Clover DraftRFP_Q-A_Rd1release_16FEB_LRr1approved.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 307 KB Posted
- Attached to
- EMERALD Follow-on: "CLOVER" update (FCL update)
- Solicitation number
- HM0476-20-R-0030-CNTD
View the file
Other files
Show all 24
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
CLOVER Q&As for Legal Rvw 1
| Q. # | Date Received | Company /POC | RFP Section | Category | Questions | Answer | Date Answered | Internal Comments | Answered by (Internal) | |
| 1 | 13-Jan | Metronome (Justin W. Miller) | NAICS | Has a decision been made as to which NAICS the CLOVER effort will fall under? Specifically, we have heard it may fall under the $16.5M threshold, but we are hoping it does not so we can prime this effort as WOSB. | The Government selection NAICS code 541611, for Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services. For companies unfamiliar with this code, see its description and examples on the NAICS website (https://www.naics.com/naics-code-description/?code=541611). | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 2 | Graham Technologies LLC (Paul Geraci) | OCI | Do you foresee OCI issues for DIA SITE III Prime contractors? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response _______. | Gary, please write response for this question. | |||||
| 3 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | Intent | Why reduce number of awardees? 550 FTEs across small businesses - you are keeping smaller companies out? | The Government did an analysis of the current requirement under Emerald, and an analysis of the market via RFI responses and market research. From these findings, four awardees was determined to be a right-size fit for vendors to have a fair opportunity to earn a fair chunk of the work to be contracted, vice winning into an awardee pool and not being competitive to hold more than one Task Order over the five-year vehicle. Bear in mind that the total number of FTEs for Clover is comparable to current staffing under Emerald. On Emerald, one vendor may have provided up to the higher range of approximately 120-250 FTEs across multiple awarded Task Orders, vice the current structure proposed for Clover, which seeks to reduce unnecessary administrative burden. The Government has heard industry concerns regarding the competitive pool for future Task Order awards, however, and plans to amend the Final RFP to allow up to five (5) awardees, or six (6) in the event of an exact tie for points evaluated at position five in the IDIQ competition. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 31 JAN. | Request review of my wording used at end of 2nd sentence. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 4 | Stellar Solutions (Walter Eilers) | Size | What is the $ cap for the Small Business Set Aside and why is this effort set at that cap? Have you thought about a company size cap in numbers vs. $ amount? | Per the latest Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to Northern American Industry Classification System Codes, released by the U.S. Small Business Administration in August 2019: the size standard for NAICS code 541611, Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, is $16.5M. There is no standard for this NAICS code that ties to number of employees of the proposing company. (https://www.naics.com/sba-size-standards/). | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 5 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | Intent | Is it NGA's intent to limit competition to only those companies that are already supporting NGA either as Prime or Subs? The award and evaluation criteria is written to discourage new contractors from bidding. | This is not the Government's intention. The competition is full and open within a 100% small business set-aside. This effort has therefore been deemed appropriate for performance by small businesses across the industry, and is offered to maximize business opportunities within the small business industry. A Sole Source procurement method would have indicated an interest to work only with the incumbent Prime contractors and their partners. The evaluation criteria captured in the RFP draft was intended to be inclusive of skill level expertise determinations made by offerors, and to provide for a unifying contract vehicle across a Level of Effort services requirement set (by nature, flexible and adaptive). However, criteria shown emphasize the importance of properly identifying the tasks and skillsets needed to fulfill Agency requirements, per past performance lessons learned. | Draft response (22 JAN) | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 6 | Intec LLC (Nate Copeland) | NAICS | What is the NAICS Small Business size for CLOVER? | See response to Question 4. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 7 | BDO Public Sector LLC (Fernando Hernandez) | Administrative | Can non-qualifying companies submit questions to the government? | Questions may be submitted from industry until 2 FEB 2021. Written questions will be released publicly on or around 9 FEB, with available answers. One-on-one meetings were offered at industry day during this period, but could only be requested by entities who intended to propose as Prime. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 8 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | Explaination | What is working and not working with the current six contractors? | This information is deemed proprietary to each performing company, and is not releasable to industry for the benefit of this competition. | 31-Jan | Ken Sachs review/rewrite | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 9 | Milton Grant | FCL | Will subcontractors be required to possess a FCL? | <https://www.state.gov/facility-security-clearances-faq/#Subcontracts> | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response _______. | To be determined with Brian and Gary | Gary Davis, CO | |||
| 10 | D2DInc (Molly Gimmel) | Evaluation | When you say that the prime has to demonstrate their ability to meet the entire scope, does that mean the prime specifically, or does that include subcontractors? | An offeror must show, through the submission of past performance and technical experience examples, that they are capable of meeting the entire scope of the IDIQ. An offeror is defined as: a Prime and Subcontractor team where a small business will perform greater than 50% of the work; a standalone small business with experience staffing similar Work Service Categories for similar size and complexity contracts; several Similarly Situated Entities capable of collectively performing greater than 50% of the work, and a subcontracor; a populated Joint Venture partnership, wherein a small business is the managing partner. Past performance may come from any entity helping to comprise the total offeror, as long as 2 or more submitted examples are sourced by the Prime, or managing partner. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 11 | unknown | JV | The SBA updated 13 CFR parts 121, 124, 125, 126, 127, and 134. Within § 121.103(h) if specifically clarifies that an SBA approved unpopulated Joint Venture (JV) does NOT need an FCL if both the Mentor and Protégé already possess the required FCL. Will [question incomplete] | The Government plans to clarify that Joint Ventures should be populated to offer, to meet the intent of the small business set aside and show that a small business will be able to team with other entities to successfully perform work of this size and complexity. Otherwise, the SBA updates would/will apply. | 31-Jan | verify response with Brian and Gary | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 12 | AIS (Todd Jackson) | OCI | Will NGA define/list specific Contracts/Task Orders where the NGA/GOV has made an OCI determination? If so, when can we expect this information? This is important information for us as we want to ensure we capture OCI specs in effort to mitigate. | NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to question 13. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 31 JAN. | Gary Davis, CO; Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 13 | EdgeWorks Inc (Michael Farley) | OCI | Can NGA provide a list of current contracts that would be considered in conflict with Clover? Would NGA consider OCI-ing at the task order level versus at the contract level (assuming each task order is not its own contract)? | OCI concerns concerning specific contracts or efforts should be directed to the CloverPMO@nga.mil and Gary.J.Davis@nga.mil, with copy to Vanessa.L.Knight@nga.mil. All included OCI clauses, addressing organizational conflicts of interest at the IDIQ and Task Order levels, and non-developmental conflicts at the Task ORder level (case by case) will remain in the final RFP. The Government will try to minimize conflicts occurring between Task Orders. Be aware, however, that a successful Multiple-Award IDIQ winner may not be able to bid on every Task Order competition, due to the program-building nature of some support being procured. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation (Part 1 of question); 31 JAN (Part 2 of question) | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 14 | Nicole Pierce | OCI | Strict avoidance OCI regarding potential conflicts with development efforts -- if applied to the subcontractor level, NGA will NOT be able to access key talent (accounting firm expertise for audit efforts) as some of the accounting firms also do dev work. | Gary, please provide written response for this prompt. | ||||||
| 15 | Nicole Pierce | OCI | Could you please repeat what contract has the appropriate OCI clause in it to allow companies to participate in Clover? | NSES, as one example (given because it is a contemporaneous Enterprise Services contract to EMERALD, for which CLOVER is a follow-on). Other OCI concerns concerning specific contracts or efforts should be directed to the CloverPMO@nga.mil and Gary.J.Davis@nga.mil, with copy to Vanessa.L.Knight@nga.mil. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 22 JAN. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 16 | Potawatomi (Thorsten Littau) | Industry Day | Will you plan to make the presentation slides available? | See response to Question 1. | 22-Jan-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 17 | integrateIT (David Baldini) | Award Fee | If it is an award fee based contract, is a DCAA approved accounting system a requirement? | No. See explanation of award fee at FAR 16.401. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 31 JAN. | verify response with Brian and Gary | Gary Davis, CO | |||
| 18 | Guidehouse (Keith Cooperman) | OCI | Will the gov't provide potential Offeror's a consistent definition of what it considers to be "Development" work in order to be fully compliant with OCI clauses at the ID/IQ level? | See paragraph (e) in RFP clause H-21. See clause H-20. | ||||||
| At FAR 35.001, Research & Development contracts, "development" was defined as the systematic use of scientific and technical knowledge in the design, development, testing, or evaluation of a potential new product or service (or of an improvement in an existing product or service) to meet specific performance requirements or objectives. It includes the functions of design engineering, prototyping, and engineering testing; it excludes subcontracted technical effort that is for the sole purpose of developing an additional source for an existing product. | 31-Jan | verify with Brian, Gary or Sachs | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||||||
| 19 | Susan Moreira | Edit | Regarding retention: Over a 5 year TO, skills needed will evolve as new tech and methodologies emerge. Keeping the same people in the same position for 5 years runs counter to that need, as well as to Professional Dev needs, and complicates vendor solutions. | The Government anticipates that businesses will manage their own personnel and staffing decisions to best fulfill mission requirements and incentivize staff. New requirements will be negotiated and staffed as a result of coordination and agreement between the Government and our industry partner(s). | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 20 | Amentum (Michael Walsh) | OCI | Is there an OCI conflict if you are on the BOS-E contract? | See response to question 13. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 21 | Bespoke (Cris Benavides) | JV | The SBA has ruled that SBA [Joint Ventures] do not have to have a facility clearance if both mentor and protégé have facility clearances and CFR § 121.103 has been updated reflecting this change. Will NGA adhere to this SBA regulation on JVs? | See response to question 11. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 22 | EdgeWorks Inc (Michael Farley) | Task Order | Will cost reasonableness assessments be performed by NGA at the task order level? Not doing so probably contributed to the "race to the bottom" on EMERALD. | All negotiations with the federal government involve cost or price analysis, and a reasonableness determination by the cognizant Contracting Officer. This includes Task Order competitions. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 23 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Task Order | What is the anticipated timeline for RFP release? | See Milestones chart in Industry Day slides presented. Release is targeted for mid- to end of March 2021. | 22 JAN. Updated 31 JAN | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 24 | ICS Federal (Charlie Painter) | Scope | Can you expand upon what you mean as "size and complexity" as this is a small business set-aside? | Past performance and technical experience should best mirror similar number of FTEs staffed, or projects totaling a comparable total contract value. See Task Order breakdowns within RFP, at Subsection B.1.1, and Industry Day slides 36-45. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 25 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Intent | Can the same project be used for multiple WSC (e.g. out of the 9, can the same project be used for all 3 categories)? | Yes. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 26 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Evaluation | Is there any restriction on using Subcontractor past performance? | No, if 2 or more past performance submissions are sourced from the small business Prime or managing partner. See more detailed response to question 10. | 31-Jan | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 27 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Price | How is "Project Value" defined? For a single-award IDIQ, [is it] the ceiling? The value of all option years on the Tos (even those not awarded)? For a task order, is it the value of all option years (incl. those not yet awarded)? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||||
| 28 | 1/19/21 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | JV | Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 29 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Intent | Can a single-award IDIQ count as a single "project"? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 30 | 1/19/21 | Perspecta (Charles Day) | Scope | Would be interested to know what the approximate actual staff level (number of FTEs) on EMERALD has recently been with respect [to] the number of allocated FTEs. | ||||||
| 31 | 1/19/21 | InfiniSource Consulting Solutions (ICS Federal) (Charles Painter) | Certification | Is there a CMMC requirement? | A CMMC is not required. The new Cybersecurity clause will be incorporated into the Base Contract. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 32 | 1/19/21 | InfiniSource Consulting Solutions (ICS Federal) (Charles Painter) | JV | Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner? | See response to Question 28. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 33 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Scorecard | What are the max points for certifications? Is it 3.500 or 7,000? | Max points for the Certifications is 8500. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 34 | 1/19/21 | Kathy Schmokel | FCL | Does the Prime and all subs have to have a TS Facility Clearance? | The Prime is required to hold an FCL at time of award. Instructions were provided on 5 Feb. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 35 | 1/19/21 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Scorecard | Will any number of our team members' prime past performance be accepted in the self-scoring sheet? | An updated score sheet will be released that annotes what example must come from the Prime and what can come from a subcontractor or other member of a Joint Venture. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 36 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Section L | Are we required to submit a past performance (L.11.3.1) for every project identified in L.11.2.2 (Relevant experience projects)? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 37 | 1/19/21 | Jeffrey Doolin | Administrative | Is there a non-exclusive clause for Subcontractors? | No. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 38 | 5-Jan | Fuel Consulting | ||||||||
| Heidi Gerhards | Industry Day | To facilitate discussion across small businesses and other companies interested in Clover, will the government post to the ARC - or by request - a list of registrants for the Clover virtual Industry Day? | ||||||||
| 39 | 30-Dec | Fuel Consulting | ||||||||
| Heidi Gerhards | Security | 1. Will prime companies and subcontractors be required to quantify and report their current cybersecurity compliance with NIST SP 800-171 requirements using the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology prior to award? | ||||||||
| 40 | 30-Dec | Fuel Consulting | ||||||||
| Heidi Gerhards | Certification | 2. Will prime companies and subcontractors be required to have a Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) appraisal prior to award and, if so, what level? | See question 31. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | |||||
| 41 | 29-Dec | Michael Koroluk | ||||||||
| Bird Analytical Solutions & Technologies | Industry Day | Will NGA provide a list of all current Emerald task orders with corresponding scope summaries, award values and incumbent awardee names at the industry day? | ||||||||
| 42 | 29-Dec | Michael Koroluk | ||||||||
| Bird Analytical Solutions & Technologies | Price | How does NGA plan to address concerns that under the Emerald best value awards marginally similar technical scoring has triggered a trade off process that has resulted lower price as the determining factor for awards? | ||||||||
| 43 | 29-Dec | Michael Koroluk | ||||||||
| Bird Analytical Solutions & Technologies | Evaluation | Has NGA considered the use of Highest Technical Fair and Reasonable Price task order evaluation methodology moving forward on Clover? | Just delete | |||||||
| 44 | David Boyd | Industry Day | Will you be posting the briefing slides? | Yes. The slides, attendee list (with only those parties still interested remaining), and presentation video were all posted to Beta.SAM on 22 JAN. The attachments, minus this video, will be on the Unclassified ARC by end of business day on Monday, 25 JAN. | 19 JAN; update 22 JAN. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 45 | Graham Technologies LLC (Paul Geraci) | OCI | Do you foresee OCI issues for DIA SITE III Prime contractors? | No, NGA is not participating on the DIA SITE III contract at this time. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 5 FEB. | Gary Davis, CO (Industry Day); Brian Mosteller (Q&A) | ||||
| 46 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | Explaination | Why reduce number of awardees? 550 FTEs across small businesses - you are keeping smaller companies out? | The Government did an analysis of the current requirement under Emerald, and an analysis of the market via RFI responses and market research. From these findings, four awardees was determined to be a right-size fit for vendors to have a fair opportunity to earn a fair chunk of the work to be contracted, vice winning into an awardee pool and not being competitive to hold more than one Task Order over the five-year vehicle. Bear in mind that the total number of FTEs for Clover is comparable to current staffing under Emerald. On Emerald, one vendor may have provided up to the higher range of approximately 120-250 FTEs across multiple awarded Task Orders, vice the current structure proposed for Clover, which seeks to reduce unnecessary administrative burden. The Government has heard industry concerns regarding the competitive pool for future Task Order awards, however, and plans to amend the Final RFP to allow up to five (5) awardees, or six (6) in the event of an exact tie for points evaluated at position five in the IDIQ competition. This is an update to direction given in the Draft RFP, and will be captured in the Final RFP release. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 5 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS (Industry Day); Brian Mosteller (Q&A) | ||||
| 47 | Stellar Solutions (Walter Eilers) | NAICS | What is the $ cap for the Small Business Set Aside and why is this effort set at that cap? Have you thought about a company size cap in numbers vs. $ amount? | |||||||
| 48 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | Intent | Is it NGA's intent to limit competition to only those companies that are already supporting NGA either as Prime or Subs? The award and evaluation criteria is written to discourage new contractors from bidding. | This is not the Government's intention. The competition is full and open within a 100% small business set-aside. This effort has therefore been deemed appropriate for performance by small businesses across the industry, and is offered to maximize business opportunities within the small business industry. Only a Sole Source procurement method would have indicated an interest to work only with the incumbent Prime contractors and their partners. Evaluation criteria was intended to be inclusive of skill level expertise determinations made by offerors, to provide for a unifying contract vehicle across a Level of Effort services requirement set (by nature, flexible and adaptive) while properly identifying the tasks and skillsets needed to fulfill Agency requirements, per past performance lessons learned. | Draft response (22 JAN) | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 49 | Intec LLC (Nate Copeland) | NAICS | What is the NAICS Small Business size for CLOVER? | The NAICS code for the CLOVER procurement is 541611. The business size standard for this NAICS code is _________, as identified on the __[NAICS body]___ website. | In Progress | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 50 | BDO Public Sector LLC (Fernando Hernandez) | Intent | Can non-qualifying companies submit questions to the government? | |||||||
| 51 | ProposalHelper (Reena Bhatia) | History | What is working and not working with the current six contractors? | This information is deemed proprietary to each performing company, and is not releasable to industry for the benefit of this competition. | 3-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 52 | Milton Grant | FCL | Will subcontractors be required to possess a FCL? | No, However the Awarded vendors must be able to pass down a DD254. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 53 | D2DInc (Molly Gimmel) | Submission | When you say that the prime has to demonstrate their ability to meet the entire scope, does that mean the prime specifically, or does that include subcontractors? | In ANY teaming arrangement (Prime/Sub, Mentor-Protege Joint Venture (JV) , SSEs, Blended JV...), small business must be able to show ability to perform 60% of the work scope described in the Task Order FTE and WSC breakouts in Section B of the RFP. Of this support, one (1) example from each Work Service Category (WSC) must be submitted by the Prime offeror -- this is a change from the minimum stated in the Draft RFP, and will be updated for the Final RFP release. All remaining performance can be substantiated by past performance and technical experience of a subcontractor. Up to six (6) examples may therefore be submitted by a partner subcontractor. | ||||||
| Note that demonstrating the ability to meet the entire scope will allow an Offeror to maximize self-scoring points. Collectively capturing past performance and technical experience for a a substantial portion, but not 100%, of the total scope solicited should result in self-scoring points below the maximum allotments. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||||||
| 54 | unknown | JV | The SBA updated 13 CFR parts 121, 124, 125, 126, 127, and 134. Within § 121.103(h) if specifically clarifies that an SBA approved unpopulated Joint Venture (JV) does NOT need an FCL if both the Mentor and Protégé already possess the required FCL. Will [question incomplete] | |||||||
| 55 | AIS (Todd Jackson) | OCI | Will NGA define/list specific Contracts/Task Orders where the NGA/GOV has made an OCI determination? If so, when can we expect this information? This is important information for us as we want to ensure we capture OCI specs in effort to mitigate. | NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to Question 13. | 3-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 56 | EdgeWorks Inc (Michael Farley) | OCI | Can NGA provide a list of current contracts that would be considered in conflict with Clover? Would NGA consider OCI-ing at the task order level versus at the contract level (assuming each task order is not its own contract)? | OCI concerns concerning specific contracts or efforts should be directed to the CloverPMO@nga.mil and Gary.J.Davis@nga.mil, with copy to Vanessa.L.Knight@nga.mil. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation (Part 1 of question); In progress (Part 2 of question) | Brian or Gary assist with Pt. 2 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 57 | Nicole Pierce | OCI | Strict avoidance OCI regarding potential conflicts with development efforts -- if applied to the subcontractor level, NGA will NOT be able to access key talent (accounting firm expertise for audit efforts) as some of the accounting firms also do dev work. | Noted. | Brian Mosteller, PM | |||||
| 58 | Nicole Pierce | OCI | Could you please repeat what contract has the appropriate OCI clause in it to allow companies to participate in Clover? | NSES, as one example (given because it is a contemporaneous Enterprise Services contract to EMERALD, for which CLOVER is a follow-on). Other OCI concerns concerning specific contracts or efforts should be directed to the CloverPMO@nga.mil and Gary.J.Davis@nga.mil, with copy to Vanessa.L.Knight@nga.mil. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 22 JAN. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 59 | Potawatomi (Thorsten Littau) | Industry Day | Will you plan to make the presentation slides available? | See response to Question 1. | 22-Jan-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 60 | integrateIT (David Baldini) | Award Fee | If it is an award fee based contract, is a DCAA approved accounting system a requirement? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Gary Davis, CO | |||||
| 61 | Guidehouse (Keith Cooperman) | OCI | Will the gov't provide potential Offeror's a consistent definition of what it considers to be "Development" work in order to be fully compliant with OCI clauses at the ID/IQ level? | See clause language in H-20 and H-21. | In progress | Brian assist | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 62 | Susan Moreira | Award Fee | Regarding retention: Over a 5 year TO, skills needed will evolve as new tech and methodologies emerge. Keeping the same people in the same position for 5 years runs counter to that need, as well as to Professional Dev needs, and complicates vendor solutions. | Noted. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 63 | Amentum (Michael Walsh) | OCI | Is there an OCI conflict if you are on the BOS-E contract? | See response to Question 13. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 64 | Bespoke (Cris Benavides) | JV | The SBA has ruled that SBA [Joint Ventures] do not have to have a facility clearance if both mentor and protégé have facility clearances and CFR § 121.103 has been updated reflecting this change. Will NGA adhere to this SBA regulation on JVs? | |||||||
| 65 | EdgeWorks Inc (Michael Farley) | Price | Will cost reasonableness assessments be performed by NGA at the task order level? Not doing so probably contributed to the "race to the bottom" on EMERALD. | |||||||
| 66 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Schedule | What is the anticipated timeline for RFP release? | See Milestones chart in Industry Day slides presented. | 22-Jan-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 67 | ICS Federal (Charlie Painter) | Definition | Can you expand upon what you mean as "size and complexity" as this is a small business set-aside? | Size and Complexity is used to determine the offerors past contracting experience of large programs. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 68 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Submission | Can the same project be used for multiple WSC (e.g. out of the 9, can the same project be used for all 3 categories)? | Yes. A single project can be referenced once across each WSC. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 5 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 69 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Submission | Is there any restriction on using Subcontractor past performance? | See response to Question 53. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 70 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Definition | How is "Project Value" defined? For a single-award IDIQ, [is it] the ceiling? The value of all option years on the Tos (even those not awarded)? For a task order, is it the value of all option years (incl. those not yet awarded)? | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response ____ | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||||
| 71 | 1/19/21 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Submission | Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner? | See response to Question 28. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 3 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 72 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Submission | Can a single-award IDIQ count as a single "project"? | Yes. Single projects can be made up of an individual Task Order or Delivery Order under a Multiple Award IDIQ, or a Single-Award IDIQ, or a standalone contract. Industry may determine how best to group their experience to meet projects and complexity/scope of work for each "project" reported. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 5 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 73 | 1/19/21 | Perspecta (Charles Day) | History | Would be interested to know what the approximate actual staff level (number of FTEs) on EMERALD has recently been with respect [to] the number of allocated FTEs. | The current FTE count of EMERALD is approximately 580 FTEs. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | |||
| 74 | 1/19/21 | InfiniSource Consulting Solutions (ICS Federal) (Charles Painter) | Certification | Is there a CMMC requirement? | No. There is not a requirement for specific Certifications, however points can be earned by offerors for specific certifications. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | |||
| 75 | 1/19/21 | InfiniSource Consulting Solutions (ICS Federal) (Charles Painter) | Submission | Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner? | See response to Question 28. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 3 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 76 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Score Sheet | What are the max points for certifications? Is it 3.500 or 7,000? | See question 33 | 8-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 77 | 1/19/21 | Kathy Schmokel | FCL | Does the Prime and all subs have to have a TS Facility Clearance? | See question 34 and 52. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | |||
| 78 | 1/19/21 | Quiet Professionals LLC (Cameron Porcaro) | Submission | Will any number of our team members' prime past performance be accepted in the self-scoring sheet? | See response to Question 53. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 79 | 1/19/21 | St. Michael's (Andrew Scarcella) | Submission | Are we required to submit a past performance (L.11.3.1) for every project identified in L.11.2.2 (Relevant experience projects)? | You are not required to submit any particular past performance data. However, all past performance submissions should tie to Section 11.2.2 submissions, per language in Section L.11.3 Volume 3 - Past Performance (L.11.3.1 Narrative, paragraph 3). "Past Performance submissions must relate directly to the Relevant Work Experience Submissions as submitted for Volume 2. | 19 JAN, in Industry Day presentation; written response 5 FEB. | Vanessa Knight, OCS | |||
| 80 | 1/19/21 | Jeffrey Doolin | policy | Is there a non-exclusive clause for Subcontractors? | ||||||
| 81 | 19-Jan |
Author: Author:
| Via Email to PMO, NOT DURING INDUSTRY DAY | Price | 1. Given that task orders are Firm Fixed Price, how does the government plan to review/enforce the target profit percentage of 7.5%? Does the target profit represent a fee-on-fee for subcontractors? | ||||||||
| 82 | 19-Jan | Administrative | 2. Per Section B.1 of the Draft RFP, will there be any integrated TOs awarded through the Base IDIQ contract? | |||||||
| 83 | 19-Jan | Task Orders | 3. Will the Government award Task Orders exactly as they are outlined? Could each individual TO be broken down into multiple TOs? | |||||||
| 84 | 19-Jan | Task Orders | 4. Section H.15 states: “The Government intends to provide all CLOVER IDIQ MATOC Contractors a fair opportunity for consideration. This fair opportunity will be provided through the Government's examination of existing information already in the Government's possession, such as the awardee's original proposal and current past performance report records.” Is this examination of “current past performance” expected to be from records within NGA or solely based on information obtained from proposal submissions? | |||||||
| 85 | 19-Jan | Task orders | 5. Section H.19 states: “Task order proposals submitted by the Contractor shall consist of a resume for each position…” Will a resume be required for key personnel only or is it the Government’s expectation to submit resumes for all task order positions? | |||||||
| 86 | 19-Jan | Delivery | 6. Per Section L.8.2, is the proposal expected to be delivered in person? Are there any restrictions due to COVID-19 concerns? | Delivery can be made by a delivery service, however it is the responisblity to ensure that delivery is made on time. Proposals that arrive after the schedule date date/time will not be evaluated. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 87 | 19-Jan | Delivery | 7. Sections L.9 and L.10 appear to conflict in terms of what the Government expects to be submitted. Could the Government clarify what it expects the contractor to submit in DVD+R and in Hard Copy? | See Final RFP. The Government requires on hard copy and 2 softcopies. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 88 | 19-Jan | Delivery | 8. Section L.9.1 states: “The Offeror shall include all five (5) separate electronic proposal volumes and supporting documents…” Could the Government clarify whether five (5) or six (6) volumes are expected to be submitted? | This will be correct to the approriate number of volumes. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 89 | 19-Jan | Page Limits | 9. The table within Section L.10 provides the page limit by Volume. Volume 2 is divided into four (4) Sub-Volumes. Does the 10-page limit apply to each WSC Group (i.e., could end up being max 40 pages under Volume 2) or is it for the entire Volume 2? | See Final RFP. Page limits for supporting documents have been removed. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 90 | 19-Jan | Submission | 10. Past performance submissions may be submitted from any of the contractors on the Offeror’s team. However, at least two of the past performance submissions must be from the Prime Contractor working as either a prime contractor or a subcontractor. Does this mean two past performance submissions per WSC or two in total out of a possible nine? | One (1) example from each Work Service Category (WSC) must be submitted by the Prime offeror -- this is a change from the minimum stated in the Draft RFP, and will be updated for the Final RFP release. This will require at least three (3) total examples submitted by the Prime offeror. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 91 | 19-Jan | JV | 11. Section L.11.3.1 states: “The past performance submissions must have been performed within the same contractor organization e.g. division, directorate, office etc. as the one in which a contract resulting from this solicitation will be performed.” Will the Government allow Joint Ventures? If so, how will this requirement affect the eligibility of a newly formed Joint Venture given the reliance of past performance from the Parent Companies? | |||||||
| 92 | 22-Jan | Paragon | ||||||||
| John M. (Mike) Carrier | Industry Day | 1. Is the presentation or a recording of the industry day going to be posted? If so where can we find it? | ||||||||
| 93 | JV | 1. Would a Mentor -Protégé Joint Venture, where the Protégé is a Woman Owned Small Business and the Mentor was considered a large business for the CLOVER solicitation, be eligible for an award under the current business size statues for CLOVER? | ||||||||
| 94 | 21-Jan | Dan Finley | ||||||||
| Xator Corp | JV | For offerors responding as a joint venture entity through the SBA All-Small Mentor Protege Program, does NGA intend to permit the use of performance examples and industry certifications possessed by the JV's managing member organizations? | ||||||||
| 95 | 21-Jan | Dan Finley | ||||||||
| Xator Corp | OCI | How does NGA intend to define organizational conflict of interest as internal to CLOVER | NGA does not see this as a factor at this time. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | |||||
| 96 | 21-Jan | Dan Finley | ||||||||
| Xator Corp | Price | How does NGA intend to determine what is considered fair and reasonable in regards to a low and high price range submitted against each MATOC Work Service Category cost? | ||||||||
| 97 | 21-Jan | Mark Milen | ||||||||
| Innovate Holdings | Scope | Our firm is Service Disabled Veteran leader in full scope of sections 3.1.1 (Total Lifecycle Acquisition Management Support Services) and 3.1.3 (Strategic Business Management Support Services) and partial scope of section 3.1.2 (Financial Management Support Services). As you indicated that you are looking for 4 Primary suppliers, is your recommendation that we bid in that category? | ||||||||
| 98 | 21-Jan | Mark Milen | ||||||||
| Innovate Holdings | Scope | The propose RFP calls for significant staffing levels. Are you predominately looking at staffing organizations or small businesses that can exceed the scope of requirements but may not be able to provide 100’s of FTEs? | ||||||||
| 99 | 20-Jan | Ron Clatterbuck Quantech, INVC | JV | Would a Mentor -Protégé Joint Venture, where the Protégé is a Woman Owned Small Business and the Mentor was considered a large business for the CLOVER solicitation, be eligible for an award under the current business size statues for CLOVER? | ||||||
| 100 | 21-Jan | Manta Group | ||||||||
| Billi Jo “BJ” Amos | OCI | If OCI is determined at the IDIQ level, it will make teaming on the effort unduly restrictive resulting in a lack of access to the right qualified talent to meet the mission requirements as defined in the SOW. This offeror recommends OCI be determined at the Task Order level and that strict avoidance only be applied in extreme circumstances. | As described in Section H. OCI is determined at both the IDIQ and at the Task Order Level. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | |||||
| 101 | 21-Jan | Manta Group | ||||||||
| Billi Jo “BJ” Amos | Contract type | Per section B.2, Task Orders may be awarded as Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) and Firm-Fixed-Price Level of Effort (FFP LOET). However, section L.4 only identifies FFP LOET type Task Orders. SOW 1.2, Contractor-Defined, states, “These requirements involve support based on performance or outcome-based labor needs. This allows for redirection of committed but underutilized resources by optimizing the available contractor resources among current and future competing requirements.” | Currently, there are only FFP-LOET Task orders. The Government reserves the right to award sections of task orders or complete task orders as FFP in the future. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | |||||
| 102 | 21-Jan | Manta Group | ||||||||
| Billi Jo “BJ” Amos | Contract Type | This offeror requests that the Government clarify the types of Task Orders that will be released under the Clover vehicle. Additionally, if FFP LOET is utilized, we recommend the Government clarify the +/- range for the LOE at the Task Order level to ensure that the range is in the best interest of the Government to meet the mission requirements. | There is no +/- for the LOE. The Government will award 1860 hours per positions and it is expected that those hours are utilized. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | |||||
| 103 | 21-Jan | Billi Jo “BJ” Amos, Preferred Systems Solutions (PSS) | B.2 | Telework | This offeror recommends the requirement for telework be defined at the Task Order level. This will allow the Government to address any specific IT and Security requirements necessary to accommodate teleworking employees. | |||||
| 104 | 21-Jan | Billi Jo “BJ” Amos, Preferred Systems Solutions (PSS) | B.6.1 | Section M | Section M.5.1 requires the submission of Meaningful Relationship/ Workshare Commitment Letters, but these are not mentioned anywhere else in the solicitation. This requirement is not appropriate at the IDIQ level as there is no workshare commitment from the Government to the Primes. This requirement would only be applicable at the Task Order Level. It is recommended that the Government delete this clause. | |||||
| 105 | 21-Jan | Billi Jo “BJ” Amos, Preferred Systems Solutions (PSS) | H.2 | Score Sheet | The Self Scoring Sheet provides extra points for relevant experience projects in a foreign location, but there are no corresponding instructions or evaluation criteria for foreign location. Please update the solicitation accordingly to include example locations and foreign locations where EMERALD is currently being performed. | Final RFP will be updated. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | ||
| 106 | 21-Jan | Billi Jo “BJ” Amos, Preferred Systems Solutions (PSS) | H.19.(d) | Submission | According to the DRFP, the Self-Scoring Worksheet is required in both Volume 1 (per M.5.1.c on pg. 80) and Volume 5 (per Proposal Organization Table on pg. 65 and L.11.5 on pg. 74). Please clarify how the Government would like offerors to submit the Self-Scoring Worksheet and whether or not it should be included in both Volumes 1 (Contract Volume) and 5 (Verification Assessment). | Brian, please answer this question. | ||||
| 107 | 21-Jan | Billi Jo “BJ” Amos, Preferred Systems Solutions (PSS) | H.19.(d) | Edit | This offeror believes Price Factor is incorrectly referenced as “Volume 5” in Section M.8, and that it should be changed to “Volume 6.” | Correction accepted, and will be reflected in the Final RFP release. | 7-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||
| 108 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.9.1 | Price | Would the Government consider negotiating travel costs without fee but then combine them with the labor CLINs to allow flexibility in reporting/executing of the contract? The questions stems from the time spent managing a relatively small amount of dollars. | |||||||
| 109 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.9.1.1 | Price | Would the Government clarify the need to provide rationale for proposed direct/indirect and/or profit rates for task order responses, and if there is even a requirement to provide these rates for task order responses? We asked a related question concerning M.8 criteria. For example, when responding to a task order we already have agreed-upon fully-burdened rate ranges. | |||||||
| 110 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.9.1.3 | Key Personnel | This paragraph requires identification of a program manager as key personnel and refers to a resume being submitted with the proposal. Would the Government clarify the requirement to provide the resume in sections L and M, and also provide a position description or criteria? | While the Program Manager is designated a Key Personal and fall under the requirements as outlined in the RFP, there is no evaluation of the vendor Program Manager. | 5-Feb-21 | Brian Mosteller, PM | ||||
| 111 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.10.2 | Resumes | Would the Government consider requiring resumes for key positions only during the proposal process? Given the potential FTEs for each task as described in Section B, compiling resumes for all positions within a task order response timeline may not be realistic (vetting, sourcing if not on-hand, etc.) except for incumbents. | Resumes are required for Key Personnel during the Task Order evaluation period. All resumes are required to be made available post award on request from either the CO/COR/PMO. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 112 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.10.3 | Resumes | Would the Government consider a method for providing advance notice of unique education or experience requirements on anticipated task orders? This would allow non-incumbents time to source options for hard-to-fill positions. | All unique experience required will be annoted in the Task Order RFP. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 113 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.1.3 | Edit | Would the Government clarify the number of proposal volumes to include? L.9.1 currently refers to five while six volumes are listed in L.9.1.2. | Correction accepted in Section L9.1. Six volumes will be reflected uniformyl in the Final RFP release. | 7-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 114 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.1.6 | Submission | This paragraph indicates one paper copy of Volume 5. However, the table in L.10.1 indicates hard copies of all volumes. Would the Government consider only electronic submission instead of hardcopy and CDs? | One (1) copy of a complete proposal must be submitted in hardcopy for ease of Government review. The remaining documentation is expected in PDF format on DVDs, due to the secure nature of the proposal evaluation facility. Electronic submissions cannot therefore be accepted for this procurement. PDF formats should be titled in accordance with the Volume name and number, with Prime or JV corporate acronym to differentiate files. Work statements and other substantiating documentation should be PDF'ed separately and titled by volume and Project # submitted in support of. These supporting documents should be highlighted where applicable to specific scope and complexity statements that support the Offeror's self-scoring sheet ratings. One (1) PDF cover sheet may be included at the front of each example, referencing by document name, page number and (sub)section number the location where supporting content is cited. Citations on this index should also be bookmarked to enable jumping to the relevant location in the submitted PDF(s), where possible. This is a change and further specification from submission format in the Draft RFP, and will be captured in the Final RFP release. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 115 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.2.2 | Submission | The bolded note under this paragraph states that only attachment J.XX must be printed on paper in addition to an electronic copy. Would the Government clarify the requirement for hard copy and electronic copy submissions? | See response to Question 114. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 116 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.2.2 | Edit | This paragraph refers to the Green Lantern program. | No Green Lantern references are reflected in the latest draft RFP. These references are or will be replaced with Clover in the Final RFP. | 7-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 117 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.2.2 | Submission | Would the Government consider not requiring a glossary of acronyms for Volumes 2 and 5? | To support accurate and fair review during proposal evaluation, all Offerors shall submit an Acronym Glossary as defined in Section L.10.3, for all Volumes and submitted supporting documentation. This ensures that no recency, relevancy, or past performance capabilities are misunderstood or missed when corroborating self-scoring submissions and determining highest technical ratings across all submissions. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 118 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.2.2 | Score Sheet | Would the Government clarify if offerors are required to provide representations and certifications for subcontractors? | OCI Compliance will be required from all subcontractors. | 8-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 119 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.3.1 | Section L | Would the Government review this paragraph to clarify whether it’s required? | |||||||
| 120 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.3.1 | definition | Would the Government clarify whether the term “Offeror” refers to the prime or to the prime and any subcontractors? In L.11.2.2 the term seems to refer to the entire team while in L.11.3.1 it seems to mean the prime contractor (e.g., Offeror’s team). | |||||||
| 121 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.3.1 | Submission | Would the Government consider allowing a compliance matrix with Volume 2 that ties source document contents to SOW / WSC requirements? | See response to Question 114. The latter portion of this response is most appropriate to your question. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 122 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.3.1 | Submission | Would the Government clarify whether the offeror is to submit entire source documents as opposed to relevant portions of those documents? For example, a contract document that provides a source for project value may also have many pages of FAR, invoicing, and other information. | Submit entire document in PDF, highlighting (and bookmarking where possible) the relevant sections. See specific details in Question 114 response. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 123 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.3.2 | Evaluation | The last sentence of this paragraph refers to assessing technical capability. Would the Government clarify how it will assess sub-volumes 2B, 2C and 2D which are less about technical capability? | 2B/C/D all demonstrates a vendors technical capability to perform. | 9-Feb | Mosteller | ||||
| 124 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.4 | definition | Would the Government clarify what is meant by major subcontractor and if there are specific criteria? | |||||||
| 125 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.4.2 | Submission | For cited contracts, would the Government accept prime contractor points of contact in place of Government points of contact? | If submitting Past Performance where the relevant and recent support was performed as a Subcontractor, you must submit a Past Performance Questionnaire to your Prime on the cited effort, as well as to your Government POC. Please provide contact information for two (2) Government POCs; you may also provide contact information for the two (2) best Prime contractor POCs for the cited effort. This will enable the Government to circumvent conflicts of interest with former Prime partnerships who may compete against the Offeror for the current effort, and to allow extra clarifications from Government where possible. |
If submitting Past Performance where the relevant and recent support was performed as a Prime or Joint Venture, you must submit a Past Performance Questionnaire to your Government POC, and/or provide finalized CPARS report or Performance Assessment Report (PAR). Please also submit contact information for two (2) current Government POCs.
| This response adds onto and clarifies the wording released in the Draft RFP. It will be captured in the Final RFP release. | 5-Feb-21 | Vanessa Knight, OCS | ||||
| 126 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva | ||||
| StellarPeak | L.11.4.3 | Score Sheet | Would the Government clarify whether a single contract could be used as a project under multiple WSCs? | Yes. It falls upon the offeror to ensure that the associated contract represents the score that is being claimed | 8-Feb | Mosteller |
| 127 | 22-Jan | Tim Pastva |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .