Attachment 5 - QnA_07-13-20.pdf

Question # Question Answer

Is the GPAT template requiring an assessment of my proposed product? If provisions in this template are not applicable to my product do I write on the attachment "not applicable"?

The GPAT is an accessibility form. Yes, if provisions are not applicable to your product, you may annotate not applicable.

I have a complete product and wanted to provide an example of what that product looked like. With the page restrictions is it allowed to include outside links to the product within the Technical Approach?

Yes, is it allowed to include outside links to the product within the Technical Approach.

For the syllabi requirement, we have developed syllabis but including those would exceed the page requirement for the PWS. Can a statement saying “Syllabis have been developed” be sufficient to meet this requirement? See revised Instructions to offerors - FAR 52.212-1.

Also, you may want to know on the solicitation it has your incorrect email. I’ve attached a screenshot, it says “jame” instead of “Jamie”

Typo has been corrected to reflect jamie.formosa@dodea.edu

RRQ Notice:

Can you explain why there was a change in NAICS code and increase in size standard? Also, please verify the correct NAICS code? Upon further market research it was determined the requirement be solicited under NAICS 611710.

Pricing Worksheet:

This section is to identify the labor categories needed in order to provide the services outlined in the PWS. The cost for the services should be embedded in the CLIN cost on the Pricing Worksheet:

Should the contractor complete tab 2 of the spreadsheet?

Please explain

Yes, contractor shall complete tab 2 on the pricing worksheet, Attachment 1. Tab 2 represents the total number of labor hours the vendor estimates it will be required to complete the corresponding CLINS/SubCLINS

Amendments 2, 3, and 4:

How are these amendments evaluated for pass/fail? Is this done before evaluation of the technical volume? If evaluated negatively, will the vendor the have opportunity to provide additional support to demonstrate compliance or will they be excluded from evaluation?

Attachments 2, 3, and 4 are excluded from evaluation.

Cloud Questionnaire, Attachment 4 has been revised.

See revised Instructions to offerors - FAR 52.212-1.

PWS 1.2.1 and 2.1.2.2, pages 48 & 50:

Customer is requesting two, three-hour modules as base, with the option for four, 2-6 hour modules later per 1.2.1. But in

2.1.2.2 there are six, three hour modules tasked to be delivered in 2021. How are these reconciled?

The table in 1.2.1 shows 6, three hour modules for the base year with 2-6 additional 3 hour modules for each subsequent option year. The table in 2.1.2.2 delineates the expected learning topics of each of these 6 modules for the base year and states that option year topics will be determined at a later date.

There is no difference to reconcile.

PWS:

Will ALL teachers take the same courses, or will customer want these tailored to the appropriate grade bands? EX: K-2 students will be taught completely differently than, say, 9-12 – shouldn’t the resources for the teachers be more age appropriate?

Same course for ALL with references to appropriate instructional strategies for each grade band.

Age appropriate resources should be included with the instructional strategies for each grade band.

PWS 2.1.1, pg 49:

When is the project plan due? See updated PWS Objective 1 table.

PWS pg. 49: Table 1, row 3 – “Contractor-developed arc of learning, including outlines for each learning event, outlines for each learning event, resources and material”.

Is this a typo? More clarification

Is there a government reference for "arc of learning"?

Yes, this is a typo. See revised PWS pg. 49, Table 1, row 3 and Technical Exhibit 4: Arc of Learning

HE125420Q0035- Digital Citizenship Professional Learning-Questions and Answers

PWS pg. 49, Table 1, row 4:

Why does the government specify UBD? Can other models be used?

Understanding by Design (UBD) has been adopted by DoDEA as the approved planning format for all learning and instruction.

No other model can be used.

PWS 2.1.2.2, pg. 50 – “Each module shall be of a modern design and enlist the help of a qualified instructional designer to consult in form and function of all learning presented and incorporate a variety of learner access points and engaging activities that incorporate online and offline exploration of content throughout each learning session. Each module shall not exceed time shown and include time for participants to experience the learning…”

Does the government expect the vendor to modify all modules per on-going feedback from the customer? If a COTS product is approved/desired all modifications will be restricted to the original format (i.e., design, instructional design, timing, etc.). Extra activites will require additional time from the student or original content reduced. Please explain.

No, modules are not expected to need further modification after initial review and approval by client.

PWS 2.1.2.2, pg. 50 - This statement ensures that all learning is professionally developed by qualified personnel and that all expected learning activities are to be included within the self-contained learning module (i.e. no pre-work or post-work expectations to satisfy the learning requirements.)

PWS 2.1.2.2, pg. 50 "qualified instructional designer":

What are the educational/certification requirements for instructional designer? See Technical Exhibit 4 for definition of "Qualified

Instructional Designer"

Can you share any budget information such as spending ceiling? No, the government can not disclosure this information.

Please share - if any - the number of in person training needed for this requirement?

No in person training required, it is entirely an asynchronous digital requirement.

Does the off the shelf digital modules an option/ can the contractor provide customized modules?

Off the shelf digital modules are not an option, see PWS subsection 2.1.2.1.

Does the requirement have any meetings to be in person or virtual? All meetings will be held virtual as stated in PWS section 2.1.4-Task 4, Meetings

Does the requirement have a need to provide any FedRamp cloud services?

See revised PWS Technical Exhibit 3

Does non-government contracting experience count towards past performance? Yes

Is the request for Professional Development program first, followed by a student program? Or is the RFP for Professional development only? The RFQ is for Professional development only.

Our current offering requires login credentials to access learning materials and our exams. In the RFP, it states that access to materials without a login, but also states later in the technical requirements that login information needs to be secured. Is it expected that users of this program will not require a login at all?

This requirement is for a fully integratable solution that will be accessed through our current Learning Management System (LMS) without additional login requirements.

Can you clarify what “offline content” means? For example, digital content that does not require internet access to use, or content that does not require a digital device to use, like a textbook? We provide both, but are in development for IC3 GS6 and am looking to see if we need to adjust priorities.

Offline content- non-digital resources to supplement learning.

Some of our customers require additional security protocols for Admin users of our programs. What additional protocols will DoDEA require?

All technical requirements are stated in PWS Technical Exhibit 3 - Technical Requirements.

Concerning the 3hr off-the-shelf modules listed in the statement of work. Are you expecting module for each grade, or only for the grade ranges listed in the Scope of Work section? (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12)

See answer to question #9

This requirement is not for a module for each grade.

We want to base our submission to the RFP on our new IC3 GS6 that we launched last week. We plan to release the remaining certification levels later on this year. Is the preference for the response to the RFP to be for a program that is already in place, or will you allow a proposal that includes future programs, as long as we can meet the deadlines outlined in the RFP request? See the answer to question #17

What is the specific FAR clause(s) that provides the value limits for this acquisition? See clause: - FAR 52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS

Attachment X-Q&A