Government_Response_to_Industry_Questions-12SEP18.pdf

H92239-18-R-0011

JSOMTC Support Services

Questions and Answers

RFP Reference Industry Question Government Response

1. Part 1 Section 1.6.8.1.4, RFP states: Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring all personnel performing work under this contract possess and maintain current Information Assurance Technician (IAT) Level I professional certification during the execution of this contract.

Q: Does this apply to all personnel or only those working IT functions, as in Section 1.6.8.1.11?

PWS Section 1.6.8.1.11. will be deleted in its entirety.

2. Part 1 Section 1.6.8.2.3.

Q: What if anything is the difference between a check mark and an X in the chart?

There is no difference. Amendment 0003 will reflect the changes.

3. Section L Table 2.1.2.

Volume III requirements include SF294/295.

Q: Is the requirement to submit these reports for the contracts being used as Past Performance examples?

Amendment 0003 will reflect changes to the chart to annotate that SF294/295 are only to be submitted, if required.

This report is not required of small businesses.

If a Past Performance example has a

SF294/295 associated with it, please submit it with the past performance proposal.

4. Section L Table 2.1.2.

Volume III requirements include SF294/295. General Instructions for SF294 state "1. This report is not required for small businesses."

Q: Does the Government wants these reports with the offer from

Small Businesses as well?

Please see response to Question 3.

5. Section L Table 2.1.2.

Volume III requirements include SF294/295. GSA published "Form has been replaced with the Summary Subcontracting Report (SSR) system located at https://www.esrs.gov" at https://www.gsa.gov/forms-library/summary-subcontract-report.

Q: Does the Government require this report with the offer?

No, the reference to the SF295 will be deleted in its entirety.

6. Section L Section 2.2.

Q: Does the Government require a signed SF33 and if so, in what section should it reside?

Amendment 0003 will be changed to reflect the requirement for each Offeror to submit a signed SF33 in Volume 1-

Qualifying Criteria.

7. Section L Section 2.2.1.2.

Q: Does the Government require a completed DD254 be included?

reflect the requirement to submit a completed solicitation DD254 in Volume

1-Qualifying Criteria.

8.

Section L Section 2.2.2.2.

Per L.1.4, offerors concur with the PWS through the act of submitting a response.

L.2.2.2.2 instructs offerors to prepare their responses to demonstrate their ability to comply with the contract tasks requirements specified in the PWS.

In 2.2.2.3, specific PWS sections 5.1-5.4 are listed as requiring response.

Q: Will offerors addressing the requirements in 5.1-5.6 be considered compliant with the requirements in L.2.2.2?

The Government will evaluation all offerors based the stated evaluation criteria in Section M.

9. Section L Section 2.2.2.3.

PWS 5.2.1 contains language more similar to L.2.2.2.3 TAB E.ii.a than to L.2.2.2.3 TAB-Eii.b.

Q: Should the offeror's response address PWS 5.2 in its section addressing L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.a instructions?

reflect PWS 5.2 within Tab-E.ii.a.

Instructions.

10. Section L Section 2.2.2.3.

PWS 5.4 contains language more similar to L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.b than to L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.c.

Q: Should the offeror's response address PWS 5.4 in its section addressing L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.b instructions?

reflect PWS 5.4 within Tab-E.ii.b.

Instructions.

11. Section L Section 2.2.2.3.

PWS 5.5 contains language similar to L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.c.

Q: Should the offeror's response address PWS 5.5 in its section addressing L.2.2.2.3 TAB-E.ii.c instructions?

reflect PWS 5.5 within Tab-E.ii.c.

Instructions.

12. Section L Section 2.2.2.3.

Q: Does the response to TAB-F.ii need to include hours for activity beyond PWS Part 5, such as iWATCH and OPSEC

Training?

Yes, this is part of the Government’s requirement.

13. Section L Section 2.2.3.1.

Q: Does the Summary Page count towards the 25 page count limit?

Yes, the Summary Page counts toward the page limit.

14. Section L Section 2.2.3.2.

Q: Can offerors include Past and Present Information Examples for non-major subcontractors and have these examples included in the Evaluation?

Yes, however the Offeror is cautioned that the requirements listed in 2.2.3.2. are still present regarding the Government’s expectations of Past and Present

Performance Information Examples for the

Prime and each major subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture.

15. Section C PWS

1.6.11.2.1. Page 30.

States required Contract Manager (CM) Minimum Background /

Experience includes a Project Management Professional (PMP)

Certification and that experience may substitute for certification.

Q: Can the Government provide a specific description of the type of experience (background, number of years, etc.) that may be used as a substitute for the Contract Manager’s PMP certification?

Amendment 0003 will be changed to include the following: “A minimum of four years of project management experience may substitute for professional certification”

16. Section L.2.1.1.iv, Page

States “Page Limit does not include executive summary, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, key personnel resumes, cross-reference indices, and section dividers/tables…”

Q: Can the Government confirm that the Letters of Commitment from

Key Personnel are excluded from the Volume II Technical Factors page count limitation of 25 pages and the Consent Letters from

Subcontractors are excluded from the Volume III Past and Present

Performance page count limitation of 25 pages?

Yes, Consent Letters and Letters of

Commitment are not included in the page counts.

Amendment 0003 will include language in

Section L. 2.1.1.i.v., which specifically excludes consent letters and Letters of

Commitment.

17. Sections L.2.2.2.3.ii.a, L.2.2.2.3.ii.b, and

L.2.2.2.3.ii.c

Sections L.2.2.2.3.ii.a, L.2.2.2.3.ii.b, and L.2.2.2.3.ii.c reference

PWS paragraphs 5.1, 5.2 & 5.3, and 5.4 respectively. However, these

PWS paragraph numbers seem to be misaligned with the content requested by the Section L instructions.

Q: Can the Government clarify that the correct PWS paragraph references for Section L.2.2.2.3.ii.a is PWS 5.2 (Program

Management); L.2.2.2.3.ii.b is PWS 5.3 & 5.4 (Instruction

Management and Support); and L.2.2.2.3.ii.c is PWS 5.5 (POI

Support)?

Yes, please see response to Question 9, 10, and 11.

18. L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(a)

PWS 5.1

Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(a) Management Approach references only PWS 5.1. However, PWS 5.2 includes a lot of guidelines on

Management Approach. Yet Section L later places PWS 5.2 under

Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(b) Training Approach. It seems that

PWS 5.2 is a better fit under Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(a)

Management Approach ---

Q: Can the Government include a reference to PWS 5.2 under this section (Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(a)) and remove it from the later section (Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(b))?

19. L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(c.)

Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(c.) Curriculum Approach references

PWS 5.4 (Instruction Support). However, PWS 5.4 (Instruction

Support) seems to align with Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(b) Training

Approach, while PWS 5.5 (Programs of Instruction Support) aligns with Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(c.).

Q: Can the Government remove the reference to PWS 5.4

(Instructor Support) from Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(c.)

Curriculum Approach and put in under Section L.2.2.2.3 Tab

E(ii)(b) Training Approach? Can the Government then include a reference to PWS 5.5 (Programs of Instruction) under Section

L.2.2.2.3 Tab E(ii)(c.) Curriculum Approach?

20. PWS 1.3.1.1, Page 19

Q: Under the current contract, specific to the AMI positions, has there been any break in service and if so for how long?

There has been no recorded break in services.

Please see Technical Exhibit 4 for

Estimated Workload Data.

21. PWS 1.3.1.1, Page 19

Q: If the Government collects the data on the AMI positions, will the Government please provide that information for the last

12 months, so offerors can evaluate the current performance and develop a best-value solution for AMIs.

The requirements for AMI personnel are listed in the solicitation and that is what

Offerors should be basing their proposals on.

22. PWS 1.5, Page 20

Q: Will the Government please provide the Period of

Performance dates? With the current contract ending 31

October 2018, it does not seem as if there is not enough time for a 60-day Phase-In/Phase-Out with the incumbent in place.

The PoP will be provided at the time of award. The anticipated start date is 1

November 2018 for the phase-in; with full performance starting 1 January 2019.

23. PWS 1.6.8.1.4, Page 24

Q: Does the Government mean Information Assurance Training

Level I instead of Information Assurance Technician (IAT)

Level I professional certification? Is this a requirement to have all instructors certified?

Please see response to question #1.

24. PWS 1.6.8.2, Page 25

Q: Currently, there is a waiver policy citing no more than 10% of non-SOF instructors. The previous PWS did not include this requirement and the percentage of incumbent non-SOF instructors is currently well above 10%. Will the awardee be required to uphold said waiver policy of no more than 10% of non-SOF instructors?

There is no waiver to the requirements stated in the PWS and the resulting contract will be the governing document that outlines all of the Government’s employee qualification requirements.

25. PWS 1.6.8.2, Page 25

Q: The ATP certification is administered exclusively at

JSOMTC by military and GS personnel. Once an instructors

ATP expires, section 1.6.8.2 states, “The Contractor shall also be responsible for maintaining any training requirements and all re-certifications. The Government will not be responsible for any re-certifications.” Does that mean all instructors must get their NREMT Paramedic certification or will they be allowed to renew their ATP certification?

NREMT Paramedic certification is required of all Contractor employees.

However, should the Contractor employee be a National Guard/Reservist with ATP certification, the Contractor may substitute

NREMT Paramedic certification for the

ATP certification. The National

Guard/Reservist Employee may retain their

ATP certification through their respective units. JSOMTC will recognize this in lieu of NREMT.

26. PWS 1.6.8.2.3 Chart, The chart shows the SIM is not required to be an “18D or SOIDC

Graduate”. Is this accurate or should this block have a check mark as well? It seems that, based off the overall requirements within the

PWS for this SOF specific medical instruction, that the SIM should be equal to or higher than those working as medical instructors to be able to properly perform their job found in PWS 1.6.11.2.2.

Q: Will the Government please quantify/clarify why the SIM should not be an “18D or SOIDC Graduate”?

Amendment 0003 will include a check mark for this requirement. The SIM shall be an 18D or SOIDC Graduate.

27. PWS 1.6.11.2, Page 29

Q: Will the Government please clarify who the Key Personnel are?

The Key personnel are the CM and SIM.

See PWS 1.6.11.2 and SOFARS 5652.237-

9001.

28. PWS 1.6.11.2.2, Page 30

In the SIM Minimal Background/Experience Required section, we recommend that “Four years of Army Special Forces experience” be added. While it can be left in the Minimum Education Requirement as a substitute for academic degree, it is recommended that this be added to the experience requirement to ensure SOF training is managed by SOF-experienced personnel. If not, then we recommend that the qualification level be equal to that of the SFMS3 instructors to properly evaluate conduct quality control and provide feedback at that certification level.

Amendment 0003 will be updated to include four years of experience.

29. PWS 5.4, Page 42

Q: Will the Government confirm what the instructor-to-student ratio should be during 1) didactic (lecture), 2) practicum (hands-on), and 3) simulation training exercises (STX) phases of training?

1) Didactic (lecture), 2 instructors - 87 students

2) Practicum (hands-on), 1 instructor – 4 students (LTT);

1 instructor – 6 students (Civilian accreditation type courses);

1 instructor – 8 students (non-LTT simulation training)

3) Simulation training exercises (STX) phases of training

1 instructor – 4 students (LTT);

1 instructor – 6 students (Civilian accreditation type courses);

1 instructor – 8 students (non-LTT simulation training)

30. PWS L 2.2.4.3.1 (c), Page

Q: Will the Government please provide the amount of JSOMTC surge support requested and approved in the last 12 months?

Without this historical data, it will be difficult for offerors to accurately price for this.

This will be an option CLIN. For evaluation purposes ONLY, the

Government will use 15% of the JSOMTC support CLIN for each respective year and include as the plug figure.

31.

N/A

There have been nine (9) modifications to this contract, the majority of these exercising options and applying funding; however, there are three (3) that are not.

1: (P00006) 02/01/2018 MEDICAL INSTRUCTORS FOR

JSOMTC Supplemental Agreement for work within scope $15k

2: (P00007) 03/30/2018 SOF-P INSTRUCTION AT JSOMTC

$57k

3: (P00003) 07/28/2017 IGF::CT::IGF JSOMTC MEDICAL

INSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES Change Order

$76k

Q: Will the Government please clarify what each of these were, this information will allow us to determine the growth and change expected within the contract and without this historical data we will be unable to ensure pricing for management structure and best value is not capable.

The question is not relevant to the current solicitation.

Please see Technical Exhibit 4 for

Estimated Workload Data.

32. L, 2.1.1, iix and L, 2.1.2

Q: Can the Government please clarify what it means by

“protected” and “unprotected” copies? Is “protected” simply in

PDF format and unprotected in MS Word or MS Excel format?

Please verify that both the required protected and unprotected files be provided on one volume’s CD?

Yes, per the solicitation “For the protected version, the Government will accept a

PDF. For the unprotected version, Microsoft Office 2010, presentation and spreadsheet products are acceptable.”

Yes, one CD-ROM/DVD is acceptable per volume.

33. N/A

Q: Does Government want offerors to include an executed SF 33 in our proposal submission? If so, please provide instructions on where (there is no mention of SF 33 in proposal instructions).

Please see response to Question #6.

34. L, 2.2.3.4

Offerors are required to complete and send questionnaires with a cover letter to all POCs for those past performance contracts identified in the submitted information examples. Also, for tracking purposes, the Offeror is required to include a listing of all POCs, dates, and email addresses to which the questionnaires were sent.

Q: Please clarify that they Government wants this tracking info included in proposal?

Yes, the Government requires this information.

35.

L, 2.2.1.4

Q: If offerors determine that an OCI does not exist, does the

Government want us to acknowledge this in the proposal in lieu of providing an OCI Mitigation Plan?

Yes, if you determine that an OCI does not exist, please acknowledge this in Volume I of the proposal in lieu of providing an OCI

Mitigation Plan.

36. L, 2.2.1.2

This section indicates that offerors must possess a SECRET Facility

Clearance at the time of proposal submission. However, this section does not include any instructions for proposal submission.

Q: Please confirm that offerors are not providing anything in the proposal deliverable with regard to this requirement?

Amendment 0003 will be changed to add the following: “In addition to each offeror providing verification of its Facility

Clearance, each offeror shall also submit a completed DD254 with its offer.”

37. Page 19 Section 1.3.1.1 Q: During the current contract there have been extended periods (over 6 month of time straight) that there was only 2

AMIs to support training. Will this be taken into effect for evaluating the incumbents past performance? Can the government please provide how many total months during the current contract that the AMI positions have been vacant?

Please see response to Question #21.

38. Page 19 Section 1.3.1.1

Q: If the government collects the data on the competence of instruction for the current AMIs. Will the government please provide that information for the last 12 months so we can evaluate the current AMI performance and develop a best value solution for AMIs by enhancing those minimum qualifications if the current AMIs are not meeting or exceeding the standards?

Please see response to Question #22.

39. Page 20 Section 1.5 Question: Will the government please provide the PoP dates? With the current contract ending 31 October 2018 there is not enough time currently to do a 2 month phase in with the incumbent in place unless the intent to do the phase in without the incumbent in place.

Please see the answer to Question 23.

40. Page 24 Section 1.6.8.1.4 Question: Does the government mean Information Assurance

Training Level I not Information Assurance Technician (IAT) Level

I professional certification? The incumbent is a computer company so it would seem that this requirement in the PWS provides them a distinct advantage especially since the PWS requirement is to support medical training and not be cyber or computer programmers.

Is this a requirement to have all instructors or just have this in-house team capability that can be used as needed?

Please see response to Question #1.

41. Page 25 Section 1.6.8.2 Currently there is a house policy or directive that no more than 10% of all instructors will be non SOF, however the previous PWS did not state that as a requirement.

Q: Will the awardee be required to uphold that in house policy and waiver process of no more than 10% of non SOF instructors?

Please see response to Question #24.

42. Page 25 Section 1.6.8.2 The ATP is only administered at JSOMTC by military and GS personnel. So once an individual instructors ATP expires and as section 1.6.8.2 states “The Contractor shall also be responsible for maintaining any training requirements and all re-certifications. The

Government will not be responsible for any re-certifications.”

Q: Does that mean all instructors must get their NR Paramedic certification or will they be allowed to take the ATP?

Please see response to Question #25.

43. Page 28 Section 1.6.8.2.3

Chart

The chart shows the SIM is not required to be an “18D or SOIDC

Graduate” is that the true intent or should this block have a check mark as well? It seems that based off the overall requirements within the PWS for this SOF specific medical instruction that the SIM should be equal to or higher than those working as medical instructors to be able to properly perform the job found in section

1.6.11.2.2.

Q: Can the government please quantify/clarify why the SIM should not be an “18D or SOIDC Graduate”?

Please see response to Question #26.

44. Page 29 Section 1.6.11.2

Q: Will the government please clarify who the Key Personnel are?

Please see the response to Question #27.

45. Page 30 Section

1.6.8.11.2.2 Q: In the SIM Minimal Background/Experience Required section recommend that the “Four years Army Special Forces experience” be added. While it can be left in the Minimum

Education Requirement as a substitute for academic degree it is recommended that it is added to the experience requirement to ensure SOF training is managed by SOF experienced personnel.

If not then the qualification level needs to be equal to that of the

SFMS3 instructors in order to properly evaluate conduct quality control and provide feedback at that certification level.

Please see the response to Question #28.

46. Page 42 Section 5.4 Q: Are we to maintain National Registry and NAEMT standards for faculty-to-student ratio (1:6) in didactic and hands-on blocks or the published POIs standards for faculty-to-student ratio in didactic and hands-on blocks? Based off the number of requested personnel in the PWS these numbers do not work out to maintain the 1:6 ratios as required.

Please see the response to Question #29.

47. Page 89 Section L

2.2.4.3.1 (c) Q: In the last 12 months will the government please provide the amount of JSOMTC Surge Support that has been requested and approved? Without this historical data we will be unable to price for this.

Please see the response to Question #30.

48. N/A Question: There has been 9 total modifications to this contract and a majority have been exercising options and applying funding but there have been 3 that are not. Will the government please clarify what each of these were, this information will allow us to determine the growth and change expected within the contract and without this historical data we will be unable to ensure pricing for management structure and best value is not capable.

A: (P00006) 02/01/2018 MEDICAL INSTRUCTORS FOR

JSOMTC Supplemental Agreement for work within scope $15k

B: (P00007) 03/30/2018 SOF-P INSTRUCTION AT JSOMTC

$57k

C: (P00003) 07/28/2017 IGF::CT::IGF JSOMTC MEDICAL

INSTRUCTION SUPPORT SERVICES Change Order

$76k

Please see the response to Question #31.

49. General Q: How many current SOF-P instructors and AMI instructors are on the current contract?

There are 3 AMI Instructors and 49 SOF

Medical Instructors.

Be advised that the historical data being provided is inclusive of all requirements as outlined in the PWS, which is subject to increases and decreases in workload, and

SHOULD NOT be considered as absolute in terms of present or future requirements.

Offerors are cautioned to use at your own risk and are responsible for reviewing the

PWS and ensuring that all requirements are met.

50. RESERVED RESERVED

RESERVED

51. General The current contract states a FFP but has a Level of Effort (LOE) for billing similar to a T&M so only positions filled can be billed.

Q: Since this is a FFP contract will the awardee be allowed to bill for the full amount monthly even if positions are not filled or after award like the current contract will the government implement the requirement of LOE billing?

The current solicitation will result in a FFP contract award. Please refer to the PRS for exceptions to fixed billings.

The workload data provided is derived from standardization of previous labor hours to assist Offerors in determining a fixed level of support.

52. Industry Day Q: How or what is the instructor breakdown for the 8 concurrently run medical curriculum courses?

Q: How many hours in your 5- week blocks executed # of instructors? Or rather per each 25-day block?

Q: Instructor Breakdown and number of iterations of the two sustainment courses?

It varies based on the ratios and student through put.

Please see Technical Exhibit 4 for updated information on how many times the classes run.

Technical Exhibit 4 includes historical workload based on ratios & accreditation standards.

53. Industry Day Q: What is the # or contractors per block? Please see response to Question #52.

54. Industry Day Q: How much of the phases other than combat trauma is in a field environment?

SOCM includes field environment training in the Trauma 2 and Trauma 3 blocks of instruction.

SFMS: No field training

SSC: FTX

SFMS3: FTX

55. Industry Day Q: Is the maximum hours for a contract instructor to work in one day 14 or 16 hours?

Per PWS 1.6.4.1, services may be required up to 16 hours in any one day during the latter part of the SOCM course.

56. Industry Day Q: Can you please explain the 35% penalty on the PRS? The PRS percentages are not penalties, they are considered remedies related to measurable performance.

The Government requires receipt of all critical contracted services.

57. Industry Day Q: Due to Hurricane Florence & the impact on local/regional business/vendors, may the Government consider a 10-14 day delay on the proposal due date?

The Government will allow for an extension until 27 September 2018 at 12:00 p.m. EST.