HHPC2 Industry Day Q and A.pdf

Answers to Questions Human Health and Performance Contract 2 (HHPC2)

1. Question: Please advise if NASA will share any changes to the Evaluation Criteria prior to Draft RFP release.

Answer: The HHPC2 procurement strategy has not been approved and the evaluation criteria will not be released prior to the Draft Request for Proposal (DRFP).

2. Question: To what extent does the HHPC collaborate and work with NIH? If extensively, which Institutes and how are those partnerships set up (grants, MoUs, OTAs, etc.)?

Answer As specific collaborative projects are formulated, there is a possibility that NASA might utilize HHPC2 skills and capabilities to implement the projects. Currently, NASA’s Office of the Chief Scientist along with the Science Mission Directorate, the Space Operations Mission Directorate and the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer has a collaborative agreement with the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The coordination is through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between NASA and the NIH. The MoU also has participation from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCAT). Other efforts include an MoU with NIH Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW) for animal welfare with the NASA Veterinary Medical Officer. The Human Research Program coordinates with different parties at the National Institutes of Health.

3. Question: What Work Control system is the Government currently using?

Answer: JSC currently uses the Electronic Document System, which is a custom database solution that tracks all work authorizations for spaceflight hardware, software, firmware, and relevant testing facilities.

4. Question: When will the DRD's be available for HHPC II offerors?

Answer: The Data Requirements Deliverables (DRDs) will be released at issuance of the DRFP.

5. Question: Will the offerors be allowed to provide onsite and offsite pricing?

Answer: The HHPC2 procurement strategy has not been approved and the official evaluation criteria will be included in the DRFP.

6. Question: Is there an expectation to have any contract performed offsite at contractor owned Facilities?

Answer: The Government cannot advise industry on how to accomplish the HHPC2 Draft Statement of Work (DSOW) requirements. Onsite and offsite performance expectations will be included in the future HHPC2 task orders.

7. Question: Please provide government furnished equipment listing to contractors.

Answer: A listing of Government Furnished Property (GFP) will be included in the DRFP.

8. Question: Will the contractor be required to perform calibrations for HHPC equipment?

Answer: HHPC uses the JSC Measurement Standards and Calibration Laboratory (MSCL) which is on a different contract for many types of equipment. Other instrumentation is either calibrated in place by HHPC staff or by vendors.

9. Question: Are there represented staff on this contract? If so, what union? Please provide copies of the current agreements.

Answer: The Human Health and Performance Contract (HHPC) employees are not represented by a union.

10. Question: Section 3 states that “Some facilities are owned by the HHPD while others are owned outside of HHPD”. Can the Government please clarify who owns the facilities outside of HHPD? Are they NASA owned or private ownership? Will there be any difference in Contractor responsibilities for facilities owned by HHPD vs those outside of HHPD?

Answer: All HHPD labs and facilities listed in Table 1 in the DSOW Section 3.1.1 are Government owned, except for the Conroe Sample Archive, which is leased by the incumbent contractor. “Ownership” of a facility indicates a facility in which HHPD is the primary or only tenant. Additional Contractor responsibilities for HHPD labs and facilities are identified in the requirements in the DSOW Section 3.1.2 Facility Equipment and Maintenance and Section 3.1.3 Facility Modifications. These requirements and responsibilities may be further clarified in the DRFP. The non-HHPD facilities discussed in the DSOW Section 3.2 are primarily Government owned. Currently, many of these Government facilities are owned by NASA, but in some cases, they are owned by other Federal Agencies or by state institutions.

11. Question: Can the Government please clarify what percentage of the current HHPC scope transitions to HHPC2 and what percentage is expected to be new scope?

Answer: The entire scope of work (100 percent) on HHPC is included in the scope of work for HHPC2.

Government cannot project future Task Order requirements and therefore will be unable to provide a percentage of new work.

12. Question: The scope of HHPC2 is very broad. To get the best benefit from competition and in order to avoid a single vendor lock in (especially if the period of performance is 10 years) would the Government consider multi-award (at least two) for HHPC2 and compete the task orders between the contract winners?

Answer: The Government is taking into consideration various contract types, however, please note that a procurement strategy has not been approved.

13. Question: Would the government consider changing NAICS to 541990 encompassing All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services?

Answer: NAICS code 541990 is not being considered because it excludes establishments engaged in scope of work for services such as engineering, and related services; scientific research and development services; and veterinary services. These services, which are excluded in NAICS code 541990, are significant portions of the HHPC2 DSOW. Additionally, 541712, which was the 2012 NAICS code used for the current contract, no longer exists, and was replaced with 541715.

14. Question: Is the government contemplating a shift from single award to multiple awards with the objective of fostering competition, potentially reducing prices, enhancing quality, shortening the duration from requirement identification to award, and potentially improving overall performance through access to a broader knowledge/capability pool? Is the government open to considering this opportunity as a small business set-aside?

Answer: The Government is taking into consideration various contract types, however, please note that a procurement strategy has not been approved. The Government is researching the market for capabilities and interest from all business type.

15. Question: Will a roster of industry day attendees be disclosed?

Answer: A listing of attendees/participants will not be released, however, there is a listing of HHPC2 interested parties that will be posted to sam.gov and the HHPC2 website.

16. Question: Will you consider a Period of Performance (POP) longer than 5 years for HHPC2? We recommend 10 years?

Answer: A procurement strategy has not been approved, but the Government is considering a POP longer than 5 years.

17. Question: Will the Government please confirm if the change to a 5-year period of performance for HHPC2 has been finalized? If so, what were the primary reasons for shortening the period of performance?

Answer: See response #16.

18. Question: Given the Government has separated the scope into 7 sections from 4, is there consideration to separate HHPC2 into more than one contract?

Answer: The Government is not considering separating the scope of work in the HHPC2 DSOW into more than one contract.

19. Question: With workforce challenges, breaking up this monolithic contract makes even more sense. Is this one of the options still on the table?

Answer: See response #12 and #18.

20. Question: Do you anticipate the next contract being Single Award or Multiple Award?

Answer: See response #12.

21. Question: Does the Government intend on putting HHPC2 as a Single Award?

22. Question: Will remote staffing be indicated as an option in the RFP?

Answer: Remote staffing narrative is currently included in the HHPC2 DSOW, however, the HHPC2 procurement strategy has not been approved. The DRFP will be posted for industry comment prior to posting of the RFP.

23. Question: Will the government consider changing the acquisition from full and open to a small business?

Answer: See response #14.

24. Question: If MAIDIQ, will the government issue a 5-yr or 10-yr contract (i.e., 3-yr with 7/1-yr options; 5-yr with 5/1-yr options)?

25. Question: If MAIDIQ, will the government make award off the initial proposal to qualified firms in functional areas and then recompete the subsequent task orders later?

26. Question: Will a list of industry day participants be released?

Answer: See response #15.

27. Question: Can NASA clarify the organization chart shared on Slide 44 of the Industry Day slide deck (‘Draft Statement of Work (SOW) Structure: Section Relationships’). It was explained verbally at Industry Day- but it is still very confusing. Would NASA share a written explanation of the roles, responsibilities, and relationships associated with the graphic on Slide 44 - ‘Draft Statement of Work (SOW) Structure:

Section Relationships’ - of the Industry Day presentation?

Answer: The Government would like to clarify that Slide 44 does not reflect the Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD) organizational structure, but rather it depicts the Draft Statement of Work (DSOW) structure and relationships among its sections.

Background/ Rationale for this Structure: Given the growing number of programs, commercial providers, and partners, increasing demand for a greater volume and diversity of Human Health and Performance (HH&P) products and services, and challenges with workforce hiring and retention (e.g., highly specialized skillset, civil servant hiring constraints, competitive hiring environment) as well as workforce management with retiring and evolving programs, the Government determined the need for highlighting the key support areas for HHPC2. Therefore, each DSOW section covers critical/key areas that will aid the Government to effectively address these challenges.

Relationships between the DSOW sections:

All the sections support HHPD and the Human Research Program (HRP) except Section 7.

Section 1 includes content to manage/oversee the activities in all the other sections (Sections 2-

7) at the contract level.

Section 2 focuses primarily on the occupational health services, and health and medical care performed in a terrestrial environment. The occupational health services include the Employee Assistance Program (EAP), Electronic Health Record System (EHRS), Fitness, Food Safety, Health Physics, Health Promotion, Industrial Hygiene, Wellness, and Occupational Health Medicine (includes Clinics).

Section 3 provides facilities/laboratories, and Section 4 provides unique specialties/capabilities, i.e., science and engineering expertise across HHPD and HRP to support all the activities under Sections 2-7.

Section 5 provides core functions in support of programs and mission operations. In addition to HHPD, these requirements support the Crew and Thermal Systems Division; Software, Robotics and Simulation Division; Project Management and Systems Engineering Division under the Engineering Directorate; and the Exploration Development Integration Division under the Exploration Architecture, Integration, and Science Directorate.

Section 6 provides directorate level core functions including support for the Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA), the Human Research Program (HRP), Human Risk Management, Knowledge Capture and Dissemination, Information Systems, Education and Development, Government Task Agreements and Collaborations, and Crew Health and Safety.

Section 7 provides “direct” (not through HHPD) support to external NASA organizations such as the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and International Space Station Research Integration.

28. Question: We understand that NASA wants to ensure a fair playing field for all bidders. However, it must be noted that the incumbent has an advantage for the management and cost volumes since it has by definition the full WBS data down to head count in every function down to the individual role across all SOW and Task functions. This data enables the incumbent to be able to prepare a very accurate staffing plan, including cost data to a fidelity that is not available to other bidders. The NASA Guide on OCI (March 2010) references “unequal access to information” as an OCI in FAR 9.504-4 regarding obtaining access to proprietary information. The guide cites the test for determining whether data confers an unfair competitive advantage requiring resolutions is: 1) Whether the information was unavailable to potential offerors; 2) Whether the nonpublic information would have been useful in responding to a solicitation; and 3) Whether the contractor would be afforded an unfair competitive advantage by having access to the nonpublic information. For the purposes of HHPC2, will NASA provide to all potential bidders the full WBS information and staffing levels on the current contract and tasks to ensure that there is no inherent OCI with the incumbent contractor and to improve the overall fidelity of all bidder’s management and cost volumes to the new contract bids?

Answer: The Government intends to provide the Government Resources Estimate (GRE) in the future.

Additionally, HHPC contract information may be requested through the FOIA office at NASA Headquarters via the following link: NASA HQ Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Homepage.

29. Question: Interactions with commercial space flight companies seems to be one of the main focuses of NASA in the coming years. We have found in our work with other government Agencies/Departments that the public-private partnership is often “defined” in these early years of relationships and then difficult to change once set, especially when large amounts of revenue are generated on the private side. Given this, is strategic consulting and implementation work in shaping this relationship over the coming years a potential part of this contract? If yes, within the HHPD organizational structure where would those types of work be issued?

Answer: The Government is not levying specific requirements in the early development phases but rather more of a partnership through both funded and unfunded Space Act Agreements (SAAs) thus allowing the relationship to evolve over the upcoming years. The goal is to avoid being overly prescriptive and instead foster industry innovation. Currently, the consulting is a level of effort and is anticipated to progress into an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) structure in about the 2026 timeframe. From an organizational perspective, this work is managed at the directorate level under the Program Health and Performance Office. Currently, the work requirements are defined in Sample Task Order 2.1.1 and DSOW Section 6.1. The consulting effort may expand over time and involve the various human systems teams as needed.

30. Question: Medical ontologies and controlled vocabularies for terrestrial medicine have been transformative to the clinical research world, allowing people from diverse fields and expertise to use the same words to mean the same things without having to argue/discuss definitions. The field of ontology (and controlled vocabularies) has grown to become its own field in the terrestrial biomedical world that has enormous resources devoted to it. Is NASA fostering/developing/utilizing any biomedical space specific ontologies? If so, where are these maintained, and what integration (if any) with terrestrial medical ontologies does NASA support? If not, would this type of work be of interest to HHPC and within the HHPD organizational structure where would this type of work reside?

Answer: NASA uses biomedical ontologies and standardized vocabularies with modifications for medical clinics and spaceflight human research. The NASA Human Health and Performance Directorate Information Management Platform for anALysis and Aggregation (IMPALA) uses ontologies along with the support of other systems such as the Systemized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) International and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD 9 and 10). The biomedical ontology terms used by NASA are terrestrial medical ontologies. NASA customizes the ontologies for spaceflight as needed.

The Space Life Sciences Ontology was developed and is being maintained by the Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD), Human Research Program (HRP), NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP), Ames Research Center Code TI (ARC-TI) link to ontology:

http://obofoundry.org/ontology/slso.html

The Radiation Biology Ontology was developed and is being maintained by the Human Health and Performance Directorate (HHPD), Human Research Program (HRP), NASA Open Science Data Repository and is maintained by Ames Research Center Codes SC and TI (ARC-SC/TI) link to ontology: https://bioportal.bioontology.org/ontologies/RBO

31. Question: Can the Government define major subcontractor?

Answer: At this time, the major subcontractor value for HHPC2 is not available but will be identified in the DRFP. As a point of reference, a major subcontractor on HHPC is a subcontractor awarded a subcontract at $20 million.

32. Question: Is there contractor owned critical equipment? If so, please provide list.

Answer: The Government does not have insight into contractor-owned equipment. From the Government perspective, critical equipment is Government-owned. The Government will provide a list of Government Furnished Property (GFP).

33. Question: Can the Government please provide incumbent FTE count on HHPC?

Answer: The Government is unable to provide details of the incumbent FTE (or Work Year Equivalent) because it is business sensitive information. However, the Government intends to provide the Government Resources Estimate (GRE) in the future.

34. Question: What small business goals/sub-goals are anticipated for HHPC2?

Answer: The HHPC2 procurement strategy has not been approved, however, if there are any small business subcontracting goals it will be made available in the future.

35. Question: What are the actual contracted small business percentages on HHPC currently?

Answer: The HHPC small business percentage goals may be requested through the FOIA office at NASA Headquarters via the following link: NASA HQ Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Homepage.

36. Question: When will NASA release the Small Business Requirements for HHPC2?

Answer: See response #34.

37. Question: In workforce transition, do you see a need to add/up-skill the workforce to keep pace with commercial industry?

Answer: This is an evolving area of the HHPC2 DSOW, and the Government cannot advise industry on how to accomplish the HHPC2 DSOW requirements.

38. Question: In the introduction, it was mentioned that HHPC needs to move at the speed of commercial, is HHPD intending to become the leader for commercial Human Health and Performance or more of a collaborator?

Answer: The HHPD has been a leader in Human Health and Performance in promoting and protecting the health and performance capabilities of astronauts living and working in diverse spaceflight environments to accomplish NASA mission objectives. Currently, the HHPD is sharing subject matter expertise and other capabilities with NASA’s commercial partners through various types of agreements and collaborations, such as Government Task Agreements and Government Collaboration Agreements.

Reference the DSOW Section 6.7. Examples of this work may be found in sample Task Order 2.1.5 in the HHPC2 Technical Library.

39. Question: How do you see the percentage of the workforce focused on LEO vs. deep space changing over the next 5 years?

Answer: The Government cannot project future Task Order requirements and therefore will be unable to provide a percentage of workforce focused on LEO vs. deep space over the next five years.

40. Question: Will the four [five] videos be available in the technical library?

Answer: The five virtual facility tour videos, which were presented at the HHPC2 Industry Day, will be provided in the HHPC2 Technical Library.

41. Question: Will the government entertain using a contractor self-scoring matrix that would be validated by the government to create a point driven threshold for award eligibility?

Answer: The Government will not entertain a contractor self-scoring matrix.

42. Question: What are the Government’s thoughts on AI for HHPC2?

Answer: The NASA Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) is currently in the process of developing a policy on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI).