Round 1 Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 21 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MSC Financial Management Support Services
- Solicitation number
- finanmanag_25R4034solicitation
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for an MSC Financial Management Support Services solicitation that addresses contractor inquiries about key personnel requirements, security clearances, period of performance, and other contract details.
Key details include: The contract will begin April 28, 2025 for most services, with MEBO-related services starting June 27, 2025. All positions are designated as key personnel, with requirements for CPAs, SAP expertise (DoD or commercial experience accepted), and T1 security clearance level. Telework/remote work is permitted, though the Program Manager must attend quarterly meetings in Norfolk, VA. This is a new requirement for MSC with no incumbent. The government will provide NMCI computers/systems access. Past performance submissions are limited to 3 references with minimum $10M total contract value. The acquisition uses LPTA source selection methodology. Knowledge transfer and support reduction efforts are anticipated to begin in the third year of the contract.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation Amendment 0004.pdf | ||
| Round 2 Questions and Answers Clarification.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation Amendment 0001.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment 0003.pdf | ||
| Round 2 Questions and Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Solicitation Amendment 0002.pdf | ||
| Solicitation Amendment 0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1- Pricing Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Final Financial Management Solicitation.pdf | ||
| CDRL 12.pdf | ||
| CDRL 02.pdf | ||
| CDRL 07.pdf | ||
| CDRL 05.pdf | ||
| CDRL 03.pdf | ||
| CDRL 06.pdf | ||
| CDRL 10.pdf | ||
| CDRL 04.pdf | ||
| CDRL 08.pdf | ||
| CDRL 09.pdf | ||
| CDRL 11.pdf | ||
| CDRL 01.pdf | ||
| Final Financial Management Solicitation.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - Question Submission Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 1- Pricing Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3 - Past Performance Information Sheet.pdf | ||
| Attachment 4 - Past Performance Questionaire.pdf |
Show all 26
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
Attachment 2 Financial Management Question and Answers Spreadsheet
| Reference (ie: Attachment # or PWS paragraph) | Comment/Question | Answers | Column1 | Column2 |
| RFP, Page 6/79, Paras 1.5.12.1-10 & Page 22/79 Technical Exhibit 3 | For all Key Personnel listed, is the government requiring one (1) resume per LCAT, or should all FTE represented in the Estimated Workload Data on page 22 be included? i.e. do we need one (1) Senior SAP Subject Matter Expert Resume, or ten (10) resumes included in our submission? | Please refer to FAR 52.212-1 in the solicitation for all proposal submission requirements. The Government is not requiring submission of resumes. It is the responsibility of the offeror to determine its own labor mix that is necessary to perform all of the work detailed in this PWS. The awardee will be responsible for hiring key personnel that meet all of the requirements in the PWS. If, during contract performance, the Government has reason to believe that a key personnel position is filled by an unqualified contractor employee, the COR will request a copy of the contractor’s resume to verify the minimum qualification requirements of the position are met. | ||
| RFP, Page 6/79, Paras 1.5.12.1-10 & Page 22/79 Technical Exhibit 3 | Would the Government consider reducing the key personnel requirements to the PM, Data Manager, and 5 Sr. SAP SMES? This would promote competition because few firms have the full slate of support staff available to start on day 1 of contract start. | No, the MEBO requirement would not begin until 27 June 2025, so firms would have ramp up time for those particular resources. | ||
| RFP, Page 6/79, Paras 1.5.12.4-5 | Would the government accept a Certified Government Financial Manager (CGFM) or Certified Defense Financial Manager (CDFM) certificate in lieu of a Certifieid Public Accountant license? | Senior Accountant and at least one of the Staff Accountants must be licensed Certified Public Accountants. The remaining Staff Senior Accountants may hold an active designation as a Certified Internal Auditor (CIA) or Certified Government Financial Manager (CGFM) or Certified Defense Financial Manager (CDFM). | ||
| RFP, Page 27/79 | The solicitation incorporates FAR clauses 52.222-55 and 52.222-62 by reference, but both of these clauses are only applicable to contracts subject to the Service Contract Labor Standards. As this contract is not subject to SCLS, can these two clauses be removed to avoid confusion? | Yes, you are correct, these clauses are only applicable to contracts subjected to SCLS. These clauses have been removed and the revised solicitation has been posted to SAM.gov. | ||
| RFP, Page 4/79 | The Place of Performance is set out as the Contractor's facility. Please confirm that telework and remote work are acceptable. | Yes, telework and remote work are both acceptable for this contract, however the program manager will be required to attend meetings at MSC facilities in Norfolk, VA quarterly. | ||
| RFP, Page 6/79 | Paragraph 1.5.12 sets out all positions as Key Personnel. Can you confirm that this is accurate? | Yes, this is accurate. | ||
| RFP | The solicitation does not specify whether the Government will provide laptops and ancillary equipment for contractor use. Please clarify. | Paragraph 3.2 of the PWS states that the Government will provide all necessary Navy Marine Corps Internet (NMCI) computers or Nautilus Virtual Desktop applications (as applicable) access in order to all Contractors access to required systems. | ||
| RFP, Page 7/79 | Would MSC consider updating the LCAT to be for X years SAP or X years DoD SAP experience. Locking it down to just Navy disqualifies highly qualified other DoD (Army) SAP resources. | Yes- it doesn’t have to be Navy SAP only, prefer DoD SAP but will accept commercial SAP experience | ||
| RFP, Page 4/79 | Can the Government confirm all LCATs and KPs will only require a T1 or Tier 1 = Non-sensitive (no clearance)? | In accordance with Paragraph 1.5.6.1 of the PWS, any personnel required to access and/or handle CUI necessary to carry out their duties and responsibilities, must obtain and maintain minimum required investigation (T1) throughout the duration of the contract. The MEBO related portion is unclassified. | ||
| RFP | Is there a minimum FCL required? | In accordance with Paragraph 1.5.6.1 of the PWS, any personnel required to access and/or handle CUI necessary to carry out their duties and responsibilities, must obtain and maintain minimum required investigation (T1) throughout the duration of the contract. There is not a requirement for a facility clearance. | ||
| RFP | How long has the incumbent been in place? | This is a new requirement for MSC. | ||
| RFP | Who was the awardee prior to the current incumbent? | This is a new requirement for MSC. | ||
| RFP, Page 3/79 | Is the Period of Performance start date 28 April 2025 or 27 June 2025? | The Period of performance for the services described in sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 of the PWS will begin on 28 April 2025. The services described in sections 4.4 and 4.5 of the PWS are currently being performed under another contract and therefore will not start under this contract until 27 June 2025. All option years will run for 12 consecutive months and they will contain all services described in the PWS. | ||
| RFP, Page 14/79 and 22/79 | Based on 4.6.2 Knowledge Transfer- there is an anticipated reduction in support efforts starting the third year. Is the third year the first year reduction efforts are anticipated? | Yes. Based on the current timetables pushed from DoD, we anticipate that this is when significant progress has been accomplished in specific areas that will allow those things to transition to sustainment from creation, implementation and attainment. | ||
| RFP, Page 22/ 79 | Beyond the Program Manager, are there specific LCATs, KPs and or FTEs assigned to MEBO or expected to contribute to MEBO? | Technical Exhibit 3 has been modified to reflect the number of employees that we anticipate would contribute to MEBO | ||
| RFP, Page 22/79 | Which LCATs, KPs, or FTEs are currently conducting MEBO? | There are currently nine government employees in MEBO. | ||
| RFP, Page 31/79 | For Past Performance, can Offerors submit information on less than three (3) previous contracts? | Yes. | ||
| RFP, Page 31/79 | What is the maximum number of Past Performance examples that can submited by the Prime on behalf of their subcontractor? | In accordance with the solicitation, Past Performance Questionnaires shall only be submitted for contracts not found in CPARS in which a Past Performance Information Sheet was also submitted. Because the solicitation allows for only 3 or less Past Performance Information Sheets, there should only be a maximum of 3 Past Performance Questionnaires received. | ||
| RFP, Page 32/79 | To provide wider competition, would the Government consider replacing LPTA with Best Value? | LPTA has been determined to be the source section methodology that will achieve the best value for this acquisition. We do not have criteria which we are willing to trade off against price; instead our technical criteria focuses on organizational experience to ensure that offerors have the experience we need doing similar work. | ||
| RFP, Page 30/79 | Would the government consider reducing the requirement for acceptable past perofmrance from $10m TCV to $2m TCV? This would promote a wider response from firms who have directly relevant past performance (but not at the requested scale for these same contracts). | No. Previous contracts with a total dollar value of $10M or more will more-closely represent the magnitude and complexity that the Government is looking for with this contract. | ||
| Solicitation Addendum 52.212-1 and SAM.gov Notice | The referenced section of the solicitation indicates that questions should be sent to keeley.a.crosby.civ@us.navy.mil and Lawren.h.wolf.civ@us.navy.mil. However, the sam.gov notice for this opportunity states that the points of contact are Ms. Keeley Crosby and Mr. Jordan Castellat. May the Government please confirm which are the correct points of contact for this solicitation? | Any of the points of contact on Sam.gov can be contacted regarding information about the Sam posting, but proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the instructions in FAR 52.212-1 of the solicitation. | ||
| SF1449 | Though the solicitation has the filename "Final Financial Management Solicitation," the SF1449 included with this file has a "Draft" watermark. May the Government please clarify whether this solicitation is the final RFP or a draft RFP? | This solicitation is not a draft. A revised version of the solicitation has been posted that no longer contains the “Draft” watermark. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .