach. Given this significant change will the government reopen the solicitation in its entirety so bidders can propose a revised approach to meet this change? | No changes to the technical proposal submissions or technical evaluations are being made. Only final cost/price proposal revisions are being requested. Technical revisions will not be accepted. Where the costs are proposed/accounted for/paid should have no impact on the strengths/weaknesses/deficiencies, if any, of the offeror's evaluated proposal. |
| 14 | Will the government remove any requirement for offerors to provide indirect/proprietary rate information given this is a firm fixed price (FFP) contract and it appears no most probable cost (MPC) adjusts will be made? This is further supported by the government not allowing indirect cost on certain CLINs. Offerors should be allowed to provide a unit price/total price by CLIN only with no other proprietary cost data requirements. | As detailed in M-3.1.4, Cost/Price Factor, cost/price will be evaluated on the total price proposed for the basic requirement as well as on other price-related issues. Offerors whose price is determined to be unrealistic, unreasonable, and/or unbalanced may not be considered for award. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of analysis techniques. The Government will analyze offers to determine whether there are unbalanced separately priced line items or sub-line items. The Government reserves the right to perform a price realism analysis. If the Government determines that price realism is necessary, the Government will review fixed prices to determine whether the proposed prices reflect a lack of technical understanding. A proposal can be rejected for offering unrealistically low prices. As needed, the government will evaluate 'other than cost or pricing data' to verify the prices proposed are realistic, reasonable and/or balanced and reflect an adequate technical understanding of the government's requirements. |
File details come from the government source that posted it.