Section_L_Attachment_L1_-_Question_and_Answer_Template_17_Oct_FINAL.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 23 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ENCORE III IT Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HC1028-15-R-0030
- Issued by
- Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
Additional Q A
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
ENCORE III IT Services has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Instructions
| Q&A INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of these specific instructions is to expedite the process of answering questions. Please do not change the format of this document. |
| Complete the spreadsheet tab below named "Q&A" with all questions, comments, and recommendations about the RFP. Examples provided in the spreadsheet. **Please delete the examples before submitting your questions. |
COLUMN A: Complete the "Page" column. This is the page number from the RFP located in the upper right hand corner of the page. Do not include the total page number. Enter only the page number where the topic begins.
COLUMN B: Complete the "Section/Paragraph" column with the applicable section and paragraph number (if applicable) of the RFP. For example: B2, C, or L5.1.2. For a section and paragraph number reference do not place a dot between the letter and the first number. Additional subparagraph references should be separated with a dot regardless of the format in the RFP, for example, L5.1.2.a. Do not including any other extraneous identifiers or other information other then instructed here. If the reference is to a CLIN, Clause, Appendix, or Attachment etc. the entry goes in the next column. At a minimum you will always insert at least the Section letter A through J in this column.
COLUMN C: Complete the "CLIN/Clause/Other" column. Insert the CLIN, Clause, Provision, Appendix, or Attachment number. For example: CLIN 0001, 52.217-8, Appendix A, or Attachment L3. Insert the section letter only in the Column B. This column will be completed only when there is not a more precise RFP reference number. NOTES: CLINs are in Section B. Most sections contain clauses so ensure you reference the correct section.
COLUMN D: Complete the Questions/Comments/Recommendations column. Start the question by referencing the topic. This may help the sort process. For example: Minimum Qualifications Checklist or Performance Area 10. Then insert the question or comment.
Issues must be submitted to the following e-mail address: disa.scott.ditco.mbx.encore3@mail.mil
Q&A
| RFP Page | RFP Section/ Paragraph | CLIN/ Clause/Appendix/Attachment/Other | Questions/Comments/Recommendations | Answer |
| 14 - 16 | L6.2.2 | Can members of a JV submit independent sealed packages documenting the financial basis for the proposed indirect rates for the JV? | See AMD 0007. RFP section L6.2.2.k. | |
| 15 | L6.2.2.i | Are subcontractor rates required for cost reimbursable (CR) labor rate tables if the proposed relationship with the potential subcontractor will be on a T&M basis against ceiling rates proposed by the prime? | If subcontractor pricing is utilized in the development of the proposed labor rates, the subcontractor's fully burdened labor rates must be separately identified in the build-up of the proposed CR rate. See RFP L6.2.2.i. | |
| 15 | L6.2.2.h | Does the requirement to provide salary data, FPRA/FPRRs, etc. still apply to the CR price materials? | Yes, Offerors are required to provide salary data, FPRA/FPRRs, etc. to support their proposed labor rates. | |
| N/A | N/A | Q&As dated 09.23.2016 | Am. #6 Question 41: How will the CR cost associated with subcontractors be evaluated when the contractor is not required to provide a final list of subcontractors until prior to first task order proposal per H.3? Please clarify. |
Answer: Subcontractor pricing is only required if it is used in the development of the proposed labor rates contained on the Labor Rate Tables.
Am. #6 Question 142: Please confirm that all subcontractors, regardless of subcontract or commerciality, must meet the cost requirements outlined in Section L.6.2.2(h) to be eligible for award.
Answer: If a subcontractor relationship exists, the subcontractor fully burdened labor rates must be separately identified in the build-up of the proposed CR rate.
| Question: The two answers appear to be contradictory. Please confirm that (1) Offerors are not required to include subcontractor rates in their price submission if it was not used in the development of the proposed labor rates and (2) Offers will not be deemed non-compliant if subcontractor labor rates were not used in the development of the proposed labor rates contained on the Labor Rate Tables. | 1. Yes, 2. Yes | ||||
| N/A | N/A | Q&A Line 226 | Row 226 of the ENCORE III Q&As reads, "The Government requests offerors not add tabs to the Pricing Template. Please submit an additional workbook within the Price Narrative. See RFP revision in L6.2.2(f)." Does the government mean offerors may include another Microsoft Excel file/workbook as part of the Price Volume? The Price Narrative and other proposal volumes will be in Adobe Acrobat, Portable Document Format (PDF). | Question on Row 226 was specifically in response to not adding tabs for required backup documentation to be provided in accordance with L6.2.2.h. to the Pricing Template. Offerors are required to complete Attachment L4 - ENCORE III Pricing Template. A separate Excel workbook may be submitted as an attachment to the price narrative only for additional cost information. | |
| Page 132 of 149, Amendment 0006 | Section L6.2.2.h and L6.2.2.i | Q&A responses at lines 39, 40, 149, 150 | As the result of Amendment 005 and Amendment 006 changes in L6.2.2.h and L6.2.2i, and responses to Questions 39, 40, 149 and 150 – will the government clarify the requirements for indirect rate build ups when the proposing organization is an unpopulated Joint Venture without DCAA approved indirect rates? Does the government wish to see the “managing partner’s” rates or all members of the Joint Venture’s indirect rates? If the government requires all member’s rates (which are proprietary) how does the government wish delivery of this “sealed” information? | See AMD 0007. RFP section L6.2.2.k. | |
| G | Attachment G2 | Per the Q&A above from Amendment 0006, did the Contracting Officer make his/her determination in accordance with FAR subpart 39.104 that the government’s needs either cannot be met without the education requirements, or require use of other than a performance-based acquisition. Since many ENCORE II task orders have been performed successfully without specific degree/years of experience requirements, it seems illogical to require this under ENCORE III where a large number of current task orders will continue as or transition to sustainment efforts under ENCORE III. Does the Government maintain that sustainment efforts under ENCORE III cannot be supported without new restrictive degree/experience requirements with no relief offered by substitution or equivalency? | Yes, the government prepared the D&F required by FAR 39.104. Yes, establishing a high baseline for the minimum technical requirements under an LPTA source selection at the contract level reduces risk and increases the probability of receiving quality staffing plans proposed at the task orders level. | ||
| G | Attachment G2 | As noted in the previous Questions, related to the Labor Category Years Experience and Education - ENCORE III has the same basic set of labor categories as ENCORE II. ENCORE III has added education requirements to the labor categories without adding a “number of years’ experience” equivalency in lieu of a candidate having the required degree. This is contrary to commercial hiring practices and has the risk of creating unintended negative impact on ENCORE III. As a premier DoD IDIQ with a wide array of requirements, we respectfully request the Government reconsider based upon the following: 1)Substituting experience for degree is a commercially acceptable hiring practice and good for business. It allows companies the ability to make the best hiring decisions based upon many important factors, and provides maximum flexibility to ensure a diverse bench of employees with a broad range of technical skills. This benefits the government end-user customer in ensuring staffing on their programs is relevant and qualified. Most companies have guidelines for staffing positions when bidding on programs to ensure the requirements are met and follow substitution guidelines established for their organization. Recommend the following language be added to ENCORE III: For all labor categories, experience may be substituted for education and education for experience as shown in the table below. Experience, education, and description of duties for the service categories are provided as a guideline to the typical background for staff to be provided under individual orders. Each task order opportunity will have to be carefully reviewed to determine the best candidate available, while considering all aspects of the work requirements. Degree Degree & Experience Related Experience |
Substitution Substitution Associates 2 years 2 years Bachelors Associates + 2 years 4 years Masters Bachelors + 2 years 6 years Doctorate Masters + 4 years 10 years
2) ENCORE III needs this flexibility for their DoD customers. The inability to substitute experience for a degree will preclude many outstanding and well qualified military veterans the ability to utilize from using the skills they acquired while in service to become gainfully employed and deployed on programs under ENCORE III.
3)Many of the companies supporting ENCORE III are actively engaged in supporting and hiring military veterans. Some currently employed veterans would not qualify to perform the same work under ENCORE III as it is currently written. This substitution language is critical to ensure the success of the veteran hiring programs and to ensure the future success of ENCORE III for its DoD customers.
4) This has an adverse effect on Veteran Owned and Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses and on companies trying to meet their small business goals in these categories.
5) In addition, the education and experience requirements provided by the Government seem unduly restrictive for new college graduates. There are no appropriate entry level technical positions (Associate or Junior level) that could be filled by a new graduate holding any type of engineering, computer science or computer security degree because they have no years of experience in addition to the degree to qualify for hire on an ENCORE III task order. This seems counter-intuitive in today’s highly cost-competitive environment.
| The government considered the request however, the RFP will not be changed. Establishing a high baseline for the minimum technical requirements under an LPTA source selection at the contract level reduces risk and increases the probability of receiving quality staffing plans proposed at the task orders level. | |||||
| N/A | L | Attachment L4 | In the Pricing Spreadsheet Template, on all Labor Rate Build tabs, i.e. FIXED PRICE LABOR RATE BUILD (GOV SITE), FIXED PRICE LABOR RATE BUILD (CONT SITE), CR LABOR RATE BUILD (GOV SITE), and CR LABOR RATE BUILD (CONT SITE), is it acceptable that the various indirect elements entered in cells Hn, In, Jn, Kn, etc. be calculated on a cumulative basis (e.g., Direct Labor * overhead (H4) entered into cell Hn: Direct labor + Overhead( Hn)* fringe (I4) entered into cell In; Direct labor+overhead +fringe* G&A (J4) entered into cell Jn, etc.). This would be reflective of the methodology used in establishing our approved DCAA rates. | Offerors are instructed to propose in accordance with their accounting practices. The Labor Rate Build tabs are not locked to allow offerors edit and add as many columns and rows needed to show the detail of the build up to their proposed rate. | |
| N/A | L | Attachment L4 | In the Pricing Spreadsheet Template, on all Labor Rate Build tabs, i.e. FIXED PRICE LABOR RATE BUILD (GOV SITE), FIXED PRICE LABOR RATE BUILD (CONT SITE), CR LABOR RATE BUILD (GOV SITE), and CR LABOR RATE BUILD (CONT SITE), there is an error in the formulas for cells H11 through M11. Please provide a corrected template. | The Labor Rate Build tabs are not locked to allow offerors edit and add as many columns and rows needed to show the detail of the build up to their proposed rate. | |
| 26 | 1.6.2.2.a | Cost/Price Proposal - PWS paragraph states, "To enable the Government to evaluate pricing information as Factor 3 for the solicitation, the Government has provided a Picing Spreadsheet Template entitled ENCORE III Pricing Template (Attachment L4 to this solicitation) that the offerors are to utilize in pricing their proposal. Most of the cells within the "Indirect Cost", "FP Labor Rate", and "CR Labor Rate" categories columns do not have forumlas (e.g., J10), while some do have formulas that point to empty cells (e.g. J11). | |||
| Will the Government be issuing an amendment providing an updated Pricing Template with pre-populated formulas, or are the contractors required and/or allowed to make corrections and submit the form? | The Labor Rate Build tabs are not locked to allow offerors edit and add as many columns and rows needed to show the detail of the build up to their proposed rate. | ||||
| Am5 Section L, Attachment L2 | Past Performance Information Sheets | Item C.5 | Will the Government please provide verification that C.5 Initial Contract Cost/Price represents the initial total contract life cycle cost at award? | ||
| No, the Initial Contract Cost/Price represents the initial total contract amount that was awarded without options or modifications increasing the level of effort. It's usually displayed on the cover page to the original contract or task order. | |||||
| Am5 Section L, Attachment L2 | Past Performance Information Sheets | Item C.6 | Will the Government please provide verification that: C.6 Current Contract Cost/Price represents total dollars obligated to date? | No, the Current Contract Cost/Price represents the current total contract amount including exercised options. In most contracts there is a statement in the modification showing what the contract was increased From and To. | |
| Am5 Section L, Attachment L2 | Past Performance Information Sheets | Item C.7 | Will the Government please provide verification that C.7 Total Contract Life Cycle Cost represents the total value if all options are exercised? | ||
| Confirmed | |||||
| Am5 Section L, Attachment L2 | Past Performance Information Sheets | Items C.8 | C.8. If Amounts for 5 and 6 above are different, provide a brief description of the reason. | ||
| Should this read "If amounts for 5 and 7 above are different, provide a brief description of the reason?" | See answers to C5, C6, and C7 above. | ||||
| 24 | L4.1 | One Experience Reference per subfactor - The updated Technical Volume instructions include the clarification that “A single task order represents one experience reference. Combining multiple references within a subfactor to satisfy the requirement will result in a finding of technical unacceptability.”. Does the Government consider a single award IDIQ contract to fall withn this definition or just multiple award IDIQs? | |||
| There is no distinction between basic contracts. In all cases, a single task order represents one experience reference. Combining multiple references within a subfactor to satisfy the requirement will result in a finding of technical unacceptability. | |||||
| 16 | L2.0 | L2.0, GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS, states in part, “No subcontractor, affiliate, or subsidiary experience or past performance will be recognized.” Please confirm the term “affiliate” does not include an offeror’s parent organization and that government will take into account the past performance of a parent organization in the evaluation of offers for the base IDIQ award and subsequent Task Orders. | See amendment 0006, Sections L7.7 and M4.1 | ||
| N/A | FP and CR Labor Rate Build tabs | Section L Attachment 4 Encore Pricing Template | Please confirm that Columns H4 - M4 is intended for the indirect rates % (e.g. Fringe, O&H, and G&A). | Yes, however offerors can add as many columns as necessary to show the detail of the build up of their proposed rates. | |
| N/A | CR Labor Build tabs | Section L Attachment 4 Encore Pricing Template | Please confirm that the CR build up should include % associated with profit. Or should the Fixed Fee % be used in place of Profit % for CR build ups? | As stated in L6.2.2.b. and L6.2.2.f. the CR Labor Rate Build tab shall include fixed fee of 5.5% for all CR labor rates for evaluation purposes only. No other profit/fee shall be included for CR labor rates. | |
| N/A | Total Proposed Price, Base Year through 6 Month Extension | Section L Attachment 4 Encore Pricing Template | Please confirm that these tabs are intended for Task Order cost | The offeror does not complete the Total Proposed Price, Base Years 1-5, Option Years 1-5, or 6 Month Ext tabs. These tabs are protected by the Government and will be automatically populated when the Cost/Price team applies the Government estimated hours to the offeror rates included in the FP Labor Rate and CR Labor Rate tabs. | |
| N/A | Total Proposed Price, Base Year through 6 Month Extension | Section L Attachment 4 Encore Pricing Template | Please confirm that these tabs are NOT APLLICABLE for ENCORE III Small Business set-aside. | The tabs for Total Proposed Price, Base Years 1-5, Option Years 1-5, and 6 Month Ext are applicable for both the Small Business and Full and Open Suites. The offeror does not complete the these tabs. These tabs are protected by the Government and will be automatically populated when the Cost/Price team applies the Government estimated hours to the offeror rates included in the FP Labor Rate and CR Labor Rate tabs. | |
| 140 | L7.7 | Will the government please confirm that it is acceptable for an offeror to submit a proposal separately as a Prime and as member of a Joint Venture since each will have a distinct CAGE Code? Language in Section L2.0 appears to allow for separate submission - "For the purpose of this solicitation, an offeror is defined as a prime contractor or Joint Venture Teaming Arrangement. No subcontractor, affiliate, or subsidiary experience or past performance will be recognized. Each offeror, identified by a distinct CAGE code, may submit only one proposal against a suite of contracts subject to the restrictions of section L2.3(f)". |
However, language in L7.7 appears to consider each member of a JV as the Prime - "Contractor Team Arrangements (“CTA”), as defined in FAR 9.601(1), may submit a proposal in response to this RFP. While the CTA is its own unique entity distinct from the member companies, for the purpose of evaluation, each member of the CTA is considered the prime offeror."
| Please clarify. | Each offeror with a distinct cage code may submit a proposal. L7.7 is intended to recognize individual CTA members experience and past performance as being from the CTA itself. | |||
| 143 of 149 | L.7.7, M3.1 | N/A | Section M3.1 states, "For this evaluation factor, the offeror may use its own experience or the experience of the joint venture partners, as described in Section L.7.7 to satisfy each subfactor listed below. Each offeror may use only a maximum total of four (4) separate experiences to satisfy the Subfactors within this Technical/Management Evaluation Factor. Proposals worded as a future technical approach without having already performed the describe experience will be found technically unacceptable." |
In reference to the Section M paragraph, M3.1 above, would the government provide clarification on how the vendor should annotate previous performance? If an offeror provides information at the start of the scenario about task performance and methodology execution, is it required to qualify each aspect of performance area scenario satisfaction with a statement such as; “as previously identified on project X, we will…” to meet the acceptable standards of this statement?
| In other words, how should offerors describe their approach to the performance area scenario (which is specific) if they are only permitted to discuss past performance? | Offerors experience and past performance must have actually been performed. Proposals must be expressed in the past tense describing what the offeror actually did that responds to the Problem Statement and Subfactors. The experience may provide for learning opportunities achieved as long as it is expressed in terms of an actual PAST experience. | ||||
| 1 | SF 33 | Item 9 | The ENCORE III solicitation was released originally on March 2, 2016 with final proposals ultimately due by April 25, 2016, a period of 54 days. The re-opened ENCORE III solicitation was released on September 7, 2016 and is currently due on October 21, 2016, a period of 44 days. In consideration of Fair Opportunity to all new offerors submitting a proposal under the re-opened solicitation, will the Government please consider extending the due date by two weeks to Friday, November 4, 2016? | No, it was at the offerors election to enter the process late. 44 days is more than adequate time to respond to an RFP much less this amendment. | |
| N/A | L5.1.2 | N/A | Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ): Our Government customer does not feel comfortable in responding to PPQ. Would government please accept CPARS in lieu of PPQs please. | The offerors proposal will not be negatively impacted by the government POC not responding to a PPQ. However, the POC information required by the "List of Past Performance Questionnaires sent to customers" in Vol III must still be submitted. The government will attempt to make its own contact. | |
| 126 | L2.10 Proposal Submission | Offerors are strongly encouraged to register a minimum of two weeks prior to uploading a proposal. | Since we observe a potential delay in getting ECA from the approved ECA Vendor. Though we prepared our proposal, we are unable to register on DITCO due to the delay in obtaining our ECA. We are suggested that we may receive our ECA mid of next week. Though we get it earlier, the clause to get registered two weeks prior would resist our proposal submission. We are afraid of loosing this potential business opportunity to work with DITCO. We request you for extending date to accept proposals atleast for another 2-3 weeks. | The process for obtaining an External Certification Authority has been published since August 02, 2016. Although we recommend offerors register at least two weeks in advance it is not mandatory. However, a late proposal due to untimely registration will still be late. The RFP will not be extended any further. | |
| 137 | L6.2.2.k | Please verify if the offereor is required to submit a compensation plan in the pricing volume? If so, is it to be included in the pricing narrative? | Offerors are not required to submit a compensation plan. | ||
| N/A | M | M2.1 | In Amendment 7 the following sentence was struck out "Proposals worded as a future technical approach without having already performed the described experience will be found technically unacceptable." This same statement was deleted from the F&O pool and neither change was referenced in the list of Amendment 7 modifications in the SF30 synopsis. Are we to understand the offeror can propose a future technical approach without having already performed the described experience? | No, The RFP is very clear about the treatment of experience being the same as past performance. Following are several references form the RFP that reinforce this point. |
L2.0 - The technical/management proposals will be evaluated based on the offeror's experience. This means all proposal responses to the technical/management subfactors in section M must be based on the offerors actual past experiences (previous performances).
L2.5.1, Table - The Past Experience Information Sheet is part of the Technical/Management Approach Volume.
L4.1 - Past experience is used for the basis of all subfactors. AND, The same past experience reference may be used to satisfy more than one technical subfactor.
L5.1.1.1 - The same experience references used to determine technical acceptability in response to the Technical/Management Evaluation Factor found at M2 or M3, as applicable, shall be included in the offeror's response to the Past Performance Evaluation Factor, found at M4.
The definition of Relevant Experience (M2.1 and M3.1) - Relevant experience means providing evidence demonstrating EXPERIENCE WITH PAST contracts in:
| 36 | C4.13/C4.13.6 | The PWS references different types of testing as part of the cyber security process. The PWS references "testing including security test and engineering and modified developmental testing". We are not aware of 'Modified developmental testing' (MDT) in the context of cyber security. | Modified developmental testing is innovative testing that is tailored from classical developmental testing approaches in order to better support agile acquisition of products and services - continuing to achieve developmental testing goals and mitigating risk despite shortened developmental timelines and rapidly evolving technologies, capabilities, and threats. Requirements may be more specifically defined at the task order level." |
| 10 | L2.10.i | If we already submitted a proposal for the reopened solicitation (after Amendment 05) but now have changes (before the proposal due date) should we have the older proposal deleted? | Yes, RFP Section L2.10.i provides offerors instructions on how a duplicate or obsolete proposal should be deleted by calling the DITCO Technical Support Help desk at 618-229-9333. There should only be one proposal per offeror at the time the solicitation closes on October 21, 2016 at 11:59 a.m. (central time). |
| On 9/24/16 XXXX submitted/uploaded our proposal response to the DISA Contract Support System as directed per the RFP. Amendment 7, released this week, has no effect upon our original proposal submission. Would our submission be considered compliant if we simply uploaded a signed copy of Amendment 7 as a stand-alone document leaving our original submission as is, or do we need to upload a completely revised proposal that incorporates amendment 7 into the document? Please advise. | A new complete revised proposal will need to be uploaded. See RFP Section L2.10.i on how to delete your obsolete proposal. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .