Attachment 11 - SS Draft RFP Q A.pdf

H92222-10-R-0044 Attachment 11 - Questions and Answers, November 12, 2010

SOCOM SPECIALTY SERVICES RFP

QUESTION

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

PAGE

Questions / Comments

Response

(TBD)

Action

1. General At Industry Day we were briefed on the schedule for award of the SITEC towers. The order presented was as follows:

1. ITSM

2. Enterprise Network Services

3. Data Center Services

4. Distributed Computing Services

5. Application Management Services

6. Specialty Services

7. IT Production Services

The Draft RFP for Specialty Services has come out before the one for

Application Management Services. Has the planned order for RFP and award changed as well?

Due to several reasons, we have moved the Specialty

Services RFP and award ahead of Application

Management.

2. Section L, page 52 of 64

The Section L to Section M crosswalk table identifies I-F – Total

Compensation Plan. However, the table for preparation instructions for

Volume I does not include I-F, nor does section M make reference to Total

Compensation Plan (52.222-46).

Sections L and M updated.

Clause 52.222-46 is part of

Section L.

Corrected

3. Section L L.1 appears to be the only numbered heading for the entire Section L . For ease of reference, would the Government consider numbering other headings in this section (L.1.1, L.2, etc.)?

Headings added to Section L. Corrected

4. Section L Volume

IV, page 56 of 64

Section L has the Task Order Management and PWS as Volume IV while

Section M has the TO Management and PWS as Volume III. Could you please clarify the correct order of the Volumes prior to the release of the Final RFP?

[Note – answer to this question well in advance of the release of the Final

RFP is encouraged in order for USSOCOM to receive consistent, thorough proposals from all offerors.]

Section M revised to read TO

Mgt is Vol IV and PP is VOL

III

Corrected

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

5. Section L III – Past

Performance

Information and L

IV- Task Order

Management and

PWS, pages 55 & 56 of 64

The page count for PP and TO Management in Section L seem to be reversed

(should it be 25 for PP and 50 for TO Management and PWS?).

The limits are correct. PP is

50 pages total and the TO

Mgt and PWS is 25 pages per

TO ITO.

N/C

6. Section L Volume

IV-A, page 56 of 64

The first sentence under IV-A – Task Order Management references

Subfactors 1-4. There doesn’t appear to be a relationship to the Subfactors listed in Section M (M contains Factor 2 with no Subfactors for this Volume;

Volume II – Tech Mgmt is the only M factor that contains Subfactors but only

1-3).

Sections L-II A through E are the correct reference.

RFP updated

7. Section L Volume

IV-B, page 57 of 64

In IV-B there is mention of the Service Delivery Summary (SDS) table present in the SOW for a particular Task Order. The SDS table appears to be missing from the Attachment 8 SOO. Will the SOO be updated to include the SDS table to be filled in by the offeror or should we use our own formatted table?

SDS has been included the contract PWS. Individual

SOO SDSs may be included in the TO ITOs.

N/C

8. Attachment 8 The SOO is lacking significant detail for fair and competitive evaluation of offerors’ responses (identification of Participating Entity, locations of services, demarcation of responsibility between this TO and other service area provider activities, for example where the Enterprise Network contractor WAN/MAN/CAN/LAN responsibilities end and Specialty Services

Contractor begins, etc.). Would the government consider providing an updated, detailed Task Order SOO well before the Final RFP issuance to allow all non-incumbent contractors to organize their responses?

[Note – answer to this question well in advance of the release of the Final

RFP is encouraged in order for USSOCOM to receive consistent, thorough proposals from all offerors.]

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

9. Section L V-B Pricing instructions for the Sample Task Order has not been provided. Does the Government intend to provide these pricing instructions prior to the release of the Final RFP.

All the task order for initial award will be CPFF.

RFP updated

10. Attachment 8

Section 8.0, page 8 of 8

Item 8.0 requires resumes for all personnel supporting this Task Order.

Based on the limited detail provided in the current SOO, the number of personnel and resumes could be very high. Does the Government intend to require 100% of all personnel supporting the Sample Task Order(s) to have resumes for the proposal submission this fall as opposed to having resumes and cleared personnel available at time of Task Order award/transition?

Key Personnel Only N/C

11. Attachment 8 In order for fair and competitive evaluation of the Task Order proposals, does the Government intend to provide detailed baseline data (similar to the Bidder’s Library data) specific for the Sample Task Order (number and type of devices, locations, etc.)?

There will NOT be a Bidder’s

Library for the initial award of Specialty Services

Contract. We will provide as much information as possible (unclassified) in the initial ITO SOOs for the purpose of initial award.

N/C

12. PWS v 1.10, Sec.

1.0, page 4, second to last para of section; PWS

Section 5.1, Network Services, Data Center

Management and

Distributed

Computing bulleted paragraphs

Section 1.0 says, “…Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and other items necessary to perform the services and provide support….” Section 5.1 says, “…Contractor will be responsible for the local provisioning, operating…and managing all aspects of the

Participating Entity’s….” Does the Government intend that the Contractor procure or purchase any equipment, tools, or materials under Specialty

Services task orders, or is the Government providing this as GFE?

The Government is providing as GFE.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

13. PWS v 1.10, Section

5.1, Distributed

Computing Bullet, “Contractor must also provide support for training, troubleshooting and maintaining biometrics gear…” Will the Government please identify the types, quantities and locations of biometric equipment to be supported?

Removed from PWS. RFP PWS updated.

14. SOO Paragraph 3.12

What are the current production systems in use that require training support?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

15. SOO Paragraph 3.12

Do Programs of Instruction currently exist for all the production systems requiring training? If not, which production systems have POIs? If not, does this Task Order cover the development of POIs?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

16. SOO Paragraph 3.12

For existing POIs, what lesson materials are available (e.g. lesson plans, student materials, supplemental student materials, media, Instructor

Preparation Guides, etc.)?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

17. SOO Paragraph 3.12

What delivery methods are currently used for production systems training

(e.g. classroom, practical exercises, web-based, computer-based, etc.)?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

18. SOO Paragraph 3.12

Does this Task Order cover the development of alternate or new delivery methods?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

19. SOO Paragraph 3.12

What skills and experience will personnel receiving production systems training have?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

20. SOO Paragraph 3.12

What is a representative sample of the MOS' or the equivalent that the personnel receiving training have?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible.

N/C

21. SOO Paragraph 3.12

Page 5 and

Attachment 3 Policy

References and

Guidance

The CJCS Instructions in Attachment 3 Policy References and Guidance which relate to training (CJCSI 6245.01 and CJCSI 6721.02B) cover high-level management of C4 training programs within the DoD. They do not cover nor reference development, implementation and analysis of subject specific training. What other references or policies are appropriate for the development, implementation and analysis of training (e.g. MIL-HDBK-1379

DoD Handbook for Instructional Systems Development/Systems Approach to

Training; TRADOC Pamphlet 350-70-10 Systems Approach to Training Course and Courseware Validation, etc.)?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

22. SOO Paragraph 3.14

What Web Services are provided with the existing architecture? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

23. SOO Paragraph 3.14

Does USSOCOM consider the existing architecture(s) Service Oriented

Architectures (SOA) (e.g. Web 2.0)? If not, does USSOCOM intend to migrate the existing web services to a SOA? If so, does this Task Order cover the system engineering, etc. for this activity?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

24. SOO Paragraph 3.14

What web servers are in the existing architecture? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

25. SOO Paragraph 3.14

What development tools (e.g. Dreamweaver, Fireworks, etc.) are currently in use to develop and maintain web pages?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

26. SOO Paragraph 3.14

What applications (e.g. Photoshop, Illustrator, Fireworks, etc.) are currently in use to develop graphics for web pages?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

27. SOO Paragraph 3.14

Do current web pages contain geospatial data? If so, from what source(s) is geospatial content accessed (e.g. local databases, enterprise databases, NGA or other external databases) If so, how is geospatial data displayed (e.g.

Google Earth, ArcExplorer, etc.)?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

28. SOO Paragraph 3.14

Does the creation of new web pages include the creation of mashups? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

29. SOO Paragraph 3.14

What type of content (e.g. data/file types) is currently included in web pages?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

30. SOO Paragraph 3.15

What database servers are in the existing architecture? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

31. SOO Paragraph 3.16

What are the current and legacy GOTS/COTS software and applications? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

32. SOO Paragraph 3.17

Will the current Organization Technology Refreshment Plan be made available in the Bidders Library?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

33. SOO Paragraph 3.19

See questions TC-01 through TC-08 above. SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

34. SOO Paragraph 3.20

For mobilization planning, will personnel required to travel to the CENTCOM

AOR (specifically Iraq or Afghanistan) on short notice be required to complete CONUS Replacement Center training at Fort Benning?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

35. SOO Paragraph 3.20

Does "applicable special training" include training at US military training schools or centers (e.g. Language, Geospatial Analysis, etc. )?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

36. SOO Paragraph 3.20

Does "applicable special training" include training at commercial or contractor facilities? If so, will the cost of this training be included in the

Task Order(s)?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

37. SOO Paragraph 3.20

Does "applicable special training" include weapons qualifications? If so, what weapons?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

38. SOO Paragraph 3.20

What language requirements, if any, are there for OCONUS travel? SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

39. PWS v1.10

Paragraph 3.3 Page

Will the contractor be required to store any Specialty Services related classified information or media at contractor facilities? If so, at what level of classification?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

40. Section B – Supplies or Services and

Prices; pg. 2 of 64

The CLIN structure does not include a separate CLIN for Other Direct Costs

(ODCs), such as equipment or other materials that are not classified as either labor or travel. For example, the Specialty Services TO 1 (Attachment

8, paragraph 7.1) indicates that circumstances my required short notice acquisition of IT equipment, software, or parts for the task order. We recommend that the Government add a separate Cost Reimbursable CLIN for ODCs to enable more precise cost accounting during contract execution.

If equipment or materials are required to perform a task the cost will be included in the fixed price or target cost and will be dependent on the type contract.

Corrected

41. Section F; pg. 7 of

The POP in Section F is 1 January 2011 – 31 March 2016; Section L-1 page 51 of 64 estimates the date of contract award as 1 March 2011; and the sample task has a start date of 1 July 2011. Can the government please clarify the periods of performance for the contract and the Sample Task?

Per Section F, contract awards could be made as early as 1 Jan 2011. The contractors will base their proposals on contracts beginning 1 Mar 2011.

Individual tasks will expire between 1Mar 2011 and 31

Mar 2012.

N/C

42. Section H.6.2; pg.

The Government states that contractors shall submit a proposal for every requirement solicited without conflict unless granted a waiver in advance by the Contracting Officer. GBPS experience shows that having to bid each task significantly increases the cost to contractors without necessarily providing the Government with the “Best of Breed” approach given the diversity of tasking within the PWS. Will the Government consider revising this requirement to allow contractors to only respond to tasks they feel they can execute at the highest level of delivery?

Contractors are encouraged to find cost effective means to bid all the ITOs. For this acquisition, the Gov’t wants robust firms and teams with broad skill sets, not specialist

“cherry pickers.”

N/C

43. H.10 Contractor

Support in War; pg.

The RFP references performing functions of this contract during any declaration by the United States or any of the countries listed below;

however no countries are listed. Can the Government please clarify?

Paragraph H-10 clarified. RFP is changed.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

44. H.13 – Fair

Opportunity

Exceptions; pg 17 of

Are there certain tasks or areas that already meet the exception criteria based on work the current incumbent is performing?

Option periods are envisioned to be competitively awarded ITOs with adequate performance are possible circumstances to paragraph H-13.

N/C

45.

Section I, 5652.237-

Key Personnel

Requirements;

paragraph (c); pg.

What are the Government’s expectations for the roles and responsibilities for Office Chiefs for USSOCOM Tampa, JSOC and TSOCs? If the expectation is that these positions will be staffed under the base contract, will the

Government provide a separate task order to staff these positions?

There is no intention to create any separate tasks for key personnel.

N/C

46. Section L; Volume I, I-E; pg 54 of 64

Will subcontractor goals be based on the total value of the contract or the total value of labor?

Subcontractor goals are based on value.

N/C

47. Section L; Volume

IV; Task Order management and

Performance Work

Statement, IV-A –

Task Order

Management; pg.

The document states “The Offeror shall submit the following for each task order management proposal (Subfactors 1-4).” Will the government identify and define Subfactors 1-4?

Sections L-II A through E are the correct reference.

Corrected

48. Section L.1 General

Proposal

Preparation

Instructions ;

Section L to Section

M Crosswalk Table ;

Qualifying Criteria ;

pg. 52 of 64

The “Section L to Section M Crosswalk” table on page 52 References section

I-F – Total Compensation Plan; however, that Plan is not described in the

Volume 1 - Qualifying Criteria Table on page 54. Is a Total Compensation

Plan required?

Sections L and M updated.

Clause 52.222-46 is part of

Section L.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

49. Section M.1.2

Evaluation; page 60 of 64

Evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance with Past and Present Performance as Factor 3. However, in the table presented on page 61 of 64, Past and Present Performance is listed as Factor 2.

Question: Can the Government please clarify the correct order of importance?

Section M has been revised and PP is factor 3.

Corrected

50. Section M.1.7;

Paragraph 1.7.1;

Page 63 of 64, and

Attachment 8

In reviewing the material provided for the sample task, there is a lack of specific information that would provide parameters to help industry understand the scope and complexity of the task, resulting in a generic response from all respondents except the incumbent. Therefore, to remedy the situation so respondents can properly estimate and cost the sample task, can the Government provide additional detail concerning the sample task such as the following:

a. The participating entities for the sample task (e.g., JSOC only, JSOC and TSOCs)

b. Historical staffing levels

c. Locations for long-term deployed staff

d. Anticipated level of effort for short term deployments

e. Hardware and software inventories?

As an alternative should it not be feasible to provide the types of information listed above, would the government consider basing the award of this initial task order on a scenario that provides the Government with the opportunity to consistently evaluate respondents and levels the playing field among respondents?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

51. Sec L/I-A/Page 53 The Government is asking for Fiscal Revenue for 2008/2009. Would the

Government please clarify if it is looking for revenue by Government Fiscal

Year or Company Fiscal Year?

Company Fiscal year is now requested.

Corrected

52. Section B Page 2 -3 Since the RFP calls for FFP and CPFF tasks only, is it the government’s intent for each offeror to provide labor categories specific to each task?

Yes, that is correct. N/C

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

53. FBO Announcement

RFP F Delivery Dates

RFP L.1 Page 51

RFP M.1.2 Page 60

Attachment 1 5.7.1

The announcement states contract award will be by 31 MAR 2011. The period of performance given in section F starts 01 JAN 2011. L.1 estimates the date of contract award is 01 MAR 2011. As H.6 and M state, “USSOCOM intends to award the task order(s) …shortly after basic contract awards”, the date of contract award affects costing of the Task Order proposals. The PWS estimates 15 JAN 2011. Which is the date we should use for costing the task orders?

RFP Section L1.5 provides the germane date for proposal purposes, which is

1 Mar 2011.

N/C

54. RFP H.6 First

Paragraph

(“General“)Page 12

Is the 25-day limitation working days or calendar days? The 25-day response time is calendar days

Corrected

55. RFP H.6.2 Fourth

Paragraph

(“Performance

Work Statement”)

RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, IV-B, Page 57

Attachment 1 (PWS)

1.1 Page 4

Attachment 8

H.6.2 calls for our proposed PWS to include the SDS Table. Attachment 8 does not include a Task Order specific SDS table. Will the Government please include an SDS Table in Attachment 8?

SDS has been included the contract PWS. Individual

SOO SDSs may be included in

56. RFP H.6.6 Pages 14-

This paragraph is duplicated. Duplicate paragraph deleted. Corrected

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

57. RFP F Delivery Dates

RFP Section I Clause

52.216-18 (a) Page

Will the Government order throughout the entire period of performance? Yes, any time during the

POP.

N/C

58. RFP L.1 (all) Page 51

Industry Day

Presentation

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.0, Pages 9 and 10

Will the Government be requiring classified responses? Yes, that is possible. N/C

59. RFP L.1 Section L to

Section M

Crosswalk Table, Pages 51 and 52

The titles for Section L Instruction I-D and M.1.3.3 do not match the references (“Approved Business Systems”).

RFP revised to require adequate business systems.

Corrected

60. RFP L.1 Section L to

Section M

Crosswalk Table, RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, Page 54

Section 1-F is not in the proposal submission requirements outline. Would the Government please reconcile these two tables?

Sections L and M updated.

Clause 52.222-46 is part of

Section L.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

61. RFP L.1 Section L to

Section M

Crosswalk Table, RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, Pages 55 through 57

RFP M.1.2

Paragraph 1 and

Table Pages 60 and

RFP M.1.5 Page 62

RFP M.1.6 Page 62 and 63

The volume names, factor names, volume numbers and factor numbers are inconsistent among these sections. Would the Government please reconcile these inconsistencies?

RFP has been revised. Corrected

62. RFP L.1 Format

Table Pages 52 and

Would the Government permit acronym lists and a compliance table? If so, will the Government exclude them from the page limits?

Acronym lists and compliance tables are acceptable but they will be included in the page count.

N/C

63. RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, Pages 56 through 57

RFP M.1.2 Page 61

Section M indicates the Government is contemplating 3 Sample Task Orders.

Would the Government clarify whether the 25 page limitation for Sample

Task Orders is per Task Order or a total page count for all three task orders?

RFP revised to clarify that it is 25 pages per ITO.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

64. RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, Pages 56 and

RFP M.1.2

Evaluation Category

Table, Page 61

RFP M.1.5 Page 62

The four subfactors referred to in section L are not described in M.1.5.

Would the Government consider reconciling these two sections?

RFP L&M revised. Corrected

65. Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.1 Pages 10 and 11

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.1.3 and subsections, Page

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.1.4 and subsections, Pages

15 and 16

The Data Center Management and Distributed Computing descriptions overlap. The Distributed Computing section does not address clients, workgroup devices, and other end user devices such as VTC suites. Would the Government consider revising these sections to better match 5.1.3 and

5.1.4?

Modified the Distributed

Computing requirements in

5.1.1.

Corrected

66. RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, IV-A, Page 57

We recommend you exclude resumes from the page limit. Noted. N/C

67. RFP L.1 Proposal

Submission

Requirements

Table, II-B, Page 54

We recommend you exclude resumes from the page limit. Noted. N/C

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

68. Attachment 1 (PWS)

3.2 Page 8

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.4, Page 18

Example objectives and metrics for the contract level performance examples specify SIPRNET access at the contractor off-site facilities. Does the

Government require the contractor have SIPRNET access off-site?

No N/C

69. Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.6 Page 22

Attachment 3

(unpaged)

Is DOD 7000.14-R and OMB Circular NO. A-136 additional Policy References and Guidance?

Yes, and bear in mind that

Attachment 3 is not all-inclusive.

N/C

70. RFP B, Pages 2 – 3

RFP H (all) Pages 11-

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.4 Pages 18 – 21

Attachment 1 (PWS)

5.7.1.2 Page 23

Attachment 9, Introduction and

Performance

Incentive

Calculation

(unpaged)

The Government’s desire and intent is to ultimately award as many Task

Orders as “truly performance based” using specific Performance

Management measurements (PWS 7.4.1.2). Would the Government consider adding performance based contractual mechanisms such as an incentive clause for the fixed fee CLINs to this procurement?

No, the Task orders will be only FFP or CPFF with travel being Cost Reimbursable.

N/C

71. Attachment 9, Performance

Incentive

Calculation

(unpaged)

Please attach Appendices A (calculation methodology) and B (SLA weights for incentives).

The SLAs are very generic for this contract and there will be no monetary incentives.

As such, a calculation methodology and SLA weights will not be utilized.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

72. Section B, CLIN

1003, Page 3

Will the government be providing a Travel NTE estimate for CLIN 1003? No Travel NTE will be provided against CLIN 1003.

Travel identified on each

ITO.

N/C

73. RFP, Section K, Para

(a) (1), Page 45

Does NAICS code 541519 apply to the prime offeror only? Can small business teammates certify NAICS codes that align with the products/services they are providing even if they are outside of NAICS code

541519?

Yes, NAICS 541519 applies only to the prime offeror.

Yes, SB teammates can certify to other aligning

NAICS codes.

N/C

74. Section J Page 44 It lists that there will be an Attachment 2 Map of Spec Serv Sites (posted on

SITEC site). Is this the same as the file Maps - USSOCOM SITEC_Map of SIE

Sites_unit based.pdf in the Bidders Library?

Reference removed from

Section J.

Corrected

75. L.

Past Performance submission requirements state that “the offerer will submit a maximum of five Past Performance Information Sheets” and that

“Past Performance Information Sheets for each contract is limited to five pages.” The page limitation provided is 50 pages. Can the page limit for

Past Performance Information Sheets for each contract be increased to allow for detailed discussions of the data elements required by the

Solicitation?

The volume page limitation is intended to accommodate the Table of Contents, Summary describing the role of the Offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner

Past Performance

Information Sheets and the

Completed SF 294s/295s.

Removed “Page” from the summary entry.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

76. L / Volume IV-B –

Performance Work

Statement / 57

The instructions for this section are not clear:

(1) Offeror is asked to respond to the Government’s Task Order

Statement of Work. No Statement of Work exists in the sample task order. Should the reference to Statement of Work be to the

Statement of Objectives that can be found in the sample task order?

(2) Are Offerors to prepare an “IV-B – Performance Work Statement” response for each sample task order?

L-IV B IS revised to read SOO.

Yes

77. L / Volume IV-A –

Task Order

Management / 56 and 57

L / Volume IV-B –

Performance Work

Statement / 57

The total allotment of 25 pages for this volume is insufficient if Offerors are to respond to both “IV-A” and “IV-B” requirements for each sample task order.

For example, the SOO for the first sample task order is 8 pages. The resulting

“IV-B”-required PWS will be at least that number of pages. In addition to those 8 pages, the five areas of the “IV-A” requirements must be addressed for the sample task order. If each of those areas is given only 2 pages, the total number of “IV-A”-related pages is 10, making a grand total of 18 pages to respond to the one sample task order.

This Offeror recommends that the Government allow up to 20 pages for the combined “IV-A” and “IV-B” responses for each task order that it includes in the RFP.

This Offeror also recommends that the 2-page resumes be excluded from the total volume page count.

Volume IV limit is 25 pages per ITO.

Corrected

78. L / Volume IV-B –

Performance Work

Statement / 57

Reference is made to “the Task Order SDS table from the SOW”. Is the

Offeror to assume the SDS table will be included in the SOO for each specific

Task Order?

SDS has been included the contract PWS. Individual

SOO SDSs may be included in

RFP updated to read SOO.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

79. Bidders Library /

_Readme Folder

In file Executive Summary of USSOCOM Technical Summaries.xlsx it lists several times in line 10 for JSOC that data will be provided in a separate reading room.

- Is there a separate reading room or other source of information other than the single Bidders Library?

- Will there be a separate folder in the Bidders Library to detail information on JSOC

No

No

There will be one Bidder’s

Library (classified) for both

JSOC and other organizations supported by this tower. The library will only be made available after initial award for remaining SOOs

80. RFP / General Will the Government define the labor categories that are to be used by all offerors, or is each offeror expected to define its own labor categories?

Offerors will define the labor categories based on their company estimating practices.

N/C

81. RFP General Is each offeror expected to submit a Contractor IDIQ Contract pricing schedule?

No, proposals should be specific to task orders proposed.

N/C

82. RFP, Section B, page

The CLIN Structure (1001, 1002, and 1003) appears to be for one (1) contract year with three (3) cost elements.

Recommend the Government consider utilizing CLINS and SubCLINs for each contract year (i.e. 0001 – 0003 Base Period; 1001 – 1003 Option Year 1, 2001

– 2003 Option Year 2, etc.) for ease of tracking the contract cost/price by contract period.

Noted. N/C

83. RFP, Section B, page

2, and Section H, Paragraph H2, page

CLIN 1003 Cost Reimbursable Travel references FFP task orders.

Is this CLIN for Firm Fixed Priced task orders only? If so, please advise whether CPFF task order travel estimates should be proposed under CLIN

1002 rather than CLIN 1003.

Section B CLIN texts revised to read that travel will be included in FFP CLIN and not

CR CLIN for FFP TOs; Travel will included on CR CLIN and not the CPFF CLIN for CPFF

TOs .

RFP Updated

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

84. RFP, Section B, Page

2 and Section H, Paragraph H2, page

For evaluation purposes, recommend the Government provide a not-to-exceed (NTE) amount for travel under CLIN 1003 since travel is cost reimbursable and cost estimates should be based on FAR 31.205-46.

Travel estimates will be on a task order basis.

N/C

85. RFP, Section F, page

7, and Section L.1, Section F lists a POP of 5 years and 3 months, while L.1 says the ordering period is 5 years.

Please reconcile.

The additional 3-month POP window is for not-separately-priced transition in and out of this contract.

N/C

86. RFP, Section H, Paragraph H.6.2, The DRFP indicates Contractors shall submit a proposal for every requirement without conflict unless granted a waiver in advance by the

Contracting Officer. If the Contractor has reason to request a waiver, but is not granted a waiver by the Contracting Officer in advance, the Contractor shall submit a detailed statement of reason for a waiver to the Contracting

Officer within 2 days of task order RFP receipt.

Recommend a change from “two (2) days” to “seven (7) days.” This will allow Contactors sufficient time to determine whether a conflict exists with the requirement, and whether the conflict can be mitigated to the

Contracting Officer’s satisfaction.

Noted; however, this waiver process should be and extremely rare occurrence because any readily apparent contractor conflicts should be identified and resolved positively well before initial contract awards.

N/C

87. RFP, Section H, Paragraph H.6.6, Is the Government authorizing utilization of Quick Closeout Procedures upon task order completion?

Yes, see section G.3. N/C

88. RFP, Section H, Paragraph H.6.6, If Quick Closeout Procedures are utilized, will completion invoices be acceptable prior to the Contractor receiving DCAA final rates for the last contract year in which costs were incurred?

In accordance with the FAR, Yes.

N/C

89. RFP, Section H, Paragraph H.6.6, This paragraph is provided in the DRFP twice. Recommend deleting the duplicate paragraph.

Duplicate entry deleted. Corrected

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

90. RFP, Section H, page

15 and Section L, page 54.

H.8 CREDIT FOR ABILITYONE states, “Although there are no mandatory contractual requirements to subcontract to AbilityOne firms, the

Government is offering an incentive to encourage the prime contractor to provide subcontracting opportunities to AbilityOne.” Section L, I-E – Small

Business Subcontracting Plan and Small Business Participation states only that “Offerors shall highlight how they plan to utilize AbilityOne firms in their Small Business Subcontracting Plan.”

Please clarify what the “incentive” is and what an offeror must do to qualify for this incentive.

Contractors have Gov’t small business subcontracting goals to meet. Selected firms from this solicitation will receive double credit towards their subcontracting goal reporting when they subcontract to AbilityOne.

N/C

91. RFP, Section I, page

42.

“(c) The follow positions are identified as Key Personnel: Program Manager, Assistant/Deputy Program Manager, Office Chiefs for USSOCOM Tampa, JSOC and TSOCs.”

What are the duties and responsibilities of an “Office Chief”?

The Office Chief has been deleted from the RFP

92. RFP, Section I, page

42.

“(c) The follow positions are identified as Key Personnel: Program Manager, Assistant/Deputy Program Manager, Office Chiefs for USSOCOM Tampa, JSOC and TSOCs.”

Where must these Key Personnel be geographically located?

The Office Chief has been removed from the clause.

Geographic location of the other positions should be predicated on the offeror’s proposal approach.

Corrected

93. RFP, Section J, page

44.

Attachment 2, Map of Spec Serv Sites (posted on SITEC site), Attachment 6, DD254 Security Plan, and Attachment 7, CDRLs, have not yet been posted on

SITEC site.

When will these attachments be posted or provided to offerors?

Attachment 2 has been removed from the solicitation.

94. RFP, Section L to

Section M

Crosswalk, page 52

The Total Compensation Plan (Volume I) is referred to in the “Section L to

Section M Crosswalk,” but is not mentioned in the Proposal Submission

Requirements Matrix or in Section M.

Should the Total Compensation Plan be included in Volume I, or in Volume

V?

TCP added as Section Vol I L-

IF and Section M 1.3.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

95. RFP, Section L, Format

Requirement, Page

Limits, page 53

The RFP states that “Title pages, table of contents, section dividers, and cover pages will not count in page limits and will not be evaluated.”

Will the government also excuse from the page limitation a table of figures, list of acronyms, and compliance matrix, if these are included in each volume?

No. N/C

96. RFP, Section L –

Proposal

Submission

Requirement, Volume II, page 54;

and Section M.1.4

Factor 1 – Technical

Management, page

The Section L discussion of “Volume II – Technical / Management” doesn’t specify a requirement to provide a technical approach to any of the PWS tasks. However, Section M states that “the Government will evaluate the offeror’s overall approach and expressed capabilities for providing the IT service management and integration services across all IT Service Areas.

Where in Volume II does the Government want the offeror to describe the offeror’s technical approaches to the PWS tasks?

Technical/Management has been renamed “Program

Management.” Offerors will describe, among other elements, their overall approach to meet ITIL v3 requirements within this

Volume. Specific technical approaches to individual task orders will be addressed in

Volume IV.

Section L & M revised to change

Technical/Management to

Program Management.

97. RFP, Section L/Key

Personnel, page 54

Do resumes count against the 90-page limitation in Volume II? Yes, resumes count. N/C

98. RFP, Section L, Volume II-B, Key

Personnel, page 55

Section L indicates that the offer must provide information on the

“Corporate and personal commitment to providing specific proposed key management.”

Please define “key management and specify what kind of information on our corporate and personal commitment(s) should be provided (e.g., is a signed letter of commitment required?).

A signed statement by the individual in the resume to the effect that they attest they will join this team if the offer is selected.

N/C

99. RFP, Section L, page

55, and Section M, Section L refers to Volume III as Past Performance. Section M refers to

Volume III as Task Order Management and SOW.

Please clarify which one is correct.

PP is Volume III. Corrected

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

100. RFP, Section L, Volume II-E, page

The text requires the offeror to submit an “…overall transition management approach and a complete transition plan.”

Are a generic task order process and milestones sufficient to address meet task order transition requirement?

Offerors will only be required to provide contract mgmt transition mgmt plan.

Detailed transition plans will be required at the Task

Order level

RFP revised

101. RFP, Section L, Volume II-E, page

The text requires the offeror to submit an “…overall transition management approach and a complete transition plan.”

Will sufficient information be provided in the final RFP to support more than transition planning for the Contractor management staff?

Offerors will only be required to provide contract mgmt transition mgmt plan.

Detailed transition plans will be required at the Task

Order level

RFP revised

102. RFP, Section L, Volume II-E, page

Will the final RFP contain the task order forecast referenced on page 55 in the Transition Plan?

No RFP revised

103. RFP, Section L –

Volume IV – Task

Order Management and Performance

Work Statement, page 56; Section M, Evaluation

Category, page 61;

and SOO

Attachment 8 –

Specialty Service

T.O. 1

Section L indicates that the offeror shall submit more than one task order response. Section M indicates that the evaluation will be based on responses to 3 task orders. However, Attachment 8 is the only task order SOO provided with the solicitation.

Please clarify.

3 ITO SOOs will be provided with the final RFP. Section L

Vol IV revised to indicate one response required per each

ITO.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

104. RFP, Section L –

Volume IV – Task

Order Management and Performance

Work Statement, Section L indicates that the response to the task order(s) will be limited to 25 pages.

If three task order responses are required, is there a 25 page limit on each task order response, or does this page limit apply to the sum of all three task order responses?

The page limitation is per

ITO.

Corrected

105. RFP. Section L, Volume IV-B, page

Because there are many specific performance areas, the potential SDS metrics will be equally extensive.

Based on the Government’s expressed desire for quality, innovation, and performance measures, will the government exclude the bid SDS table and/or QASP from the page count?

No, the 25 page per ITO is sufficient for the SDS table and or QASP.

N/C

106. RFP, Section M, Section M states that “USSOCOM intends to award the task order(s) based upon the proposals submitted for this solicitation shortly after basic contract awards per Section H. After completion of the evaluation the USSOCOM may establish a competitive range and conduct discussions.”

Please define “discussions.”

After providing feedback to the offerors via Evaluation

Notices, the Government will conduct short discussions with the offerors to clarify our Evaluation Notices (if required)

N/C

107. PWS General The Government describes the Participating Entities and the services to be addressed. It does not specify whether follow-on TOs will be structured to provide all paragraph 5 services on a by-organization basis, or if TOs will represent a subsets of paragraph 5 services on a by-organization basis, or if

TOs will be structured in functional layers for all participating Entities.

Which of these courses of action best characterizes the Government’s acquisition strategy?

Follow-on TOs could encompass all services identified in Paragraph 5 or just a subset. The specific services will be organization defined.

108. PWS, Paragraph 1.0, This paragraph states that the “Contractor shall provide all personnel, equipment, tools, materials, supervision, and other items necessary to perform the services….”

Will the contractor be responsible for material acquisition for this PWS?

Gov’t deleted, “equipment, tools, materials”

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

109. PWS, Paragraph 3.2, Paragraph 3.2 states that “Contractor personnel may also be required to pass psychological evaluations and/or undergo Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training and must provide eligible personnel or personnel that have been previously SERE certified.”

What constitutes SERE certification and will SERE training and certification be furnished by the Government?

SERE training can only be certified by a DoD accredited agency. If required, the government will furnished the appropriate SERE training.

N/C

110. PWS, Paragraph

2.1.1, page 5 and

Paragraph 3.6, page

The paragraph indicates that support will be on UNCLASSIFIED, SECRET and

TOP SECRET networks. Paragraph 3.6 indicates NIRPNET, SIPRNET and

JWICS. JWICS is a TS/SCI network.

Is there an additional network that is only TOP SECRET?

Added “SCI” to paragraph

2.1.1

Corrected

111. PWS, Paragraph 3.5, “The Specialty Services Contractor shall develop and implement processes to perform compliance monitoring and periodic assessments of all IT service providers performing work under the SITEC service delivery approach to validate that their respective services and solutions are both conforming and compliant with all applicable DoD, USSOCOM, and Participating Entity direction, guidance, policy and regulations, as well as all other applicable documents.” The Government intends to award a minimum of 2 and maximum of 4 prime awards as a result of this solicitation.

What other IT service providers will the Specialty Services Contractors be required to monitor and assess?

Deleted subject reference from Paragraph 3.5

Corrected

112. PWS, Paragraph 5.0, page. 10

“This separate, classified bidder’s library will be developed and made available in response to specific task order requirements.”

How will this classified bidder’s library be made available to Specialty Service

Contractors (e.g., electronically via SIPRNet, paper copy, etc.), and how many personnel from each Specialty Service Contractor Company will be allowed access?

Specific location has yet to be determined, but paper copy will not be authorized. Number of authorized personnel has not been determined.

113. PWS, Paragraph 5.1, pages 10 and 11

The description of services for Data Center Management and Distributed

Computing are in many ways identical.

Please confirm that these descriptions are accurate.

Modified verbiage to eliminate duplication.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

114. PWS, Paragraph

V1.10 - 09.09.10, “The Specialty Services Contractor must also provide support for training, troubleshooting and maintaining biometrics gear, and ensuring that backend systems are up and functional for Biometrics teams to send/report their findings to the Participating Entity’s required database(s).”

Please describe the biometrics gear and backend systems?

Deleted from PWS and it may appear in later ITO

SOOs.

PWS updated.

115. PWS, Paragraph

5.1.1.3 and

Paragraph 5.1.1.5, pages 11 and 12

Both paragraphs reference the requirement for Configuration Management

(CM).

Does the government want CM under IT Service Transition or as a standalone function?

Config mgmt is an inherent element of Transition /

Change Mgmt and should

NOT be treated as a standalone function.

116. PWS, Paragraph

5.1.1.9, page 13

“The Specialty Services Contractor will provide Service Desk support as Tier 2 and 3 services for those participating entities requiring this support as part of an individual task order. Tier 1 support will be provided by other existing

USSOCOM IT Service Desks as defined by USSOCOM.” However, the

USSOCOM SITEC Unclassified Bidder’s Library indicated that the JSOC HQ service desk is independent from the USSOCOM Enterprise Service Desk.

How will Tier 1 support be provided by other existing USSOCOM IT Service

Desks?

Paragraph 5.1.1.9 has been revised. The Specialty

Services Contractor is responsible for a Tier support for devices that are under their day-to-day O&M.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

117. PWS, Paragraph

5.1.1.9, page 13

The government indicated the Specialty Tower Service Desk would support

Tier II and III, while the USSOCOM Service Desk would support Tier I.

Will the USSOCOM Service Desk have remote access to the Specialty Tower’s

Participating Entities environment, to include the ability to action fixes to servers, routers, switches, desktop and end users devices?

The USSOCOM Service Desk will only have remote access capabilities to devices that are supported by one of the unit towers and Application

Mgt Tower. As such, all service requirements related to devices solely supported by Specialty Services

Provider(s) will not be initiated through the Service

Desk

N/C

118. PWS, Paragraph 5.3.

“The Specialty Services Contractor shall assist the Participating Entity in performing liaison management between enterprise and localized IT service providers providing services related to one of the five IT service areas (e.g., Data Center Management, Network Services, Application Management, etc.).”

Please define “liaison management” and “localized.”

Changed language to clarify the PWS

Corrected

119. PWS, Paragraph 5.4

– Contract Level

Performance

Examples chart, One objective identified in this chart reads as follows: “Does the Contractor maintain SIPRNet capability in off-site facilities when required?” The related metric is stated as follows: “Contractor’s SIPRNET services will be available to the customer at least 85% of the operating hours during a calendar month.”

How much “SIPRNet capability in off-site facilities” must the offeror be able to provide, and in what locations must it be provided?

There is no requirement for

SIPRNET at off-site contractor facilities.

Corrected

120. PWS, Paragraph 5.4, Does the Government expect a comprehensive Performance Management

Plan as part of the proposal or will a discussion of performance management plan highlights and key factors suffice?

The offeror will submit a well-defined Performance

Mgmt Plan as part of the proposal.

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

121. PWS, Paragraph 5.5, Paragraph 5.5 requires management activities beyond what is required for each task order. Specifics cited include: “a common level of management” and a “contract-centric monthly report.”

Will the Government issue a task order for overall contractor contract management activities, or does the Government intend that contractors spread the contract management costs across all issued task orders?

Gov’t expects that offeror use a common set of contract mgmt processes and procedures and that the offeror provide reporting for individual TOs & consolidated reporting across all TOs

122. PWS, Paragraph 5.5.

Monthly Report Requirements.

Will classified monthly reports be required and, if so, what will be the method of submission?

Classified monthly reports may be required on task order basis. If required, methods for submission will be articulated at the task order level.

123. SOO Attachment 8 /

General

The draft Sample Task SOO lacks sufficient detail (Participating Entities;

locations, and number of personnel and devices to be supported; etc.) on which to base a response.

Will the final TOs contain the required detail?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

124. SOO Attachment 8:

Paragraphs 3.2 and

3.3

Paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 are missing

Is substantive language missing or just a miss-numbering of the paragraphs?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

125. SOO Attachment 8, Paragraph 3.6

The government identifies the requirement for a “technology refresh plan” but does not provide a scope in terms of which IT elements should be included.

Please clarify.

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

126. SOO Attachment 8, paragraph 7.5

If a Task Order requires travel to a designated hazardous duty area IAW

Department of State Guidelines, is Hazardous & Hardship Duty Pay authorized for pricing?

Costs should be proposed in accordance with the requirements of the Task

Order(s) and the Offeror’s established accounting practice.

127. SOO Attachment 8, Paragraph 8.0, and

RFP, Section L, page

Paragraph 8.0 states that” “All positions in support of this Task Order are considered key positions. As such, contractor will submit resumes for all new and replacement candidates proposed.”

Inasmuch as each offeror will probably need to submit multiple resumes, are these resumes excluded from the 25-page limitation identified in Section L for Volume IV - Task Order Management and Performance Work Statement?

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as much detail as possible

N/C

128. SOO Attachment 8, Paragraph 8.

Paragraph 8.0 states that “All positions in support of this Task Order are considered key positions. As such, contractor will submit resumes for all new and replacement candidates proposed.” Depending upon the place of performance, which is not specified in TO1, this requirement could be for dozens of personnel.

Please be more specific about what the Government expects offerors to provide in their write-ups pertaining to this paragraph.

SOO provided was a sample.

SOO’s provided with the

Final RFP will contain as

SECTION /

PARAGRAPH /

129. Attachment 9 -

Specialty Services

TO 1 SLAs, Section

1.1, Paragraph 4A.

Paragraph 4A states that “Total elapsed time in calendar days to fill an open key position from date position is initially vacated until qualified appropriately cleared personnel are working onsite is calculated as:” The contractor security/screening requirements of various “Participating

Entities,” e.g., background investigations (finance, security, criminal, etc.), psychological evaluations, command/group interviews significantly impact the time it takes a contractor to fill a new or vacated position.

Please explain how the Government intends to take these Participating

Entity requirements into…