Amenment__4-Questions Answers.pdf

Questions for Clarification For: RFP: HHS‐NIH‐NHLBI‐CSB‐RG‐16‐002‐JF

Administrative and Technology Support Services for the NIH Peer Review Program

AMENDMENT #4 TO THE RFP

1. What is the current breakdown (number) of each contractor staff type assigned to each office (Professional, Professional Support, Administrative Support)?

Response: See Amendment #1 to RFP; Questions 4 and 6. – Offerors shall propose their best strategy solutions in response to the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work. Offerors shall identify labor categories that reflect the best strategy solutions described in their technical proposals.

2. How many total Review Meetings are anticipated for each year?

Response: The number of Review Meetings is dependent on the number of grants applications received. For costing purposes, the Government anticipates approximately 1,542 Review Meetings per year.

3. How many total Video Assisted Meetings are anticipated for each year?

Response: The Government anticipates approximately 80 Video Assisted Meeting per year.

4. How many total conference rooms does CSR have?

Response: CSR has 13 conference rooms.

5. Is the contractor responsible for the maintenance or purchase of any of the technology or equipment required for CSR meeting rooms?

Response: No, the contractor is not responsible for the maintenance or purchase of any of the technology or equipment required for CSR meeting rooms.

6. What is the approximate volume of calls received by DRR DMA?

Response: For costing purposes, the approximate volume of calls received by DRR DMA is 50 per day.

7. What is the approximate volume of emails received by DRR DMA?

Response: For costing purposes, the approximate volume of emails received by DRR DMA is 50 per day.

8. Reference RFP Section L.2.a.6, Page and Formatting Limitations. The last sentence of the first paragraph states, “Past performance information shall be included as an appendix to the technical proposal.” The second sentence of the second paragraph states, “Appendices shall not exceed a total of 10 single-sided pages or 5 double-sided pages.” Similarly, the government’s response for Amendment No. 2, Question No. 10 states, “The Government will accept as part of the Technical Proposal a list of contracts as an addendum.” However, the RFP does not specify whether proposal appendices and addenda are included in the overall 50-page limit for the Technical Proposal volume.

Please confirm that proposal appendices and addenda are exempt from the 50-page limit for the Technical Proposal volume.

Response: Appendices and addenda are exempt from the 50-page count limit for the Technical Proposal volume. See Amendment #3 – Page and Formatting Limitations, to the RFP, posted in FedBizOpps.

9. RFP Section A.8 states, “Proposals shall be submitted electronically to the Contract Specialist/Contracting Officer.” RFP p. 4, Notice to Offerors states, “Submit proposal electronically to the Contracting Officer listed.” Additionally, Attachment 1, Packaging and Delivery of Proposals states, “Please read the following information carefully: Please submit the Technical and Business Proposals electronically to Nora I. Rivera at riverani@nhlbi.nih.gov.” Attachment 1 also states that the Technical Proposal and Business Proposal volumes are to be submitted in hard copy (1 original and 3 copies).

Please confirm that both the Technical and Business Proposal volumes should be submitted electronically to Ms. Rivera.

Response: The Technical and Business proposals are to be submitted to Ms. Rivera electronically at riverani@nhlbi.nih.gov. No hard copies are required.

10. The government has provided two attachments – Attachment 6, Technical Proposal Cost Summary, and Attachment 10, Breakdown Estimated Costs – for providing cost data. However, neither of these attachments are listed in RFP Sections L or M. As such, it is unclear where these attachments should be included in the organization of the Business Proposal volume.

Please clarify where Attachment Nos. 6 and 10 should be included in the Business Proposal volume.

Response: Attachment #6, Technical Proposal Cost Summary shall be included with the TECHNICAL proposal. Attachment #10, Breakdown Estimated Costs, shall be included with the BUSINESS proposal.

11. Amendment #2 gave a contractor staff estimate of 55, but the previous Q&A, Amendment #1, gave an estimate of 50 contactor staff.

Please clarify how many contractor staff the government estimates are required for this effort.

Response: The amount of effort and number of employees required to fulfill the requirement is highly dependent on the number of grant applications received. You will find an Estimate of Effort on page 43, item f. of the RFP. For bidding purposes only, the Government estimates that approximately 55 contractor staff may be required for this effort. Offerors shall propose their best strategy solutions in response to the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work. Offerors shall identify labor categories that reflect the best strategy solutions described in their technical proposals.”

The number did change from 50 to 55. Again, this is only an approximation.

12. The RFP gives conflicting information regarding the type of contract. Article B.2 specifies and Time and Materials contract while Article B.3 part b. and c. imply a fixed price contract.

Please confirm that the contract will be awarded as time and materials.

Response: The Government anticipates a Time and Materials type contract. The Government anticipates some fixed elements (e.g. fixed hourly rates).

13. Attachment 8 (HHS Section 508 Product Assessment Template) was not included in the RFP package. Is the offeror to submit a completed template with their proposals?

Response: The Government provided the link next to the template. Offerors shall access the template via the link provided. Offeror’s are expected to submit a completed template with their link.

14. Please specify the place of performance for this contract and the breakdown of on-site vs. off-site staff if applicable.

Response: The Government anticipates all work being performed on-site.

15. The RFP states: “The business proposal must contain sufficient information to allow the Government to perform a basic analysis of the proposed cost or price of the work. This information shall include the amounts of the basic elements of the proposed cost or price. These elements will include, as applicable, direct labor, fringe benefits, travel, materials, subcontracts, purchased parts, shipping, indirect costs and rate, fee, and profit.”

Should the offeror include an Excel workbook with their offer, based off Attachment 10, and as a separate file?

Response: Yes, offerors shall utilize the Excel workbook provided as a separate file.

16. Amendment #2 requests offerors place the “Qualifications of the Offeror” section in the technical proposal instead of the business proposal. May offerors place the response to this section in the technical proposal appendix since the content mostly relates to past performance?

Response: Yes, see Amendment #3 – Page and Formatting Limitations, to the RFP, posted in FedBizOpps.

17. The RFP asks for offerors to include a list of “Pertinent Contracts” on page 66, and on page 69 under “Criterion 3: Past Performance” asks for a list of past performance references. Please specify whether the list of references should be included in the appendix along with the list of pertinent contracts, and if this should include references of proposed subcontractors.

Response: Yes. See Amendment #3 – Page and Formatting Limitations.

18. The RFP states: “… and include such items as a transition plan, contractor's monitoring plan, and customer-service levels.” Please specify under which subheading of the proposal Technical Discussion (i.e., Objectives, Approach, Methods, Schedule, Personnel), if any, the offer should place their contractor’s monitoring plan, information on customer-service levels, and their transition plan, or if this information can be instead included in the appendix.

Response: See Amendment #3 – Page and Formatting Limitations, posted in FedBizOpps.

19. Page 49 specifies the offeror is to submit past performance information as part of their technical proposal, and lists eight informational items the offeror is to provide for each contract. Page 66 asks for a list of pertinent contracts and gives seven (different) informational items the offeror is to provide for each contract. Please clarify what past performance information the government is expecting to see in an offeror’s proposal, and how the listing of contracts relates to the past performance references requested on page 69.

Response: Item 15 on page 49 refers to the Past Performance. Item 6.d. refers to the Qualifications of the Offeror. As stated on page 69 (Technical Evaluation Factors for Award) of the RFP, The Government will assess the relative risks associated with each Offeror. Performance risks are those associated with an Offeror's likelihood of success in performing the acquisition requirements as indicated by that Offeror's record of past performance.

The Government will consider the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in the Offeror's performance.

Offerors are asked to provide the information from page 49 entitled Past Performance as well as information included on page 66 regarding pertinent contacts as part of their technical proposal.

Offerors need not restate the same information for pertinent contracts if it is redundant. Offerors are asked that all of the information from both of these areas be addressed as part of the technical proposal. This may be addressed either directly in the 50 page limit or separately as part of the appendix. See Amendment #3, Page and Formatting Limitations.

20. The RFP states: “Discuss unacceptable levels of staffing and performance, and which negative incentives, such as penalties for poor performance, would be implemented.”

Please clarify whether the offeror should take “penalties for poor performance” to mean the penalties the offeror would impose on its employees for poor performance, or rather the penalties the offeror suggests the government impose on a contractor with poor performance on the contract.

Response: Yes, the Government confirms that “penalties for poor performance” means the penalties the Offeror would impose on its employees for poor performance.

21. The SOW asks for the contractor to propose a transition phase-in/phase-out plan with cost estimates. Please clarify whether the transition plan cost estimates should be included in the technical proposal or business proposal.

Response: The transition phase-in/phase-out plan costs estimates shall added to the total estimated costs and included in both the Technical and Business Proposal. See Attachments #6 and 10.

22. The RFP states: “Record and discuss specific factors not included elsewhere which support your proposal. Using specifically titled subparagraphs, items may include: … c. Equipment and unusual operating procedures established to protect personnel from hazards associated with this project; d.

Other factors you feel are important and support your proposed research.” Please confirm that since this is not a research requirement, these items are not needed in an offeror’s proposal.

Are there any ODCs associated with this contract?

Response: The Government does not anticipate Other Direct Costs.

23. Question 8 in Amendment #2 asked if resumes were required from only key personnel or for each proposed staff member, but no answer was given. Please advise on which resumes/how many resumes an offeror should include in its proposal (e.g., resumes for only key personnel, resumes for only those personnel explicitly named in the proposal, resumes for all 50+ contractor staff)

Response: Resumes/CVs/Biosketchs for all proposed personnel shall be included. For personnel not named, please make sure you include your strategy for filling these positions and a job description.

24. Since the Federal infrastructure systems and processes will be used to execute the tasks being outlined in the Statement of Work (SOW), please provide some guidance on the historical allocation of resources to the respective functional areas being highlighted in the SOW.

Response: The Government has provided as much relevant information in the Statement of Work and responses to questions from offerors under Amendments 1 through 4 to the RFP. Offerors shall propose their best strategy solutions in response to the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work. Offerors shall identify labor categories and propose labor distributions that reflect the best strategy solutions described in their technical proposals. An approximate distribution per area is provided below:

Area # of staff Division IRGs 26

DRR 6

DMS 5

OD 9

SREA 5

Total 51 with 4 additional placeholder positions for potential requirements

25. Please provide an estimate of the number of Review Groups/ Study Sections supported in the past 12 months.

Response: The estimated number of Review Groups/Study Sections supported in the past 12 months is as follows: Review Groups = 25; Study Sections = 173

26. Regarding the attachment entitled “Technical Proposal Cost Summary” (referenced on Page 46 of the RFP) that should be included as part of the Technical Proposal, please clarify if the “Year 1” column should reflect data for the 6-month initial performance period only, or for a complete year, i.e., base period of 6-months performance and one option performance period of 6 months?

Response: For the Technical Proposal Cost Summary, please provide total costs for each year (every 12 months of the 5-year period).

27. On page 43 of the RFP it states “….the Government considers the effort to be approximately 8,700 labor hours per month.” However, on page 44 the hours are listed total 53,181 which equates to approximately 8,863.5 hours monthly. Which set of hours are expected to be used for evaluation purposes?

Response: The Government provided estimates for information purposes only. The 8,863.5 hours is the highest level reached in one month. Offerors shall propose their best strategy solutions in response to the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work.

28. Regarding the “Total Compensation Plan” (referenced on page 63 of the RFP): You indicate that proposing total compensation less than currently being paid by the predecessor contractor may be considered a lack of sound management.

Please confirm that this is in reference to Non-SCA employees.

Response: Your compensation plan will not be criticized for lacking sounds management if it reflects a clear understanding of the requirements of the work to be accomplished and the suitability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and retain qualified personnel to meet mission objectives.

29. Since no information is being provided to potential bidders regarding the current labor categories, will consideration be given to the proposed mix and skill levels of personnel as proposed in comparison to the current employees?

Response: See Amendment #1 to RFP; Questions 4 and 6. – Offerors shall propose their best strategy solutions in response to the requirements set forth in the Statement of Work. Offerors shall identify labor categories that reflect the best strategy solutions described in their technical proposals.

30. Please confirm that there are no “Other Direct Costs (ODC’s)” (i.e. honorariums, travel reimbursements etc.) expected to be dispersed by the Contractor. If there are ODC expectations, please provide a basis for the same.

Response: Travel reimbursement for contractor’s staff that attend meetings outside of the local area, or perform other travel at the government’s request, will be reimbursed based on federal government travel reimbursement rates and federal government travel regulations.

31. Please clarify if Attachment 7 (Summary of Related Activities) Item c – is strictly referring to

“Key Personnel”.

Response: Attachment #7 is referring to proposed key personnel.