Q A List - 27 June.pdf

Q.1. Does the request for redacted proposals apply to the Past Performance volume?

A.1. No it does not.

Q.2. Proposal Task 2 (FFP) was removed from CLIN 2 (CPFF). However, a provision was not added for Proposal task 2. Where should we provide this information? Since Proposal Task 2 is a subset of CLIN 1, is separate pricing for Proposal Task 2 required?

A.2. FFP pricing shall be provided on Attachment 4 – CLIN 0001 Pricing Table and Attachment 7 – Price Evaluation Table.

Q.3. Re: Q&A #30, no such CLIN for basic instructor-hours and tutoring hours was added? Where should pricing or these items be included?

A.3. This question appears to be in reference Q&A#31. FFP pricing shall be provided on Attachment 4 – CLIN 0001 Pricing Table and Attachment 7 – Price Evaluation Table.

Q.4. Please specify the exact SCA occupation codes to be used in pricing CLIN 0001. This is the responsibility of the Contracting Officer under the Service Contract Act to provide this information.

A.4. As this is a performance based service contract, it is the Government’s intention that the Offeror provide all personnel necessary to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation outlined in the PWS. The Offeror must adhere to the applicable SCA policies IAW FAR 52.222-41, but the category of personnel proposed is left to the Offeror’s discretion.

Q.5. The RFP allows for the possibility of multiple awards. Is this the government’s intent? If so, how many awards are anticipated and how would task orders be awarded post contract award?

A.5. The Government contemplates the award of a single small business set-aside; however, the Government reserves the right to make no award (if no proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation) or multiple awards. There is not a predetermined number of awardees if a multiple award decision is made. Post award processes in a multiple award scenario would be negotiated prior to award.

Q.6. SCA rules require overtime to be paid at time and a half for any time over 8 hours per day.

Therefore, open-ended overtime for any SCA-determined labor category is an unacceptable risk to the company. Does the Government intend to put a cap on overtime?

A.6. All overtime must be approved by the Contracting Officer prior to the overtime being executed.

Q.7. If instructors have been tested within a certain period and possess all documentation, must they still be tested?

A.7. . Instructors must be tested for language proficiency within the 12 month period immediately preceeding the period they will support this contract.

Q.8. Section 4.6.6.4 states that “All Vendor Management Personnel shall have the following qualifications:” and then goes on to specifically reference “management personnel” “for all language instructors” in subsection 4.6.5.4.1 (sic) and “for all REC instructors” in subsection 4.6.5.4.2 (sic) should have master’s degrees. Does “all vendor management personnel” include both personnel directly supervising the language and REC instructor performance on individual task orders (a QA function) and program-level managers?

A.8. All vendor management personnel” includes all management personnel directly supervising LREC instructors. This does not include program-level managers.

The PWS has been amended to include ‘and 2 years of related experience’ to 4.6.5.4.1. The PWS numbering sequence was wrong and 4.6.6.4 has been corrected to 4.6.5.4.

Q.9. Section 4.6.5.5 on page 20 states that “All management personnel shall possess and maintain a Department of Defense SECRET clearance.” Again, does “all management personnel” include both program management personnel and those directly supervising the language and REC instructor performance?

A.9. Yes. LREC Program Manager/Supervisors are required to have SECRET clearances.

Q.10. Will the Government allow for 11x17 foldouts to be included in the proposal?

A.10. No.

Q.11. Reference Section M.3.1 Factor 1: Management/Technical – according to the table on page 53 of 56, Section 1.9 Proposal Task Orders has two subsections 1.9.1 and 1.9.2. Was it the Government’s intent to have each Proposal Task Order as a separate subsection under 1,9 (Proposal Task 1 should be noted as 1.9.1, Proposal Task Order 2 as 1.9.2, and Proposal Task Order 3 as 1.9.3) or was it the Government’s intent to address all three Proposal Task Orders together?

A.11. All three proposal task orders are evaluated together.

Q.12. Reference response to question 14 – Since instructor resumes are required for the Proposal Task Orders, are the proposed instructors considered Key Personnel?

A.12. No.

Q.13. Given the late date in which responses to questions were received and the volume of changes required for a quality response (reduced page limitations for Proposal Task Orders, Instructor Form/Resumes, etc.), will the Government consider an additional one-week extension?

A.13. The proposal due date has been extended to 1:00pm EST on 7 July 2011.

Q.14. A proper POI is inclusive of many details, however the limited page count poses an issue. Given the page limitations for the Proposal Task Orders, what level of detail is the Government expecting in response to the POIs?

A.14. Program of Instruction (POI) is excluded from the Task Order page count. RFP Section L 3. (6) Proposal Contents B. Proposal Task Orders has been amended to include Program of Instruction (POI) if required. Attachment 6 Sample Tasks has been amended to include the POI for Sample Task Order 2 and a listing of POI minimum proposal requirements.

Q.15. Given the page limitations for the Proposal Task Orders, what level of detail is the Government expecting for the PWS? A detailed PWS requires a certain structure and level of detail, that when combined with the other requirements, has the potential to exceed the allotted page count. Will the Government allow for additional pages in the Proposal Task Orders or consideration for a non-traditional PWS representation?

A.15. The level of detail must be sufficient to meet Section L requirements. No additional pages allowed.

Q.16. The instructor resume template contains extremely subjective questions. Given that this is a technically acceptable proposal, are any questions beyond those regarding academic qualifications/certifications absolutely necessary?

A.16. Yes.

Q.17. We assume by “carrier,” the Government prefers delivery of proposals via Federal Express or DHL.

Please confirm.

A.17. Yes.

Q.18. The Occupational Codes in the wage determinations do not clearly match the roles & responsibilities identified by the Government as Technical/Administrative support. Can the government clarify which Occupational codes apply for these duties?

A.18. As this is a performance based service contract, it is the Government’s intention that the Offeror provide all personnel necessary to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation outlined in the PWS. The Offeror must adhere to the applicable SCA policies IAW FAR 52.222-41, but the category of personnel required is left to the Offeror’s discretion.

Q.19. The occupational code description for Administrative Assistant is clearly aimed at executive level support. Are other occupational categories acceptable to the Government, so long as the roles & responsibilities stated in the PWS are adequately covered?

A.19. As this is a performance based service contract, it is the Government’s intention that the Offeror provide all personnel necessary to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation outlined in the PWS. The Offeror must adhere to the applicable SCA policies IAW FAR 52.222-41, but the category of personnel required is left to the Offeror’s discretion.

Q.20. There is no occupational code description for Technical Support. Can the government clarify which occupational job description should be used for the wage determinations?

A.20. As this is a performance based service contract, it is the Government’s intention that the Offeror provide all personnel necessary to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation outlined in the PWS. The Offeror must adhere to the applicable SCA policies IAW FAR 52.222-41, but the category of personnel required is left to the Offeror’s discretion.

Q.21. Occupational code 14150 is for a Peripheral Equipment Operator, occupational code 14160 is for a Personal Computer Support Technician. Can the government clarify which description the wage determination is to be based on?

A.21. As this is a performance based service contract, it is the Government’s intention that the Offeror provide all personnel necessary to fulfill the requirements of this solicitation outlined in the PWS. The Offeror must adhere to the applicable SCA policies IAW FAR 52.222-41, but the category of personnel required is left to the Offeror’s discretion.

Q.22. If the government is going to provide the winning vendor with a list of incumbent Instructors, can the winning vendor assume that the government considers those Instructors “qualified to perform” under the PWS and not subject to the testing and documentation requirements for the Employee Roster that is to be submitted as part of the proposal?

A.22. Only the Instructors that meet the following requirements at a minimum:

Instructor may have limited working proficiency (a language rating of level 2+/2+/2+ or Advanced-High) or higher in the specified foreign language in the speaking, reading, and listening modalities. Proficiency shall be demonstrated by combinations of the following: telephonic Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI) or 2-skill OPI from the DLIFLC, an interview certified by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), and the Defense Language Proficiency Test or other instruments. DLIFLC Language Skill Level Descriptions for Speaking and Listening are used during this interview or the equivalent oral proficiency interview ratings given by ACTFL. The Vendor shall provide the results of all assessments to the Government as part of the Employee Roster.

Proficiency in English. Instructor shall have completed formal study of the English Language with sufficient proficiency of at least level 2 as measured by the Test of English as a Foreign Language or a score of no less than 79 on the English Comprehension Level (ECL) test. In addition, Instructors must score at least a 2/2 (ILR) or Advanced-Low (ACTFL) on a 2-skill OPI. The test results shall be provided in writing to the Government.

Education and Experience.

Option 1: At least 2 years of recent (completed within the last 18 months) experience teaching foreign language at the secondary level or higher (a minimum of 200 classroom hours) and a bachelor’s degree in teaching, education, language, or a closely related field to be approved by Government.

Option 2: At least 6 years of recent, related experience teaching at the secondary level or higher (a minimum of 600 classroom hours) and a bachelor’s degree.

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure that each instructor meets the Government’s minimum requirements for instructors before incumbent personnel are retained.

Q.23. Can vendors submit resumes against multiple requirements (i.e. LET and Iso-immersion) or can a resume only be submitted against a single proposal task?

A.23. Yes; however, the resume must annotate the applicable requirements.

Q.24. Clause 5652.237-9001 states that key personnel are those whose resumes were submitted for evaluation of the proposal. Does this include those Instructors who were submitted as part of the proposal tasks?

A.24. No. Key Personnel include President, Vice President, Chief Financial Officers (CFO), Location/Site Managers and alternates, and Instructor Trainers. Clause 5652.237-9001 Key Personnel Requirements (2003) Section I (b) has been amended to indentify Key Personnel Positions.

Q.25. Is the 3-page Introduction to the Past Performance volume still required?

A.25. Yes.

Q.26. Re: Section L.6, AREA WAGE DETERMINATION RATES:

The amended RFP lists the following applicable wage determinations:

Wage Determination No. Date of Last Revision Location and State 2005-3034 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Pensacola, FL 2005-2532 (Rev 11) 06/21/2010 Draper, UT 2005-2080 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Ft Carson, CO 2005-2394 (Rev 11) 06/15/2010 Ft Bragg, NC 2005-2544 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Norfolk, VA 2005-2302 (Rev 10) 06/15/2010 Stennis, MS 2005-2188 (Rev 11) 08/26/2010 Ft Campbell, KY 2005-2416 (Rev 11) 06/15/2010 Cleveland, OH 2005-2004 (Rev 13) 09/01/2010 Birmingham, AL 2005-2062 (Rev 11) 07/16/2010 Mountain View, CA 2005-2104 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Riverdale, MD 2005-2058 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 San Diego, CA

2005-2376 (Rev 10) 09/01/2010 Ft Wadsworth, NY 2005-2062 (Rev 11) 07/16/2010 Moffet Federal Air Field, CA 2005-3034 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Hurlburt Field, FL 2005-2544 (Rev 12) 06/15/2010 Virginia Beach, VA 2005-2567 (Rev 14) 08/17/2010 Ft. Lewis, WA (Tacoma)

However, the referenced wage determinations were updated in the past few days to raise the minimum benefits from $3.50 per hour to $3.59 per hour. Please confirm that offerors should use the most recent wage determinations in their cost proposals, specifically:

Wage Determination No. Date of Last Revision Location and State 2005-3034 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Pensacola, FL 2005-2532 (Rev 12) 06/13/2011 Draper, UT 2005-2080 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Ft Carson, CO 2005-2394 (Rev 12) 06/13/2011 Ft Bragg, NC 2005-2544 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Norfolk, VA 2005-2302 (Rev 11) 06/13/2011 Stennis, MS 2005-2188 (Rev 12) 06/13/2011 Ft Campbell, KY 2005-2416 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Cleveland, OH 2005-2004 (Rev 14) 06/13/2011 Birmingham, AL 2005-2062 (Rev 12) 06/13/2011 Mountain View, CA 2005-2104 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Riverdale, MD 2005-2058 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 San Diego, CA 2005-2376 (Rev 11) 06/13/2011 Ft Wadsworth, NY 2005-2062 (Rev 12) 06/13/2011 Moffet Federal Air Field, CA 2005-3034 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Hurlburt Field, FL 2005-2544 (Rev 13) 06/13/2011 Virginia Beach, VA 2005-2567 (Rev 16) 06/13/2011 Ft. Lewis, WA (Tacoma)

A.26. Yes, all Offeror’s shall use the most recent wage determinations listed under the wage determination numbers listed in the RFP.

Q27. Further, please confirm that the Government will allow economic price adjustments in the event of future changes in SCA Wage Determinations throughout the period of performance, since these Government mandated minimum wage adjustments are binding on the offeror and clearly outside of the offeror’s control.

A.27. The contractor would be entitled to an adjustment if the SCA wage rates change during the contract performance. Thus, FAR 52.222-43, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act—Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option Contracts (Sep 2009) has been incorporated into the RFP.

Q.28. Re: Amended Attachment #6 (and also Q&A # 7 clarification) Instructions to Offerors for Proposal Task Orders. A ten (10) page PWS (outlining in additional detail what you provided in a PWS and SOO)?

[This seems like an error – why do you want us to restate in more detail what you have already defined] A.28. The PWS provided by the Government spells out the Government’s desired outcome and some general information on how to accomplish this task. It is up to the vendor to determine how best to accomplish the task that the Government requires to be accomplished. Therefore, the vendor must submit a PWS with specifics on how they will approach/accomplish the task, explain the vendor understands of the work, provide a definition of deliverables, explain any constraints that would impact the vendor, and provide instructor resumes.

Q.29. Re: Amended Attachment #6 (and also Q&A # 7 clarification) Instructions to Offerors for Proposal Task Orders. A PWS and TO response totaling 10 pages?

A.29. 10 pages is the maximum for the vendor’s PWS/TO response. The 10 page maximum does not include cover page, table of contents, list(s) of tables and drawings, cross-reference, instructor resumes, POI and pricing.

Q.30.Re: Amended Attachment #6 (and also Q&A # 7 clarification) Instructions to Offerors for Proposal Task Orders. A 10 page Task Order response [per L.3 6 B (a) through (e)] A.30. See question 29.

Q.31. Re: Amended Attachment #6 (and also Q&A # 7 clarification) Instructions to Offerors for Proposal Task Orders. A 10 page PWS and 10 page TO response (20 pages) A.31. See question 29.

Reference: Q6, 26, and 55 from the Amendment. These questions intimate that a large number of instructors are required to be hired or retained. Using the number of Task Order Two classes as rough guide this number could by 40 or greater.

Q.32. Will the government accept a representative sampling of resumes? Or does the Government potentially want to review over 440 pages of resumes from multiple vendors for Task Order Two alone?

We expect to hire a number of qualified people from the incumbent, as per presidential order and this is typical for contracts we have done before. Additionally, current incumbent employees cannot provide their language test scores, etc. that were paid for and are property of the incumbent.

A.32. No. Instructor resumes are required for all proposed task orders.

Q.33. Reference Q.93. Can the Gov’t clarify how it expects offerors to submit pricing within the current CLIN 1 structure that requires a single price per class when the requirement to providing that class could be in multiple locations within the CONUS, as well as OCONUS? A.93. Each class is separate. There may be multiple classes of the same type occurring at one time at different locations. The price per class is for a single class at the specified location. The answer to the question above implies that the offeror will supply a price “for a single class at a specified location.” The format of attachment 4 and 7 do not provide line items for locations. For example, the price for NSWCEN IAT classes will vary significantly from Coronado, to Norfolk to Bahrain based on SCA wage rates differences, etc. can you clarify again what you wanted as the spreadsheet did not provide for “specified locations”? Did you desire a blended rate based on your assumptions and have up state the assumptions?

A.33. No. Attachment 7 was updated with Amendment 3 to provide an approximate location split for classes. An anticipated schedule has been included in the RFP. Note: the projected class schedule is subject to change.

Q.34. You referenced Bahrain as 5% of NSWCEN split. Overseas locations involve Air and ground travel, lodging, meals, local travel, etc. Some of these vary with exchange rate, oil prices, etc. which can be significant, as well as changes in government travel regs. Did you intend Bahrain with these variable costs to be included in the same FFP line item for classes?

A.34. All OCONUS locations shall be priced as CPFF. The RFP has been amended.

Q.35. Re: Q&A #8. Answer 8 states requests POI for each proposal task order required. Will the Government please specify if the POI is required as part of the Vendor's proposal or following award of the contract? If included as part of the proposal, please clarify where the POI should be included and if it will count against page count?

A.35. The Offeror shall submit a POI for Proposal Tasks 1 & 3. The Government will provide the POI for SWCS FFP classes (ie: Proposal Task 2) at the time of task order award, unless the Offeror proposes a different POI that has been approved by the COR and the USAJFKSWCS language department of the Division of Regional Studies and Language Education (DRSE) prior to implementation in the classroom.

Q.36. Re: Q&A #14. Answer 14 states the Key Personnel section in the RFP has been amended to include clause 5652-237-9001. However, the key personnel table is missing from the updated RFP. Was this an oversight, or does the Government intend to provide the personnel they identify as Key Personnel?

A.36. Yes, this was an oversight. Clause 5652.237-9001 Key Personnel Requirements (2003) Section I (b) has been amended to indentify Key Personnel Positions.

Q.37. Re: Q&A #17. Answer 17 states the employee roster should include a list naming the primary and alternate vendor POCs at each of the Government training sites and organizations. Would the Government please clarify if this requirement is specific to all locations of the proposal task orders, or all locations listed in 4.7.5 of the RFP.

A.37. This requirement applies to all locations listed in 4.7.5.

Q. 38. Re: Q&A #99. Answer 99 states the employee roster shall include written proficiency documentation and/or test results. Please clarify if the Government is requesting certified documentation of the candidate's test score or if a written statement of the instructor's test scores will suffice.

A.38. A written statement with the date and score of the instructor’s test scores will fulfill this requirement. Upon the Government’s request, the Vendor will be required to provide certified documentation.

Q. 39. Re: Q&A #99. Answer 99 states all instructors shall have completed formal study of the English Language with sufficient proficiency of at least level 2 as measured by the Test of English as Foreign Language or a score of no less than 82 on the English Comprehension Level (ECL) test. Does the Government consider a Bachelor's degree (or higher) an equivalent measurement of an instructor's English proficiency level?

A.39. Yes. However, if an issue persists, an ECL test may be required.

Q.40. Re: Q&A #6. Answer 6 states the following, " Instructor’s resumes are required for all proposal task orders. Instructor resumes must be submitted in the QASP Addendum 3 format. Resumes do not count against the 10-page limit for proposal tasks." However, the Amended Addendum, Attachment 6, states the following, " Each task order proposal shall not exceed 10 pages in length, this includes resumes. " Please clarify if resumes are or are not included in the proposal task order page count.

A.40. Resumes are not included in the proposal task order page count. Attachment 6 has been amended to correct this.

Q.41. Re: Q&A #20. Answer 20 states, Management team resumes should be included as part of the Management/Technical Volume and will be included as part of the page count. Please confirm if the vendor may use their own template for management resumes.

A.41. Yes, the vendor may use their own template for all management resumes.

Q.42. Please clarify – the answer to question 13 contradicts the general instructions in Table 15-2 in regards to inclusion of Name and address of the offeror.

RE: Q&A #13. L.3 Section 5 Media states that offeror identification data shall only be included on the cover page. Could the government please define offeror identification data? Does this preclude the offeror from using its name, logo, or subcontractor names anywhere in the body of the proposal on both the electronic and paper copies?

Re: A#13. Offeror identification data includes company name, logo, cage code, Dunn & Bradstreet number, address, telephone number, personnel (POC) names, or subcontractor names. Include offeror identification data on the cover page of paper copies and the electronic copies. Yes, this precludes the offeror from using its name, logo, or subcontractor names anywhere in the body of the proposal on both the electronic and paper copies.

Q. Note: If offerors use Table 15.2 – general instructions section 1.A indicates “You must provide the following information on the first page of your pricing proposal:

(1) Solicitation, contract and/or modification number;

(2) Name and address of Offeror

A.42. Table 15-2 was meant as a guide for submitting proposals. Offeror’s should follow the specific instructions in Section L.

Q.43. Re: Q&A #40 & #64. Please clarify – the answer to question 40 contradicts with the answer to questions 64.

Re: Q#40. Is the bidder required to include in the Cost Volume any information in compliance with FAR 15.408 to support price reasonableness or cost realism?

RE: A#40. No, offerors shall use Table 15-2 located in FAR 15.408 as a guide for submitting cost elements for the proposal tasks.

Re: Q#64. In Attachment 6, it states Offerors shall use Table 15-2 located in FAR 15.408 as a guide for submitting cost elements for the proposal tasks. Is Table 15-2 required?

Re: A#64. This table is not explicitly required, but can be used as a guide for submitting cost elements.

A.43. Offerors are not required to use Table 15-2 located in FAR 15.408, but may do so at their discretion.

Q.44. Re: Q&A#44. To provide a clear example and to ensure offerors are not eliminated from competition on technicality the following are three samples of text of 12 point with one and one-half spacing (on the attached pdf to make sure it is correct). We could interpret the Gov instructions in at least two ways. The first option is our strictest interpretation of this - Will the Government please indicate the acceptable options that meet submission requirements? These make a significant difference in the length and amount of detail we can include.

A.44. The Government requests that Offeror’s submit proposals with 12 point font with a minimum of 18 point leading (1.5 spacing). An example is listed below:

Paragraph 1

USSOCOM is a unified combatant command of the Department of Defense (DoD) and is responsible for all Special Operations Forces (SOF) in the Department of Defense. USSOCOM is composed of a headquarters at MacDill AFB, FL; a USSOCOM Washington Office in Washington DC;

JSOC and USASOC at Fort Bragg, NC; AFSOC at Hurlburt Field, FL; MARSOC at Camp Lejeune, NC;

NAVSPECWARCOM at Coronado, CA; Joint Military Information Support Command (JMISC), and Joint

Special Operations University (JSOU) at MacDill AFB, FL. In addition, each Theater Command has a

Special Operations Command (TSOC).

Paragraph 2

USSOCOM is a unified combatant command of the Department of Defense (DoD) and is responsible for all Special Operations Forces (SOF) in the Department of Defense. USSOCOM is composed of a headquarters at MacDill AFB, FL; a USSOCOM Washington Office in Washington DC;

JSOC and USASOC at Fort Bragg, NC; AFSOC at Hurlburt Field, FL; MARSOC at Camp Lejeune, NC;

NAVSPECWARCOM at Coronado, CA; Joint Military Information Support Command (JMISC), and Joint

Special Operations University (JSOU) at MacDill AFB, FL. In addition, each Theater Command has a

Special Operations Command (TSOC).

Q.45. Are instructor resumes required for each Task Order in for this IDIQ proposal submission or only for live Task Orders post IDIQ award?

In the QA list released on June 17th, the Q&A #4 states that: “The proposal task orders in Attachment 6 will not count against the page limit for the Management/Technical section. The submission for proposal task orders shall not exceed 10 pages in length per task order. All three proposal task orders shall use the same instructions for preparing submissions. Attachment 6 has been amended to reflect these changes.

A.45. Instructor resumes are required to be submitted for each of the proposal tasks.

Q.46. Will the USG amend the conformed RFP to state that task order responses are not included in the 30 page Vol. I page count?

A.46. The Government has made it clear that proposal task responses are not included in the page limit of the Management/Technical portion.

Q.47. The Q&A list released on June 17th, the Government states in Answer #13 that: “Offeror identification data includes company name, logo, cage code, Dunn & Bradstreet number, address, telephone number, personnel (POC) names, or subcontractor names. Include offeror identification data on the cover page of paper copies and the electronic copies. Yes, this precludes the offeror from using its name, logo, or subcontractor names anywhere in the body of the proposal on both the electronic and paper copies.” How does this apply to past performance citations where the USG must have company identifying information in order to conduct diligence on past performances?

A.47. Offeror identification data can be included on a vendor’s Past Performance information (Volume 2). Section L has been amended.

Q.48. Re:Q&A#13: Offeror identification data includes company name, logo, cage code, Dunn & Bradstreet number, address, telephone number, personnel (POC) names, or subcontractor names.

Include offeror identification data on the cover page of paper copies and the electronic copies. Yes, this precludes the offeror from using its name, logo, or subcontractor names anywhere in the body of the proposal on both the electronic and paper copies.

The government has asked for points of contact (POC) names on the employee roster for each site, but then states (see above A #13) we are to redact the names? Can the government please clarify the intent and provide specific instructions if you actually desire names instead of a redaction as specified?

In essence, government instructions desire no name that may be associated with the company to be submitted. This does not make sense and we want to comply with the intent.

A.48. Do not use employee names. The vendor shall use employee numbers as identifiers. The awardee will need to update their employee roster with names within 30 days after contract award.

The RFP has been amended.

Q. 49. The government has asked for management resumes. But the names and current companies (in most cases) need to be redacted. Is the government intent to ask for resumes without names and current companies? Can you clarify so we can comply please.

A.49. Yes. Submit resumes without names and current companies.

Q.50. Re: Q&A # 32: This references 5% of the NSWCEN classes being in Bahrain. Bahrain is overseas and may subject to State Department Overseas wage adjustments, DBA insurance, Evacuation insurance, as well as travel, lodging, local travel, etc. Will the government consider doing overseas assignment because of the unknown costs as CPFF?

A.50. No.

Q.51. Re: Q&A #32: This references 5% of the NSWCEN classes being in Bahrain. Bahrain is overseas and may subject to State Department Overseas wage adjustments, DBA insurance, Evacuation insurance, as well as travel, lodging, local travel, etc. Alternatively, will the government consider reimbursing DBA, wage adjustments, and other costs which are difficult to project as ODCs?

A.51. See question and answer #34.

Q.52.To provide the best firm fixed price estimate, it would be useful to have the number of courses running in tandem/ or simultaneously in addition to the relative split between regions. It appears that some of the instructors may be hired course to course instead of an individual for all. Is this possible to provide?

A.52. A projected class schedule has been added to the RFP. Note: the projected class schedule is subject to change.

Q. 53. Re: Amendment 0001 removed the Firm Fixed Price for Proposal Task 2 from CLIN 0002 of Attachment 7, but did not provide an alternative CLIN or blank, or designated place for this Task Proposal cost. It appears there is no place to insert this cost and no instructions. Can the government clarify where you desire this cost in Attachment 7, and in the cost volume, and any additional instructions? Is the Government intending to provide a new CLIN for Proposal Task 2?

A.53. The cost of Proposal Task 2 can be figured by totaling the appropriate prices per class from CLIN 0001 in Attachment 7. The Government will add up the prices of the FFP classes in Proposal Task 2 to get the total cost of this task. Therefore, it is unnecessary to provide this cost as a separate item.

Q.54. How does the Government propose that the offeror identify proprietary data in the proposal without including identifying data?

A.54. Proprietary information/data can be included with your proposal; however, preference is not to include names within the proprietary information/data in the body of the proposal. Please annotate on the proposal cover page if company name/logo is included in proprietary information/data, RFP is amended to include. The RFP has been amended to include FAR 52.215-1.

Q.55. Is the bidder required to provide a cost breakdown similar to Table 15-2 for the FFP courses in CLIN 1 and listed in Attachment 4.

A.55. No.

Q.56. Proposal Task 2 has been removed from CLIN 2 on Attachment 7. Is the bidder required to provide any Cost/Pricing data for Proposal Task 2? If so, where should it be presented?

A.56. See question 59.

Q.57. Since the wage determinations require employers to provide "2 weeks paid vacation after 1 year of service with a contractor or successor; 3 weeks after 5 years, and 4 weeks after 15 years", will the Government provide information on the incumbent instructors to enable accurate bidding based upon the required vacation accruals for CLINs 1 and 2. If not, will the Government allow an adjustment to the FFP course prices upon award based upon unplanned vacation accruals for incumbent employees?

A.57. No. The incumbent employees will start as new employees.

Q.58. Re:Q&A#51. Will there be a transition CLIN? A.51. No. From the QASP 1.2. “Contract Performance Period: Basic Contract: The total base period of performance for the Language and Cultural Services will be twelve (12) months starting 1 July 2011 and ending 30 June 2012. Two ordering periods (1 July 2012 – 30 June 2013 and 1 July 2013 – 30 June 2014) will be established to continue support through 2014. A 60-day transition CLIN 0011 will be established to allow enough time for competition and to give continued support during a new contract being put in place.

A.58. The Government’s intention is for all transition costs to be incurred under CLIN 0002 as CPFF. The QASP has been amended to reflect this change.

Q.59. Re: Q&A# 6, states “Resumes do not count against the 10-page limit for proposal tasks” yet the revised task order description states “each task order proposal shall not exceed 10 pages in length, this includes resumes”. Would the government please clarify that the instructor resumes, as submitted in the QASP Addendum 3 format, are excluded from each 10-page task order page limit?

A.59. Resumes are excluded from 10-page task order limit. The RFP has been amended.

Q.60. Re: Q&A# 20, states “Management team resumes should be included as part of the Management/Technical Volume and will be included as part of the page count”. Given the extensive compliance requirements of this RFP, would the government consider allowing management resumes to be an appendix to the Management/Technical Volume and excluded from page count?

A.60. Yes. Resumes are not included in the proposal page count. Section L has been amended to correct this

Q.61. Re: Q&A# 95 states, “In Section B, offeror’s shall comply with the format that is set up.” Are offerors required to fill in the amounts in Section B, and provide separate Sections B for each proposal task order? If yes, would the government consider issuing section B as a word document?

A.61. Yes. Section B is provided as a word document. The RFP has been amended.

Q.62. Re: Section L .3.6(2)C.ii regarding submission of Past Performance states “Completed forms shall be included as a separate file on the CD with the proposal”. Would the government please clarify whether these forms are to be submitted with the Volume 2 – Past Performance directory or as their own directory?

A.62. The reference to “separate file” is a reference to “Volume 2” as a separate file from the other volumes.

Q.63. When the government issued amendment 0001, it included two separate documents for Attachment 4. Was this an oversight?

A.63. According to FBO, only one Attachment 4 was included.

Q.64. Re: solicitation amendment 0001, Attachment 6 Amended Sample Tasks, Proposal Task 3, 1.17, TO3 is supposed to start on October 10, which is Columbus Day, a federal holiday. However, the TO asks for 15 days of instructor hours, which isn’t possible if Columbus Day is designated in the PWS. Since the TO states federal holidays are not considered training days. Is the offeror to make the 10th a holiday in the training schedule and schedule 14 days of training or extend the schedule to coincide with the 15 day requirement?

A.64. The Proposal Task 3 dates have been changed .

Q.65. Re: solicitation amendment 0001, Attachment 6 Amended Sample Tasks, Proposal Task 3, only 2 instructors will be involved in supporting the iso-immersion (total hours required: 480 – 15 days x 17 hrs x 2 instructors). Would the government please clarify whether this means that additional instructors or role players cannot be proposed?

A.65. Yes. Proposal Task 3, 1.18 is stated correct : Total hours required: 480 (15 days x 16 hours daily x 2 instructors)

Q.66. Re: original L.3 Page 92, Number 4, this question: Please clarify if glossaries are excluded from the total page count.

A.66. Glossaries are to be included in the total page count.

Q.67. The amended RFP (like the original) states that “The Government will specify at the task order level the POI and/or training materials to be used or direct the Vendor to provide POI and/or materials” (3.2, p. 13), and the course overviews throughout Part 4 distinguish which courses will have Government-provided POIs and which require contractor-developed POIs. Furthermore, the description for Iso-Immersion Training notes that “The SOO for each task order will outline the POI and the required support materials to be provided by the Government” (4.3.7.3, p. 15). However, A.8 answers “Yes” to the question of whether POIs are required for all three Proposal Task Orders – to include, presumably, Proposal TO3, Iso-Immersion. Please clarify the exact requirements for POIs for Proposal Task Orders.

A.8 goes on to state that “for proposal Task Order 2 [IAT], the contractor is authorized to use different POIs than provided.” Where is the provided POI for IAT?

A.67. Attachment 6 – Amended Sample tasks has been changed to read, “2.2 The POIs will be provided for these requirements.” The Government will provide the awardee with POIs for individual task orders at the time of task order award.

Q.68. Regarding Section L, INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, and NOTICES TO BIDDERS, Paragraph 5, Media, Subparagraph c, should the Cover Page be inserted in the binder, at the beginning of Volume 1 – Technical Management? Can the Government please clarify the instructions for what is expected as the front cover of each binder for the hardcopy submission?

A.68. Yes, the proposal cover page shall be included in the volume I binder. For each subsequent binder, please mark them with a volume title only. No Offeror identification shall be included.

Q.69. Section 4.6.7 of the PWS states vendor will provide for the “operation of the computer labs.” How many computer labs is this? What are the hours of operation?

A.69. Most site’s have at least one computer lab. The computer lab hours vary by location and are subject to change.