SWMS_Group_A_RFP_Q As_Final_Batch.pdf

H92222-14-R-0020

Q&A FINAL BATCH

RFP

Document Section Para. # Page # Question/Comment Gov't Response

All TO's-

SOW/PW

S

Since the Government has asked for ODCs to be included in the FFP price in one CLIN, will the government define which ODCs are to be included? If they are DBA, Hazard, Hardship and any other differentials, will the government provide the bidders with details of estimated time spent OCONUS, locations, and facilities involved for each TO? All these differentials, and DBA costs are variable based on location, it will be difficult to provide reasonable prices without these parameters. Would the Government consider the ODC portion of the costs be contracted under a Cost reimbursable CLIN.

For SORDAC (Atch 6) and J5 (Atch 8), offerors should propose all ODCs they require in order to perform the requirements as outlined in the SOW. While OCONUS travel is possible, it is not anticipated at this time. Should OCONUS travel be required, the TO Prime contractor would be required to submit a cost proposal to include all costs associated w/OCONUS travel (e.g. DBA, visas, differentials).

For SMEP (Atch 7), offerors should propose all ODCs they required in order to provide all deliverables as outlined in the PWS. Offerors should include all costs associated with the travel as delineated in Paragraph 8.

Atch 5 J2 2.1.5 4 Will the analytic input, and testing of new sensors, architectures, or processes result in the contractor providing recommendations for or evaluation of future requirements development? (OCI)

Potentially, any future request for task order proposal for this effort will identify the specific requirements. OCI issues would have to be addressed at that time.

Atch 5 J2 SOW 4.0 9 Would the government please clarify if the position quantities in Figures 1, 2, and 3 within 4.0 Personnel and Minimum Skills Requirements are mandatory levels in accordance with Section L2.1 General [all requirements are mandatory]?

Yes, for purposes of the sample task the position quantities (to be corrected in Amendment 0002) are mandatory manning levels.

However, any future request for task order proposal for this requirement will include all necessary information for the Group A primes to submit a technical and cost proposal.

Atch 5 J2 3.4 3.4 9 Will the Government please clarify that the Deliverable entitled Studies, Evaluations and Testing Support is the same thing as i2CM?

No it is NOT the same. The Identity Intelligence Operations Branch (J24-I) also collaborates with the SOCOM SORDAC program office for technology refresh / future equipment fielding.

This involves testing new equipment in the form of Tactical Biometric Evaluations (TBE), Tactical Forensic Evaluations (TFE), and Tactical DOMEX Evaluations (TDE) that span the SOF enterprise (Components, TSOCs, operational units, the USAJFKSWC JETC, SORDAC, and J24-I). Historically, the contracted company has coordinated unique data evaluation expertise from specific a/o government directed companies as sub-contracts and are executed by short turn-around contract Modifications in the form of a PWS Annex / SOW for the evaluation to be conducted (TBE, TFE, or TDE modality). These evaluations are usually done one per PoP, will alternate between the three modalities, and span the Option Years (usually one evaluation per option year).

Atch 6

SORDAC

ITO 2 Historical Labor Requirements in the ITO states there are multiple task orders under the Global Battlestaff and Program Support (GBPS) contract providing current SORDAC services. May offerors assume that completion dates of those task orders will not all coincide with start date of this SWMS Group A task order?

Correct. Amendment 0002 will include revised position start dates that will coincide with the task order completion under

GBPS.

Atch 6

SORDAC

SOW 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 6-11 Atch 6 lists 152 billets. Can offerors increase or decrease the number of FTEs (152 FTE) and still be compliant? (e.g., 5 Senior Engineers listed on page 10 but can we submit 4 or 6 Senior Engineers in lieu of 5).

No. The labor categories and number of FTEs listed in 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 are the required manning levels for this task order. The Government will consider alternate proposals for the Task Lead position only. (Ref. Q&A #326)

Atch 6

SORDAC

SOW 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 6-11 Paragraph 4 (4.1, 4.2 and 4.3) delineates the minimum skills required for the 152 FTEs. A total of 55 FTE positions are annotated that they require or will require SCI eligibility.

However, the SCI addendum indicates this task order requires 5 SCI contract billets. Can the government clarify which is the correct number of SCI billets required, and ensure they are clearly identified in the minimum skills/qualifications paragraph of the

SOW?

Amendment 0002 will revise the Atch 6 tables to reflect the current # of SCI billets (15). Those eligible for SCI may be required in the future; however, at this time additional billets are not approved. The DD254 will be updated at time of award to reflect the current approved # of SCI billets (15).

Atch 6

SORDAC

Personnel & Min Skills Req

4.1-4.3 6-11 Discussion: We do not understand the difference in the "Minimum Required Skills/Qualifications" listed for certain Levels of Expertise. For example, in paragraph 4.2, a PAS Journeyman (for the 24FTEs listed on page 8) has a Master’s degree requirement whereas in the line directly below (PAS for 7 FTEs) lists the requirement for a journeyman with a BA or BS degree. The difference(s) between journeyman, entry level, junior and senior Levels of Expertise are not clear.

Question #1: Can you rank order the "Level of Expertise" associated for the contractor positions, e.g., Senior>Junior>Journeyman>Entry level.

Question #2. Can you provide relative GS level of experience for each Level of Expertise, e.g., Senior ~GS14, Junior ~GS12, etc.

The Minimum Required Skills/Qualifications 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 represent the requirement for the Level of Expertise and Labor Category identified.

Q1: No.

Q2: No.

Atch 6

SORDAC

Section 4 6 Under the Labor Category Minimum Required Skills/Qualifications, some categories provide an “OR” experience requirement in lieu of a Bachelor’s degree. To ensure existing, well qualified and USSOCOM experienced staff can be retained, request the Government provide additional “OR” requirements for all labor categories such as “a Bachelor’s degree and four years’ experience OR 8 years of directly qualifying experience.”

The government has considered skills and qualification requirements, and allocation of expertise across the organization.

The labor category tables reflects the government's requirement.

Atch 7

SMEP

2 2.9.1 4 The Government states in support of Unipath that the support may include conducting surveys, or other research methodologies and …that are related to Unipath. Are all of these measures externally focused on the TA; or; are some measures intended for use by Unipath management for plans/assessment?

These are externally focused. The Government is not putting the Contractor in the position of assessing their own product. Product assessment is done by uniformed behavioral scientists.

Atch 8 J5 2.0 2.7, 2.12 4 Section 2.7 and 2.12 both pertain to geopolitical SMEs but it is not clear how these two requirements differ. Is there a FTE capabilities or experience-level difference required to fulfill Requirements 2.7 and 2.12 or is this simply a repetitive requirement?

SME will need geopolitical expertise for both but two different requirements 1) analysis, assessment, and synchronization of the command strategic documents and 2) for command policy, action plan, and strategic assessment. Capabilities and experience must be sufficient for FTEs to provide contracted support to both requirements.

Batch 3 #250 Q&A Batch 3, Ref. #250: In the answer to Question #250, the Government indicated that a Compensation Plan for Professional Employees is required as part of the proposal, per 52.222-46.

Since the requirement for the Compensation Plan is not addressed anywhere else in Section L, we request that the Government provide specific instructions for how this plan is to be submitted in the proposal. Because this is a late clarification, we recommend it be included as part of Volume III Price/Cost Proposal, as this volume is not page limited.

FAR Clause 52.222-46 is incorporated by reference in Section L of the Final RFP and has always been a requirement. Offerors may include the plan as part of their Volume III proposal.

368 Batch 4 Q&A 329 IDIQ PM Requirements Amendment 0002 will not include the requirements previously provided in Q&A # 329.

Q&As Batch 3

#250 "Describe how you will handle the requirements for mission essential travel to hostile environments and the impact to benefits and costs." Question: Does "benefits" mean employee benefits ? If yes, the government has not required a total compensation plan, so are there specific benefit areas in which the government is interested? ANSWER: Yes. A compensation plan is required per 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (See Section L).

1. Is a compensation plan required with the proposal?

2. If, yes what level of detail and format are required?

3. If yes, where should the compensation plan be inserted?

4. If yes, is the plan for US Citizens only or non-citizens as well?

5. Is there a reference number in section L for the plan?

Please note that a compensation plan is not a new requirement, FAR Clause 52.222-46 was included in the Final RFP release (Section L).

1. Yes.

2. Offerors should include the information they feel is necessary to comply with the requirement. As stated in 52.222-46, "The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty."

3. The plan can be included in Volume III (Price) or Volume IV (Administrative Material).

4. All.

5. Yes, Section L FAR Clause 52.222-46.

RFP L L.3.1 37 Organizational Structure Change History was removed from the requirements for the Past Performance volume. Due to recent Mergers and Acquisitions, and in the interest of fair competition, we request that the following language provided in the DRFP be added to the Final RFP. "Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. Not to be used for evaluation purposes, but, in order to facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes to the Offeror’s company/companies.

As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the offeror(s), your "roadmap" must be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources."

Additional language will not be added. Offerors are not prohibited from providing this information.

RFP L Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

33 Clauses incorporated by Reference include the FAR clause at 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

1. Can the Government please advise if this requirement also applies to our subcontractors?

2. If so, will the Government allow for direct electronic submittal of these proprietary compensation plans from each subcontractor?

Q1: No.

Q2: N/A

RFP L2.2.1.4

L2.2.1.4 H.4 (b)

Request that the a full copy of the OCI Avoidance Plan be provided in Volume IV as it is a contractual document which requires specific general rules to be addressed in accordance with FAR 9.5. and that offeror's be required to address the specific requirements outlined in the Section L.2.2.1.4 and H4 of the in Volume I Technical.

Offeror must provide requirements at L2.2.1.4 in Volume I.

RFP L and M L.2.2.1.6, L5.5 and M2.2

37, 40 and 42 of 44

Paragraph L.2.2.1.6 Small Business Participation is an element of Volume 1. Paragraph L. 5.5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan is an element of Volume 4. In Section M2.2 Factor 1 - IDIQ Management & Technical Capability, it states "all proposals will be evaluated as to the extent of participation of SB to include SDB concerns…" and states that "Offerors will be ineligible for award if they fail to submit an acceptable plan." (our emphasis is added to the final word). Can the Government confirm that the SB Subcontracting Plan is an element of Volume 4 but will be evaluated under Volume 1?

Small Business Participation is evaluated as part of Sub-factor 1.1 (Program Management).

374 RFP Q&A Is it the Government’s intent for all offerors to adjust SORDAC pricing based on the phased start dates using the 1880 FTE (per Q&A 340) as the baseline for adjusting hours from start date (e.g.

a labor category start date six months into the base period of performance on a labor category would result in 940 hours priced on that labor category for base year)?

Yes.

375 Atch 6

SORDAC

Security 7.1 12 Statement of Work states "Contractors shall require access to SCI, Foreign Government Information, NATO, and Focal Point Material” The DD 254, section 10, Foreign Government Information and NATO are not marked "yes". DD 254 also does not specify access to Focal Point. Focal Point is usually addressed in section 10k. Do these requirements need to be removed from the Statement of Work or added to the DD 254?

Amendment 0002 includes a revised DD254 to reflect Foreign Government Information and NATO check boxes 10g and 10h marked as "YES." Focal Point Material has been added to Item 10k.

376 Atch 7

SMEP

3.

Deliverabl es

3 5-8 Will the cost for publication of magazines be considered an ODC, or included in the 12 month cost?

Offerors should include the cost for publication magazines as part of their FFP.

377 Atch 7

SMEP

2 2.9.1 4 1. What tools are in use? CATI? F2F? Online surveying?

2. Please provide finer detail on research tools currently used on Task.

1. Face to face and online.

2. Currently, UNIPATH analytics include reviews of key leader engagements, editor observations while interacting with subscribers, face to face discussions at conferences, regional exercises and other opportunities. It is an ongoing effort to pulse reader impressions, opinions and beliefs.

378 Atch 7

SMEP

2 2.9.1 4 The Government states in support of Unipath, that the support may include conducting surveys or other research methodologies and …that are related to Unipath.

1. Are these surveys and other research methodologies currently in use on a schedule for provision to field?

2. If so, what is the periodicity?

Currently, UNIPATH analytics include reviews of key leader engagements, editor observations while interacting with subscribers, face to face discussions at conferences, regional exercises and other opportunities.

1 and 2. There is not a schedule. It is an ongoing effort to pulse reader impressions, opinions and beliefs.

379 Atch 7

SMEP

2 2.9.1 4 The Government states in support of Unipath, that the support may include conducting surveys or other research methodologies and …that are related to Unipath.

1. Are these surveys and other research methodologies currently in use or does the Government want us to provide options/enhancements with pricing for future use?

2. If for future use, when would these researches begin under Task?

1. Research is ongoing. There is not a current survey in use.

Surveys would be on the magazine website and designed to get general reader impressions and to drive subscriber interaction.

(i.e. not designed for in depth statistical significance)

2. Research is an ongoing task that would begin on the first day of the PoP.

380 Atch 3 Pricing

B (sub factor 2.2)

The Pricing Template formula is based the total amount proposed by year and divided by 12 month. However, the SMEP TO is based on deliverables (publications). Would the Government consider breaking this down by deliverable instead of an evenly distributed monthly amount?

Since work is being accomplished throughout the year, offerors are requested to provide an annual FFP to accomplish all deliverables as stated in the PWS. The proposed annual FFP is then divided by 12 to arrive at a monthly price.

381 H92222- 14-R-0020

Q&A #293 Solicitation Section L.2.3.1 requires a demonstration of knowledge and understanding of the requirement, and an overall discussion of the technical approach. Q&A #293 adds a significant new requirement for offerors' proposals to include "unique plans" to accomplish the Analytics task. A full plan for data collection and analysis for two magazines is a major new requirement. This plan could itself be a document of up to or greater than 20 pages. Is this correct, or is Section L.2.3.1 correct?

The requirement for the analytics task is not a new requirement.

By definition, the offeror's plan should be a description of the companies’ unique approach to accomplishing the described task.

Past MOE and MOP will be provided to the awarded offeror.

Or does the Government mean that the awarded offeror will be provided existing analytic documents and data for integration into their unique analytical plan after award?

382 Group A

RFP Q&A

Batch 4

SORDAC

Position Start- Dates end of Q&As

RE: SORDAC Position Start-Dates (provided at end of Q&As file).

Position start dates, for the Base Year, for many labor categories are shown as "Pending". Offerors cannot price out the Base Year without this information. Given this is incomplete, and that primes must give specific directions to subcontractors for pricing data, and coordinate those responses, we request a one week extension to 2/2/1025, assuming this issued can be clarified the week of January 19.

Amendment 0002 updated the position start dates and extended the due date to 28 Jan.

383 Group A

RFP Q&A

Batch 4

SORDAC

Position Start- Dates end of Q&As

RE: SORDAC Position Start-Dates (provided at end of Q&As file).

The new Base Year start date is May 16, 2015. The SME for Testing and Operational Support (Senior) is the only position shown to start on Day 1. Is this correct? The majority of the work force does not start for 6 months after award. Please clarify if this is the correct way to price the effort.

Offerors should price the SORDAC TO base year using the position start dates provided in Amendment 0002.

384 RFP L 35 L.1.4 As a result of the Batch 4 Q&A release and the extensive impact to our proposal from the answers, we request a 10-day extension from the current due date of 26 January 2015. Our request is also necessitated based on the numerous and significant outstanding items including unanswered questions that remain to be addressed in Amendment 2.

Amendment 0002 revised the due date to 28 January.

385 Q&A Batch 4, Question

Question/Answer 304 wrt “Amendment 0002 will revise the position start dates for SORDAC.” The original RFP did not have position start dates that can be revised. Looking at the newly added “Position Start Date” table provided with the Q&A batch 4, is it the Government’s intent that a position that has a start date of 12/1/2015, would only be in the offeror’s proposal for approximately 783 hours [1880 divided by 12 months times 5 months (1 Dec 2015 – 30 Apr 2016)] rather than the 1880 that is stipulated as being the man year?

Yes, that is correct for the base year only.

386 H92222- 14-R-0020

L L.3.5 38 Section L.3.5 says to "Provide one year history (within the past 12 months) demonstrating corporate commitment to meet subcontracting goals/targets ...for those contracts/projects submitted under Past Performance." Can the Government confirm that this is only required for projects submitted under Past Performance by the Prime Offeror(s), and not for projects submitted by proposed subcontractors/teaming partners?

This refers to SB participation of the Prime offeror

387 Atch 6

SORDAC

Security 7.3 12 Is it the Government's intent for contractors to conduct office end-of-day security checks? Will contractor perform these security checks in support of a Government person? Or will the contractor have sole responsibility to do End-of-Day-Checks? Will this requirement include SCIFs?

The intent is that contractors would be included in the organization End of Day rotation schedule. When required the contractor would have sole responsibility for the area in which they are conducting EOD. This may include SCIFs. The DD254 will be revised accordingly at time of award.

388 Atch 8 J5 SOW Figure 4.1 7 For the Industrial Analyst, Business Process Consultant, there is a "0 FTE" requirement. How would the government like offerors to manage and address this, assuming this is a placeholder for additional hires (think tank, academia, special advisors)? Will the offeror hire and supervise them? Do they provide their corporate administrative and functional support? Please clarify.

Amendment 0003 will specify 0.33 FTE.

389 Atch 5 J2 Section 2 2.1.6 4 Reference PWS section 2.1.6 (Specific Requirements), page 4, will the government provide non-incumbents a copy of the “current guidelines for i2 Pre-Mission Training (PMT) provided by the USSOCOM i2EC?

PMT requirements vary based on unit / deploying force need. At present an i2 POI of a minimum 8-hours (basic POI) up to a 40-hour (comprehensive POI) is utilized to get deploying SOF familiar with the SOCOM i2 PED and operational process.

390 Atch 6

SORDAC

6 6 12 of

Reference "Support may also be required at contractor facilities and at worldwide locations." Question: Will the Government state how much of the work will be required at Contractor facilities?

Amendment 0002 deleted "Support may also be required at contractor facilities and at worldwide locations."

391 H92222- 14-R-0020

Q&A #282 Please clarify the response to this question. Historically the magazines and the websites have been separate contracts. In fact, PACOM has already separately released a solicitation for maintenance of the apdforum.com website, among others. Is the Government creating an additional requirement with Q&As, and SMEP offerors will also be required to maintain and manage all magazine websites? If so, how will this be deconflicted with existing programs and contracts to manage the websites?

Or is the Government merely stating that the magazine contractor will have to work with website management contractors and provide them with copies of the magazines in HTML-coded PDF format, for posting on the websites?

The Government is not requiring web development but requiring copies of the magazines be delivered in PDF and HTML-coded format for posting to websites. (Ref 2.7)

392 Atch 6

SORDAC

Travel 9 12 Will the Government provide the estimated number of trips and their durations for hazardous travel? Without this information, offerors cannot accurately estimate the impact to labor costs due to hazardous location uplifts (part of the fixed price labor cost).

Alternatively, would the Government consider DBA as an allowable travel charge on the Cost CLIN? Will the Government consider putting labor uplifts alone (not the base salary) into the travel CLIN or establish a separate Cost CLIN for this purpose?

This approach reduces risk for both parties, eliminates fee on labor uplifts and DBA, and saves the Government money when anticipated travel does not materialize. Without this, offerors must guess and place an estimate for these legitimate expenses into the

FFP CLIN.

Amendment 0003 adds the following to ITO Para. 2.b:

While OCONUS travel is possible, at this time it is not anticipated. Should OCONUS travel be required in the future, the TO Prime Contractor shall be required to submit a cost proposal to include ODCs associated with OCONUS travel.

393 Atch 6

SORDAC

9 1 12 Request the Government confirm that OCONUS travel expenses such as DBA, visas, hazard uplifts, etc., are allowable charges to the travel CLIN.

Yes, the types of expenses listed that are associated with OCONUS travel are allowable. (Ref. FAR 31.205-46 - Travel Costs) These would be included in any cost proposal for travel.

RFP M 2.3 Factor 2 This evaluation criteria requires “…complete approach and provides insight into how it will manage, transition, resource and execute each TO SOW requirement…”. The Government in the Q&A responses released 16 January 2015 introduced phased start dates by labor category for the SORDAC task order. This change adds complexity to any task order approach proposed. If it is the Government’s intent for all offerors to adjust approach from “transition within 30 days of task order award” to managing, transitioning, resourcing and executing on the new phased start dates, specifically by labor category, this new requirement will have a significant impact on industry responses. In order to respond to this change offerors need all of the pending dates and additional time to alter approaches in order to respond to the evaluation criteria. Is it the Governments intent to use a phased transition by labor category in execution and if so, will the Government consider allowing at least a week extension to the proposal due date from the time all “pending transition dates by labor category” are provided in amendment form for offerors to determine impact and implement changes to their response to management, transition, resourcing and execution approach and pricing?

Yes, it is the government's intent to use a phased transition approach by labor category. Amendment 0002 extended the due date.

RFP L 2.3.3 The Government in the Q&A responses released 16 January 2015 introduced phased start dates by labor category for the SORDAC task order. In Section L2.3.3 Transition Plan the requirement is to ensure cleared employees are in place day 1 of the task order performance start date. Is it the Government’s intent for the offerors to provide an approach to manage, transition, resource and execute each task order based on a “day 1 of task order performance start date” for the SORDAC task order in the technical response, but to provide phased pricing in the cost volume?

No, offerors should propose a SORDAC Task Order transition that aligns with the position start dates. Offerors also need to provide phased pricing in Volume III.

Atch 6 Amend 02

4.2 There are three positions assigned different levels, but they require the same qualifications. Is this the Government’s intent or is this an error?

Amendment 0003 will revise to reflect the level of expertise as Journeyman instead of Junior.