Pre-Proposal_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

Pre-Proposal Questions and Answers Sol. GS-00-P-15-BQ-D-7002

Amendment 4

Note: A solid bold line was inserted to indicate each question or set of questions submitted.

General

1. Pages 6, 17, 54 and 55 – Section B.1 references “the Zonal Regional Contracting Officer (RCO)”, yet

Section G.1.5 (page 54), states that there will be “multiple RCOs per zone” and there is no corresponding reference to a Zonal RCO in Section G. Section C.3 (page 17) refers to

Zonal/Regional Contracting Officer (RCO), Zonal/Regional Program Manager (RPM). Additionally, the

Amendment 001 answer to question G.1, referencing a “Zonal Contracting Officer’s Representative

(COR)” is not mentioned in Section G.1.6 (page 55) of the final RFP. Can GSA please clarify the structure for Zonal leadership in managing work and task orders in the four zones?

Response: GSA may have Zonal/Regional Contracting Officers (RCO), and Regional Program Managers

(RPMs) per each Zone/Region. There will be two National Contracting Officer Representatives (NCOR) at the National Level for the base contracts. This answer overrides the answer provided in Amendment

1.

A COR per Section G.1.6. is the Lease Contracting Officer and is designated in each task order.

Section C

2. Pages 21-22 - The response to Section C.4.1.5. (2), Question 42 was not incorporated into the RFP.

Response: Revision as follows was incorporated into the solicitation through Amendment 3.

2. Other changes, such as a change in COR, change in square foot, delineated area, term, tenant improvement allowance, or a schedule change that does not impact the RDD, may shall be accomplished via electronic notification from the RCO/Ordering Official (OO) for the task order.

Section G

3. Page 57 – Section G.2.4 states that “All targets for SDB participation, expressed as dollars and percentages of total contract value, in each authorized NAICS Industry Subsector, and a total target for SDB participation by the Contractor.” Please confirm whether the requirement for comparison to total contract value is limited to only firms categorized as small disadvantaged businesses (SDBs).

Response: Section G.2.4 is revised through Amendment 4.

Section H

4. Page 70 – Please confirm that offerors may propose and perform the work using the same Zonal

Project Manager for more than one zone.

Response: It is at the offerors discretion to determine the best and most competitive method for meeting the requirements of this solicitation when proposing, and potentially receiving awards, for more than one zone.

Amendment 4

Section K

5. Page 100, Section K – Please confirm that it is GSA’s intention that none of the clauses in K.2(c)(2) apply.

Response: None of the items under K.2(c)(2) are checked as applicable, therefore they do not apply.

Section L

6. Page 106, Section L.6.4 – Should Offerors include a table of contents with each volume? If yes, please confirm that it will not count towards page limits.

Response: All pages will count toward the page limitation as specified in Section l and Section M. It is at the offerors discretion as to how they utilize the pages they submit.

7. Page 107, “Note” – Please clarify the reason GSA dropped the reference to “parent firm” included in the Draft RFP. Does GSA intend to allow firms with various subsidiaries or affiliates to submit multiple bids and thus potentially be awarded contracts in all four zones under different business names?

Response: The reference to “parent firm” was inadvertently dropped. Bids must be submitted from the parent firm. The Note in Section L.6.4. has been corrected as part of Amendment 4.

Section M

8. Page 120, Section M.1. – Does the definition of “Contractor” in H.5 apply to the limitation in M.1 where it is stated that the Government “intends to award no more than two (2) contracts to any one contractor in two (2) distinct Zones…” Can an Offeror and its affiliates be awarded more than two (2) contracts?

Response: Bids must be submitted by the parent firm. The Government intends to award no more than two (2) contracts to any one contractor in two (2) distinct Zones.

9. Page 107, “Note” – Please confirm that other than small offerors must also tailor the small business plan in Volume Three for each zone pursued.

Response: Each proposal shall include all volumes as applicable for each zone an offeror is submitting a proposal for. However, the subcontracting plan will not be evaluated for purposes of an award decision.

The subcontracting plan must be approved before award can be made.

10. Page 108 – Is there an Item #6 that offerors are meant to address?

Response: The removal of item #6 was a clerical error and the requirement is not missing from the list.

Amendment 4

11. Pages 120 – 135 – Throughout the Section M evaluation criteria, several items are called out as potentially being rated higher or more favorably. Because there are several factors listed without reference to the other, might GSA please provide a chart or other clarification that demonstrates the relative importance of these factors? For example:

Proposals may be rated higher if the offeror can provide evidence to support the coordination of multiple concurrent projects in multiple locations for corporate accounts

Projects within zone for which the bid was submitted may be rated more favorably

Proposals that include Government (Federal or State) experience may be rated more favorably

Proposals with projects where requirements development was provided may be rated more favorably

Response: No, neither a chart nor further clarification will be provided.

12. Page 120 – Please provide a single list of all “minimum requirements” that offerors must meet to compete.

Response: The RFP provides the minimum requirements. All offerors must be able to perform the requirements listed in Section C to be minimally qualified.

13. Pages 120-121, M.1 and Amendment 0001 Question Responses 4 and 5 in Section B – In the situation where small business subcontracting plan negotiations reveal that a firm is both an ASO prime and a subcontractor to an ASO prime, at whose discretion will the award be granted? For example, will either prime be able to remove a proposed subcontractor during the negotiation of the small business plan to become compliant and retain the award?

Response: Yes, prior to award and upon GSA’s review and approval the awarded contractor may revise their subcontracting plan.

14. Page 121 – Can GSA please clarify the statement: “Experience performing tenant or owner representation services for corporate accounts that expand several states or for government accounts

(Federal or State)”? Should this be interpreted to mean that Corporate experience may be rated equally or more highly than Government account experience?

Response: See Section M.2. Factor 1, which states “proposals which include government experience (federal or state) may be considered more favorable.”

15. Page 121 – Please confirm that: (i) offerors may use the same contracts to demonstrate corporate experience/past performance for multiple zone submissions, and (ii) offerors will not be required to ask client references to complete up to four past performance forms for the same contract.

Response: Per Section M.2 Factor 1 – “The offeror should include projects located within the zone for zone for which the bid is submitted. To the extent the offeror does not have experience in that zone, projects in other zones should be included. However, projects within the zone for which the bid was submitted may be rated more favorably.” If proposing in multiple zones using the same reference a separate past performance form must be submitted for each zone.

Amendment 4

16. Page 121 - May references whose relevant experience spans more than one zone identify more than one zone in a single Attachment 3 and email it to multiple zones as required?

Response: Attachment 3 must be submitted with each proposal even if bidding in separate zones.

17. Page 121 – Please clarify the meaning of “expanding several states”. Might offerors interpret this as the need for offerors to demonstrate their ability to undertake work that spans several states?

Response: Yes

18. Pages 132-134 – For the purposes of evaluation, are “government accounts” limited to only State and

Federal clients, or will other significant government accounts, for example those with County governments, be rated equally with State government references? Parens in M.2 on page 121

“government accounts (Federal or State)” seem to limit evaluation credit for potentially relevant experience with entities below the State level.

Response: See Section M, Factor 1 - Proposals that include Government (Federal or State) experience may be rated more favorably.

19. Pages 132-134 – Since Past Performance forms will be submitted by clients directly to GSA, not with offerors’ submissions, may offerors provide brief summary information (e.g., a maximum of 2 pages) under that tab identifying references and other pertinent information?

Response: No.

Attachment 3

20. Attachment 3 – Please confirm that the Attachment 3 statement, “Past Performance reference role level must be at the account’s program / directing level”, is inclusive of Regional Contract Officials for national programmatic contracts, such as the currently active NBC2.

Response: It is the contractor’s responsibility to select references most suitable to respond to the scope of the project and/or program. It is acceptable for the questionnaire to be completed as a collaborative effort between one or more individuals, however the primary reference needs to be recorded on the questionnaire.

21. Attachment 3: Please confirm that there is not a Question #9 for the clients to complete on the

Reference Form.

Response: No. 9 was inadvertently left off the form. The questions were renumbered correctly through amendment 3.

22. Attachment 3: There appears to be two Question #15 items. Please confirm that answers to both are required.

Amendment 4

Response: Yes, both answers are required. The questions were renumbered correctly through amendment 3.

Amendment 0001

23. Amendment 001, Answer to Question G.1 – Please confirm that the “Zonal Contracting Officer’s

Representative (COR)” should actually be referenced as the NCOR (as it appears on pages 53-55, and not the COR as referenced in the Amendment 0001 answer.

Response: There will be two NCOR at the National Level for the base contracts. The Amendment 0001 reference to a zonal contracting officer’s representative was incorrect.

24. Amendment 001, Answer to Question L.3 – Please confirm that the change in the final RFP language, removing references to “Parent Company,” does not mean that a parent company with various affiliates can submit multiple bids, using different entity names in order to be selected in more than two zones. As such, the Section H.5 Organizational Conflict of Interest language on pages 72-

73, and specifically the application of the definition of “Contractor” to the entire RFP would prohibit such an action: “Includes the Contractor; any of the Contractor’s parents, affiliates, or other entities in which the Contractor or such parents or affiliates have a financial interest; successors in interest to the Contractor or any of its parents or affiliates; proposed consultants or subcontractors at any tier;

and employees thereof.”

Response: The reference to “parent firm” was inadvertently dropped. Bids must be submitted from the

Amendment 0002

25. Amendment 0002 – Given the change in the Contracting Officer for this acquisition, please confirm that Offerors can correct the email address included in Attachment 3, so that the client reference information is submitted to the right person.

Response: Yes. This was corrected in amendment 3.

Section L

1. Page 107, Section L.6.4, “Note” and Page 121, Section M.2 – This is a follow-up to a question asked at the Pre-bid regarding the change from the Draft RFP to the Final RFP and the removal of the “parent firm” terminology. Some businesses rely on franchises, affiliates, subsidiaries, etc. to conduct the work of the parent company nationally. Please confirm that the Factor 1 Experience of the offeror (which is as noted in M.2, “the corporate entity and not individual personnel”) would preclude franchises, affiliates or subsidiaries of a parent entity to submit multiple and separate bids in order to be awarded more than two zones under the same parent.

Response: The reference to “parent firm” was inadvertently dropped. Bids must be submitted from the

Amendment 4

2. Page 107, Section L.6.4, “Note” and Page 121, Section M.2 –Should franchises, affiliates, subsidiaries, etc., be permitted to bid as small businesses, please confirm that they cannot rely upon the experience of a parent entity.

Response: The reference to “parent firm” was inadvertently dropped. Bids must be submitted from the

Section M.1

3. Page 120, Paragraph 3 of M.1, Zonal Evaluations – Because GSA will be evaluating each Zone independently, but not concurrently, is it the case that a firm may be successful in winning Zone 4 and Zone 1 and thus not be considered for Zone 2 and Zone 3. Please confirm GSA’s intent. Will Offerors be permitted to rank order the zones preferred should they be evaluated in the top tier in more than two zones?

Response: Offers will be considered and evaluated for all zones submitted but offerors may only be eligible to receive awards for up to two zones. Offerors will not be allowed to rank their zones in order of preference.

Attachment 2

4. Attachment 2, General – Some commercial clients and government (including Federal and State) clients are concerned about the confidentially of their leased locations’ information in proposals.

Excepting the “Individual Project #” tab information, which clearly has to identify the client, may offerors identify some cells in the Client Account Data tab as “confidential” without being penalized in the evaluation?

Response: No, confidential is not an acceptable response. Note: Proposal information will not be shared outside of the source selection board. All information related to proposal submission is confidential and considered source selection information and protected by the Procurement Integrity Act. Offerors should complete all the required information for Attachment 2.

5. Attachment 2, Technical Factor 1 (Client Account Data) – Please provide a revised spreadsheet that allows for the selection of the full range of options for all rows in columns Q and R. It appears that all rows after the first row (line 7) provide a limited range selection (up to 40%, rather than 70% and 90%, respectively).

Response: The spreadsheet has been corrected as part of Amendment 4 to allow for percentage selection up to 100% for columns Q and R.

6. Attachment 2, Technical Factor 1 (Client Account Data) – For columns Q and R, please confirm that the “percentage of work performed” should be estimated for each transaction based on the period of time from task order issuance (i.e., contractor onboarding) through task order close-out (i.e., project completion).

Response: Yes, it should be from task order issuance through project completion.

7. Attachment 2, Technical Factor 1 (Client Account Data) – Because many of the cells in this spreadsheet are locked and the height of rows cannot be expanded, any information within a cell that is longer than one line is lost. As a result, for example, client reference information in the summary sheet will not be visible to GSA once the form is converted to PDF as required by the solicitation.

And, even if the Excel file is submitted in lieu of the PDF, it is not possible to see the information without placing the cursor over that cell. Will GSA consider unlocking the cells to allow for greater flexibility and readability of offerors’ submissions?

Response: The spreadsheet has been corrected as part of Amendment 4 to allow flexible format adjustment to the row and column size by pressing “ALT + ENTER” for additional space within the cell as well as the ability to expand width and height via mouse cursor at column or row instance.

8. Attachment 2, Technical Factor 1 (Client Account Data) – Please provide more clarity on how

Owner’s Rep and Tenant Rep are defined for the purposes of preparing this document. The industry has very distinct definitions for the terms used. Owner representation typically means working for a landlord leasing space to a tenant on the building owner’s behalf.

Response: For the purpose of the solicitation, industry definitions are utilized.

9. Attachment 3 – Due to the very extensive and detailed nature of the past performance questionnaires clients are being asked to complete, and the questions with regard to Attachment 2, will GSA consider extending the deadline to accept the client reference forms.

Response: Yes, the deadline was addressed in Amendment 3. The new deadline is June 4, 2015.

10. Attachment 3 – Can offerors list more than one zone on a single reference questionnaire form that is being submitted by the same client, covering multiple zones? Please confirm that offerors are not required to request clients submit their form four times.

Response: Attachment 3 must be submitted with each proposal even if bidding in separate zones..

Can a SDB firm partner with a larger firm to form a team to combine transactional experience between the two firms to meet the needed 50 transactions?

Response: Yes.

1. The project list spreadsheet, Attachment 2, states that for Tenant Rep you should list the % of work done by subcontractors, but the description on page 122 indicates to specify the percentage of service that was tenant rep. These are two very different answers based on how the question is posed. What is the specific information being requested in the Tenant Rep column of this spreadsheet?

Response: The spreadsheet has been corrected as part of Amendment 4. It has been updated to mirror the solicitation.

2. With regards to overall client “roll up” information for Attachment 2, there are columns that are more project specific and ones that are more program specific. Which columns should be completed in the overall contract line item being addressed?

Response: All individual line item information entered in Attachment 2, Client Account Data, should be on the transaction level. “The proposal must demonstrate that an offeror has experience performing at least fifty (50) transactions as described above and has provided commercial brokerage services to corporate/Government (Federal or State) accounts expanding several states.”

Amendment 4

3. With regards to Attachment 2, Technical Factor 1, Client Account Data, could you please clarify the column “owners representation”? If we have represented the tenant only, do we leave this column blank?

Response: Correct - if only the tenant was represented, the input value would be 91-100 with 0-10 in the owner representation column.

4. With regards to the percentage that should be entered in the pricing spreadsheet, is it to be a percent of how much of the commission the firm wishes to retain of the total commission paid, or should that figure reflect the percentage that the firm wants to make on the commission? For example, if the commission paid by the Lessor is 3%, should we propose the specific percentage of 3% that we want to earn, (xx% of 3%) or are we to propose xx% as a stand alone? For this example, if we propose 2% in a particular value type of assignment and are successful at getting 3%, then 1% will go to the government?

Response: The input on the Pricing Worksheet shall be entered as a portion of the total commission. For example, if the total commission from the lessor is 3%, enter the amount of that 3% that the broker firm will retain (e.g. 50%, 60%, 20%) NTE 100% for each module.

1. GLS_Solicitation, page 1 of 135, Cover

When will vendors receive the answers to the questions submitted?

Response: Per-proposal answers are submitted per Amendment 4.

2. GLS_Solicitation, page 1 of 135, Cover

Will vendors be required to submit Teaming Agreements for our small business partners with our final proposal?

Response: Teaming arrangements will need to be established prior to submission of the offerors proposal.

3. GLS_Solicitation, page 6 of 135, B.1 Services

What is the GSA’s reasoning, and ultimately the benefit to taxpayers, in changing the contract award to limit the number of awards to a single firm at two zones?

Response: GSA gave careful consideration to the number of awards allowed per zone and for the overall IDIQ contract.

4. GLS_Solicitation, page 22-23 of 135; page 42 of 135; C.4.1.6. Commission and Commission

Credits; C.8. Quality Assurance By The Government

In assessing performance, the National Contracting Officer will also consider the Contractor’s ability to meet GSA’s Bullseye Measure as well as observations of the Contractor’s performance, made by the Regional Program Officials and the National Program Officials.

Given the inaccurate and inapplicable nature of the data found in Bullseye reports, will the GSA consider alternative methods of measurement (i.e., approved negotiation objectives) to determine a

Best Value Commission? For example, negotiation objectives are required to be provided twice yet not considered as a measurement in the provided model.

Response: No. GSA will not consider alternative methods of measurement for the best value commission.

5. GLS_Solicitation, page 22 of 135; page 42 of 135; C.4.1.6. Commission and Commission

Credits; C.8. Quality Assurance By The Government

In the instance where the Bullseye Report and the Contractor Market Information contradict, will the

Contractor be provided with an opportunity to challenge the report, with the possibility of nulling or obtaining a revised Bullseye Report?

Response: No, for the purposes of the Best Value Commission, the Bullseye Report stands.

6. GLS_Solicitation, page 25 of 135, C.4.2 Description of Modules

Given that “Travel is required on most task orders,” what is the expectation for pre-award travel?

Response: Travel is only required after a task order is issued. Once a task order issued pre-award , typically limited to the the market survey (s) is required prior lease award. If Requirements

Development is included in the selected module, it may prove helpful for a Contractor to walk-through existing space to provide better consultative feedback on an agency’s requirements; however it is not required by this contract.

7. GLS_Solicitation, page 28 of 135, C.4.3.1. Requirements Development; K. Calculate agency utilization rates

Can the GSA provide clarification, or further guidance on how the Contractor will “calculate agency utilization rates”?

Response: Currently, PBS will compute an Office Utilization Rate (UR) as follows:

(Total Office Area x 0.78*) / Personnel Count = Office UR

* 22% reduction for support and circulation is assumed

PBS will then divide the number of new space actions completed during FY15 meeting the 100 - 150

UR benchmark by the total number of new space actions completed during FY15, to calculate the percentage meeting the UR benchmark.

For purposes of this measure, new space actions are considered to be new and backfill occupancies, in both federally owned and leased space, as defined by the PBS Pricing Desk Guide, 4th Edition.

Continuing occupancies in both federally owned and leased space are excluded.

This requirement is subject to change each fiscal year.

8. GLS_Solicitation, pages 29 - 30 of 135, C.4.3.1. Requirements Development

What is the threshold the Government will use to determine task order cancellation, given “If it is determined and documented by the requesting agency that the requirement needs to be canceled, federally managed space is identified that can meet the need, or the acquisition strategy has changed to the extent that it should be completed by the Government, the task order may be terminated for convenience by the Government.” For example, could the Government cancel after the Contractor

Amendment 4 has completed Requirements Development, and work the remainder of the transaction through post award (for example, to avoid having the GSA LCO complete Requirements Development)?

Response: If an agency makes a critical change to their requirement needs or Federal space becomes available or there is any viable reason to cancel a Task Order, the regions will have a review and approval process in place prior termination for convenience. In addition, GSA has an internal control process in place to mitigate this issue.

9. GLS_Solicitation, page 33 of 135, C.4.3.7.2. Assemble Lease Contract Documents

To increase efficiency, would the GSA consider alternative assembly methods for lease contract documents? For example, vendors could directly contact the COR for countersignature and review an electronic copy.

Response: Documents are reviewed electronically via GREX and lease files shall be completed in accordance with regional standards.

10. GLS_Solicitation, page 46 of 135, C.9.2.5. Compliance with Subcontracting Plans

Would the GSA favor vendors who list subcontractors provided within the Subcontracting Plan?

Response: Evaluation of the subcontracting plan will be based on the contractors ability to meet the

GSA small business goals. Note: Subcontracting plans are not part of the technical evaluation in

Section M, they are however required to be submitted in proposals for other than small businesses.

11. GLS_Solicitation, page 106 of 135, L.6.4. Submission And Content Of Proposals

In submitting proposal responses for each zone a contractor wants to be considered for, should offerors include their Volume 3: Subcontracting Plan in each of the zone submission packages?

Additionally, do vendors need to provide their entire proposal submission package, inclusive of all volumes and zones to which they are applying, to a single point of contact?

Response: A complete proposal must be submitted for each zone in which an offeror would like to be considered, including the subcontracting plan, if required. Each proposal must be sent to the zone email address provided in Section L.6.4.

12. GLS_Solicitation, page 108 of 135, L.6.5. Information To Be Included In Price Proposals

(Volume One)

Item #6 is missing from this list. Please confirm this is a clerical error and a Volume One requirement is not missing from the list.

Response: Item #6 was inadvertently omitted. This is a clerical error and the requirement is not missing from the list.

13. GLS_Solicitation, page 108 of 135, L.6.6. Information To Be Included In Technical Proposal

(Volume Two)

Please define the term “cover sheet” (i.e., proposal cover, first inside page, etc.) in this requirement.

Response: A cover sheet typically identifies things such as the Technical Proposal (Volume Two), the Contractors Name and solicitation number.

Amendment 4

14. GLS_Solicitation, page 112 of 135, L.7. Solicitation Provisions (Negotiated), 3.c.2

Please define the term “first page” (i.e., proposal cover, first inside page, etc.) under “The first page of the proposal must show:”

Response: The defined term “first page” would mean the page after the cover page. However, for this solicitation, the information may be included on the cover page and will not count towards page limitation nor be included for evaluation purposes.

15. GLS_Solicitation, page 120 of 135, M.1 Method of Award

Is there a minimal difference between overall past performance evaluation numbers that render them equal, or will the highest rated firm in past performance get all task orders pricing (pending consideration) even if only slightly higher?

Response: Awards for the IDIQ contract will be based on a best value evaluation process.

16. GLS_Solicitation, page 120 of 135, M.1 Method of Award

Would the Government consider going to equitable distribution if the firms in a given zone meet a minimum threshold for performance evaluations (i.e. 4.0)?

Response: No. The IDIQ awards will be based on a best value evaluation process.

17. GLS_Solicitation, page 122 of 135, M.2. Non-Priced Technical Evaluation Factors; Factor 1.

Experience

Within the list of “Client Account Data to be Submitted,” the type of answers (total number) solicited in questions 7 and 8 do not align to the type of questions in Attachment 2 (yes/no answers). Please confirm which questions are accurate to submit.

Response: All individual line item information entered in Attachment 2, Client Account Data, should be on the transaction level. The data will be counted to arrive at aggregate total values as represented in questions 7 and 8.

18. GLS_Solicitation, page 122 of 135, M.2. Non-Priced Technical Evaluation Factors; Factor 1.

Experience

Please clarify the discrepancy given “The offeror must submit project data as outlined below in items

1 through 8 for lease projects within the last five (5) years,” the list of 9 criteria on the following page, and the Detailed Description items listed in Attachment 2_Technical Factor.

Response: The solicitation has been corrected as part of Amendment 4 to read “items 1 through 9”.

All information requested per Section M.2. Non-Priced Technical Evaluation Factors; Factor 1.

Experience should be entered on the spreadsheet for each “Individual Project”.

19. GLS_Solicitation, page 123 of 135, M.2. Non-Priced Technical Evaluation Factors; Subfactor

(2a) Management, Organizational, and Staffing Plan

Please provide additional details that define the underlying assumptions to the metric of 3 to 5 Full

Time Equivalent Employees for 50 task orders. Please confirm the timeframe given for these task orders (i.e., if this is an awarded 50 TOs or 50 active TOs at a given point in time or some other time metric).

Amendment 4

Response: This is GSA estimate of the number of employees that will be required to complete up to

50 awarded task orders many of which may be active at the same time in various stages from

Requirements Development through Post Award.

20. GLS_Solicitation, page 132 of 135, M.2. Non-Priced Technical Evaluation Factors; Factor 3.

Past Performance

Given the required reference forms need to be sent directly from the reference to the GSA, and the need to provide five references, will the GSA notify vendors when references have been submitted so vendors don’t have to submit additional references to fulfill the requirement?

Response: GSA will not notify vendors when references have been received. It is the vendors responsibility to follow-up with potential references.

21. Attachment 1_Pricing Worksheet

Please confirm the calculation methodology for the Pricing Worksheet, we are not able to tie it with the portfolio information provided, for example:

For Zone 2, Southern Service Area, for the Base Year we took the expiring portfolio and analyzed as follows: – 3,323,231 RSF X $23.05 Average Rent X 7 year firm term X 3% commission X 51% out to brokers X 50% to the contractor = $4,101,955 versus the GSA’s projection of $24,988,535.

Response: The exact methodology of the Pricing Worksheet is a combination of many factors.

Specifically, as described in the solicitation Section B.3.1., there were several internal factors that

GSA used to derive the estimated annual commission indicated on the Pricing Worksheet

(Attachment 1). Estimated annual commissions provided by the Government in the Pricing Worksheet are for evaluation purposes only and not a firm commitment. Due to the changing nature of client agency requirements this is the Government’s best estimate of possible future workload. GSA estimates that it will utilize these services primarily for its high and moderate value lease acquisition workload. For price evaluation purposes, the estimated annual commissions per Zone were based on a five percent reduction of existing square footage, existing average annual rates, and seven-year firm terms.

22. Attachment 1_Pricing Worksheet, Modules #5 and 6

The Pricing Worksheet for Modules 5 and 6 request our proposal standard comparison. The answer to question #10 in Section C states that there will be no commission credit for task orders for Modules

5 and 6. Should we enter a proposed commission for Modules 5 and 6 and will there be a shared commission credit for those Modules?

Response: Yes, offerors should enter a proposed standard commission for Modules 5 and 6. There will be a shared commission credit for Modules 5 and 6. This response overrides the prior response to Question #10, Section C in the draft solicitation questions.

Question #1 In review of the lease inventory sheet for the Western Region and in comparison to the 6 modules in the pricing proposals, we are finding that the two do not coincide. Can you please show or outline calculations on how the $50,000,000 commission in the Western Region is calculated?

Amendment 4

Response: The exact methodology of the Pricing Worksheet is a combination of many factors.

Specifically, as described in the solicitation Section B.3.1., there were several internal factors that GSA used to derive the estimated annual commission indicated on the Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 1).

Estimated annual commissions provided by the Government in the Pricing Worksheet are for evaluation purposes only and not a firm commitment. Due to the changing nature of client agency requirements this is the Government’s best estimate of possible future workload. GSA estimates that it will utilize these services primarily for its high and moderate value lease acquisition workload. For price evaluation purposes, the estimated annual commissions per Zone were based on a five percent reduction of existing square footage, existing average annual rates, and seven-year firm terms.

Question #2 There is mention within the solicitation of training for subcontractors in local markets. Can you expand on this required training?

Response: Please reference H.7(3) e.

1. Will GSA allow and encourage qualified subcontractors to team with more than one contract firm after contracts have been awarded?

Response: Teaming arrangements shall be established prior to submission of proposals. Subcontracting efforts after award are at the discretion of the contractor, however other than small business firms should be in compliance with their Subcontracting Plan. The purposes of GSA’s Small Business Goals is to encourage maximum practicable opportunity.

2. The qualification requirements state contract firms must demonstrate experience with managing a minimum of 50 full lease acquisitions over a five year period. This requirement will impede the ability of small firms to qualify because the threshold number of 50 is too high. Also, because of the restricted flow of transactions to broker during NBC2, little business was subsequently distributed to small businesses.

For these reasons, will GSA consider lowering the threshold number and extending the experience period so that this requirement is a fair one for small businesses with GSA lease acquisition experience.

Response: GSA will not lower the number of lease acquisition projects to be submitted for Factor 1.

3. The turnaround time for proposals for this solicitation is too short. Will GSA consider extending the due date of May 21 st to June 21 st

Response: Amendment 3 addresses the offer due date.

1. In the Northern Region, are Maryland and Virginia included?

Response: Zone 1, the Northern Region includes R1, R2, R3 and R5. National Capital Region (Zone 4) serves federal agency clients located throughout Washington, DC; Maryland (Montgomery and Prince George's counties); and Virginia (the cities of Alexandria and Falls Church, and Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William counties). GSA's Mid-Atlantic Region 3, which is included in the Northern Service Area serves all other areas within Maryland and Virginia.

2. If the contractor is awarded the contract, can they form a Joint Venture or Partnership after the agreement is awarded or does the joint venture need to be formed prior to the awarding of the contract?

Does the new entity, the joint venture, need to have a CAGE code?

Response: Any Joint Venture, Partnerships or teaming arrangements must be established prior to submission of the offerors proposal. The offeror shall meet all the requirements of the solicitation as they pertain to the offeror.

3. Where and when are the Federal Leasing Procurement courses offered?

Response: These courses are offered by Management Concepts. Please visit their website or contact them directly for a class listing and location. The Lease Acquisition Training is offered by Management Concepts and American Management Association.

4. Are there any e&o or general liability requirements for the contractor?

Response: Please see Section I for all Clauses incorporated into the RFP.

1. B.2 Regarding the categories for Small Business goals on this contract, under Prime Contracts, where the goal amount is stipulated as 32.00% for Small Business, with additional categories Small Disadvantaged Business (5.00%), Women-owned Small Business (5.00%), HUBZone Small Business (3.00%) and Service-Disabled Veteran-owned Small Business (3.00%)

– are the categories SDB, WOSB, HZSB and SDVOSB considered subcategories of the overall 32% total goal on this contract for small business usage? In other words, please confirm the total small business goal for Prime Contractors is 32% (and, similarly, the total small business goal for Subcontractors is 29% with similar subcategories for the other designated entities)?

Response: Each individual category shows the annual goals for GSA. There are no sub-categories, each category stands alone.

2. M.2. Factor 1: Experience. On page 121, it states that “Proposals which include Government experience (Federal or State) may be considered more favorably.” How much of a consideration premium will the government assign to government experience vs. commercial (private sector) experience?

Response: This is source selection information and will not be disclosed in the RFP.

3. In final paragraph on page 121, there are words describing contractor’s experience that “expands” several states. What is meant by the word “expands”?

Response: Covers multiple states

4. Amendment #2: Contracting Officer Change to Danny Killian. Does this mean that in every case where Paul Ferguson is listed in the original RFP, Danny Killian should now be listed, including where to return the reference forms (i.e., on Reference Questionnaire, it is to be completed and sent directly to the Contracting Officer (paul.ferguson@gsa.gov) should now go to Danny Killian at danny.killian@gsa.gov)? Please confirm that Mr. Killian should be the recipient of all reference forms, per Amendment #2.

Response: Correct, all reference forms should be sent to Mr. Killian. See Amendment 3

5. Page 16, C.3 Definitions and Terminologies – Best Value Commission. The rating period is unclear: “rating in all rating criteria for the previous rating period.”

Amendment 1, Question 14 answers this to be “The rating period for the best value commission is six months” (emphasis ours). However, Amendment 1, Question 68 conflicts with this by saying:

“…rating criteria for the previous rating period is per quarter” (again, emphasis ours). What is

Amendment 4 the rating period: is it the prior quarter (3 months) or the prior 6 months?

Response: GSA’s intent is to evaluate performance every 6 months, but subject to change over the contract period of performance. This response overrides the answer in Amendment 1.

6. In addition, For the Best Value Commission to be awarded, must the rating of “4-very good” for all criteria to be within the entire zone or within the specific region in which the work was performed?

Please clarify whether the rating must be within the zone or the region.

Response: The rating must be within the zone.

7. Given the proximity of the answers to the questions and the proposal deadline, would you consider extending the proposal due date, so that we may better respond in the light of the answers to questions to be provided?

Response: Due date extended under amendment 3.

8. When seeking a reference for a specific Task Order, who at GSA should fill out the reference form – Attachment 3 – to the Solicitation?

If it is a CO how will they get the information needed to complete the Form – i.e., all of the program related questions?

Response: It is the contractor’s responsibility to select the reference most suitable to respond to the scope of the project and/or program. It is acceptable for the questionnaire to be completed as a collaborative effort between one or more knowledgeable individuals. The primary reference should be identified on the form.

9. If we offer 95% of the Market Commission as our quote for one of the Modules, how will the 10% Bonus Commission be paid – i.e., will it be calculated as 110% of 95 % equals 104.5% of the Market Commission?

Response: The total commission retained by the broker is capped at 100% of the Market Commission offered.

10. Attachment 3: questions as follows:

a. Attachment 3, reference questionnaire has no question #9, and two question #15s.

Should we change the numbering to reflect sequential order , changing current question 10 to 9, etc., and only having one question 15 (i.e., change second 15 to 16, and all subsequent questions in order following).

Response: Attachment 3 was corrected as part of Amendment 3. Note: The original and revised Attachment 3 are acceptable for submission.

b. Further, should we change the Contracting Officer contact to Danny Killian (danny.killian@gsa.gov) and that’s where to return the form, per Amendment #2? Are you planning on re-issuing Attachment 3 with the above corrections, or should we make those corrections ourselves to send to our clients? Please confirm that clients who return the form to Paul Ferguson (paul.ferguson@gsa.gov) will have their responses forwarded to Danny Killian (danny.killian@gsa.gov).

Response: Attachment 3 was corrected as part of Amendment 3. Note: All forms submitted to Paul Ferguson or Danny Killian are considered received and accepted.

11. Given the new additional vendor requirements under FISMA, will you allow a reasonable timeframe (for example, 18 months) to comply with the new requirements?

mailto:danny.killian@gsa.gov

Response: No, the successful offeror must be FISMA compliant before GSA can issue the notice to proceed (NTP). NTP is anticipated to be issued on around February 4, 2016.

For offerors that are not small businesses, are they allowed to meet their small business participation targets by including the value of tenant improvements, in the post-leasing project management allocation? Or conversely, are project management fees only (excluding the value of tenant improvements) eligible for inclusion in the participation measurement?

Response: The small business goals are only based on the total commissions received through the contract, therefore only dollars expensed in support of the brokerage services will count toward the subcontracting plan.

1. Based on the reference form required for Factor 3 and the expectation that the references would also be able to verify the five projects provided under Factor 1, it appears that you are expecting that Offerors would provide one reference and one project for each of five separate client accounts. Is this correct? Will offers that provide references and projects for five separate accounts be evaluated more favorably than offers that provide equally relevant experience using less than five client accounts? Would NBC 1 and NBC 2 be considered two separate client accounts for this purpose?

Conversely, if an Offeror believes that it can demonstrate more relevant experience using less than 5 client accounts, can an Offeror provide multiple references and projects from the same client account and still receive maximum credit for Factors 1 and 3? Would a GSA Lease Contracting Officer be considered an appropriate reference?

Response: L.6.6. In order to receive maximum consideration in the technical evaluation process, offeror's technical proposals must, at a minimum, address all factors listed in Section M. M.2. Factor 1: The offeror should submit a detailed description of five (5) projects performed within the past five

(5) years that are similar in nature to the high to moderate value leases described in this solicitation.

Factor 3 Contractors shall identify references for five (5) projects submitted under Factor 1. GSA did not set any limitations surrounding separate client accounts. The offeror will need to determine which of their projects and which references best satisfies the criteria. It is the offeror’s responsibility to select the reference most suitable to respond to the scope of the project and/or program. It is acceptable for the questionnaire to be completed as a collaborative effort between one or more knowledgeable individuals.

2. For Factor 1, would projects “performed within the last 5 years” include projects that are still ongoing, or must projects be fully completed?

Response: GSA did not put limits on whether projects needed to be complete or ongoing. The offeror will need to determine which of their projects best satisfies the criteria.

3. For Factor 1, when data is requested for a “Broker Client Account”, should the Offeror provide data based on the client’s entire portfolio, or merely the portion of the client’s portfolio performed by the Offeror?

Response: Factor 1 - This factor considers an offeror’s (the corporate entity only not individual personnel) experience in performing tenant or owner representation commercial broker services similar to the services described in the solicitation within the last five (5) years as a prime contractor or a subcontractor where an offeror had primary responsibility of the overall program delivery.

4. For the Limited Value Lease Scenarios under Factor 2, no lease term is specified. Will one be provided or should Offerors determine the term themselves?

Response: For the purpose of the Limited Value Scenarios for Factor 2,the lease term is 10 years 5 years firm. Factor 2 in the solicitation has been revised per Amendment 4.

5. Can a large business receive any evaluation credit under Factor 4? If so, how?

Response: No, a Small Business is one of the following; Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB);

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone); Service-Disabled, Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB); and/or Woman-Owned Small Business (WOSB) under NAICS 531210.

General

1. Extension – In addition to requesting an extension of the deadline for client references to submit past performance questionnaires, we are asking GSA to extend the deadline for offerors to submit responses for each of the four zones from May 21 to June 4, 2015 to: (i) enable sufficient time to reach agreements on teams involving small businesses (ii) allow for more than eight days (or less) to adjust proposals for responses to questions due May 12, and (iii) thoroughly analyze the potential differences in scope and basis on which commissions will be calculate across modules.

Response: Proposal due date and reference questionnaires have been extended to June 4, 2015.

This revision has been incorporated into the solicitation.

Section B

2. Page 8, Section B.2 – Please confirm that the “Prime Contracts” goals represent GSA’s requirements related to issuing set aside contracts and the “Subcontracts” goals are the goals that “other than small” offerors should utilize when preparing a small business plan.

Response: The GSA Small Business goals are the goals that “other than small” offerors should utilize when preparing a subcontracting plan.

3. Page 8, Section B.2 – Please clarify whether “other than small” offerors are expected to calculate the dollars and percentages for small business subcontracting based on the total estimated contract value or based on the total estimated subcontracted dollars.

Response: Total estimated contract value.

Section M

4. Pages 123 and 127, Section M.2, Factor 2 – Please confirm that charts, graphics and tables may utilize fonts other than Arial 12 point, so long as the information is still easily readable.

Response: Font size remains at Arial 12.

5. Page 123, Section M.2, Factor 2 – Might GSA consider increasing the page limit for Subfactor 2(a) to 15 pages so offerors can thoroughly address all management, organizational, and staffing requirements?

Response: The page limit will not be changed.

1. Can a firm’s (regardless of business size) offer as a Prime use a proposed Subcontractor’s qualifications and past performance under Section M.2 Factor 3? If so, how will the Subcontractor’s past performance and qualifications be evaluated and how much weight (relevance) will such qualifications carry in comparison to the Prime’s internal past performance and qualifications? If the size of the business (meaning small or large) affects the answer to these questions, please clarify.

Response: No. Factor 3 considers the offeror's past performance record for both small and large businesses. No, a Prime may not use a proposed Subcontractor’s qualifications and past performance when submitting a bid.

2. Given the Government’s statement in Amendment 001, “[A]n individual firm may not be awarded a prime contract and also work as a subcontractor in the same Zone”., please clarify the following.

A firm submits as a Prime and also as a potential Subcontractor in two different proposals in the same zone. Both proposals are evaluated and ranked for award.

How will GSA proceed with the awards in that zone? For example, will GSA conduct discussions with each Prime and/or will the Primes be asked to modify their proposal to resolve the issue created by the above-referenced statement? Or, will one or both firms be disqualified for award?

Response: If a prime that is selected for award proposed to use a subcontractor l that is also selected as a prime in the same zone, the large prime must update its subcontracting plan before award can be made.

3. Under the scenario of a large business Prime submitting a proposal with a potential Subcontractor that is a small business, will the small business’ qualifications and past performance be evaluated by GSA?

(Does the answer differ if subcontracting firm is simply stated in…