Clover DraftRFP_Q-A_Rd1release_16FEB_LRr1approvedv1.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 60 KB Posted Feb 17, 2021

Attached to: EMERALD Follow-on: "CLOVER" update (FCL update)
Solicitation number: HM0476-20-R-0030-CNTD
Issued by: Department of Defense National Geospatial Intelligence Agency

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
Clover DraftRFP_Q-A_Rd3release_24MAR.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Mar 25, 2021
J.18 Self Scoring Sheet_23Feb DRAFT.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Feb 23, 2021
Clover DraftRFP_Q-A_Rd2release_23FEB_LRapproved.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Feb 23, 2021
Clover DraftRFP_Q-A_Rd1release_16FEB_LRr1approved.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Feb 16, 2021
Attendee List.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 22, 2021
1. NGA Clover Program - Unclassified Virtual Industry Day-20210119 1400-1.mp4	MP4 file	Jan 22, 2021
Clover Program - Industry Day FINAL (Presented During Industry Day).pdf	PDF	Jan 22, 2021
J.X Self Scoring Sheet.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 14, 2021
J.9Travel Not-To-Exceed (NTE) Instructions.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.14 Monthly Activity Report Template.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.1 Base SOW.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.3 Labor Rate Matrix - IDIQ.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
J.16 Labor Rate Matrix - Task Order.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
J.17 Position Matrix.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
J.5a Resume Template.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
Clover RFP_HM047621RXXXX_DRAFTv5_12JAN2021.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.7 NDA.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.4 Skill Definition.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.2 Award Plan.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.5b Resume Instructions.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.10 Travel Template.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
J.15 Weekly Activity Report Template.docx	DOCX document	Jan 12, 2021
J.11 Monthly Staffing Report (MSR) Template.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 12, 2021
J.6 OCI Disclosure and Analysis Form.doc	DOC document	Jan 12, 2021

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

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Q&As Rd 1 CLOVER (Emerald Follow-On) Q&A responses, Rd 1 release - 16 FEB 2021 For questions received since release of Draft RFP through 2 FEB 2021

Q. #	Category	Questions	Q. #	Answer
1	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.	1	Yes. The Government selected 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).
3	Intent	Why reduce number of awardees? 550 FTEs across small businesses - you are keeping smaller companies out?	3	The Government reduced the number of ID/IQ awardee based on an analysis of the current requirement under Emerald, and an analysis of the market via RFI responses and market research. From these initial 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. Based on industry feedback and additional research, the Government 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.
4	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?	4	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/).
5	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.	5	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.
6	NAICS	What is the NAICS Small Business size for CLOVER?	6	See response to Question 4.
7	Administrative	Can non-qualifying companies submit questions to the government?	7	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.
8	Explaination	What is working and not working with the current six contractors?	8	This information is deemed proprietary to each performing company, and is not releasable to industry for the benefit of this competition.
12	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.	12	NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to question 13.
13	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)?	13	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.
15	OCI	Could you please repeat what contract has the appropriate OCI clause in it to allow companies to participate in Clover?	15	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.
16	Industry Day	Will you plan to make the presentation slides available?	16	See response to Question 1.
17	Award Fee	If it is an award fee based contract, is a DCAA approved accounting system a requirement?	17	No. See explanation of award fee at FAR 16.401.
18	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?	18	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.

19	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.	19	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).
20	OCI	Is there an OCI conflict if you are on the BOS-E contract?	20	See response to question 13.
22	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.	22	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.
23	Task Order	What is the anticipated timeline for RFP release?	23	See Milestones chart in Industry Day slides presented. Release is targeted for mid- to end of March 2021.
24	Scope	Can you expand upon what you mean as "size and complexity" as this is a small business set-aside?	24	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.
25	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)?	25	Yes.
26	Evaluation	Is there any restriction on using Subcontractor past performance?	26	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	Certification	Is there a CMMC requirement?	31	A CMMC is not required. The new Cybersecurity clause will be incorporated into the Base Contract.
33	Scorecard	What are the max points for certifications? Is it 3.500 or 7,000?	33	Max points for the Certifications is 8,500.
34	FCL	Does the Prime and all subs have to have a TS Facility Clearance?	34	The Prime is required to hold an FCL at time of award. Instructions were provided on 5 Feb.
35	Scorecard	Will any number of our team members' prime past performance be accepted in the self-scoring sheet?	35	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.
37	Administrative	Is there a non-exclusive clause for Subcontractors?	37	No.
40	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?	40	See response to Question 31.
43	Evaluation	Has NGA considered the use of Highest Technical Fair and Reasonable Price task order evaluation methodology moving forward on Clover?	43	NGA has considered use of the Highest Technically Rated Offer with a Fair and Reasonable Price at the Task Order level but has elected to use Best Value to determine award winners at the Task Order level.
44	Industry Day	Will you be posting the briefing slides?	44	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, were published to the Unclassified ARC on 25 JAN.
45	OCI	Do you foresee OCI issues for DIA SITE III Prime contractors?	45	No, NGA is not participating on the DIA SITE III contract at this time.
46	Explaination	Why reduce number of awardees? 550 FTEs across small businesses - you are keeping smaller companies out?	46	The Government reduced the number of ID/IQ awardee based on an analysis of the current requirement under Emerald, and an analysis of the market via RFI responses and market research. From these initial 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. Based on industry feedback and additional research, the Government 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.
49	NAICS	What is the NAICS Small Business size for CLOVER?	49	See response to Question 1.
59	Industry Day	Will you plan to make the presentation slides available?	59	See response to Question 1.
68	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)?	68	Yes. A single project can be referenced once across each WSC.
69	Submission	Is there any restriction on using Subcontractor past performance?	69	See response to Question 53.
71	Submission	Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner?	71	See response to Question 28.
72	Submission	Can a single-award IDIQ count as a single "project"?	72	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.
73	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.	73	The current FTE count of EMERALD is approximately 580 FTEs.
74	Certification	Is there a CMMC requirement?	74	No, there is no CMMC requirement for Clover.
75	Submission	Is there any restriction in using a large business as a subcontract partner?	75	See response to Question 28.
76	Score Sheet	What are the max points for certifications? Is it 3.500 or 7,000?	76	See response to Question 33.
77	FCL	Does the Prime and all subs have to have a TS Facility Clearance?	77	See responses to Questions 34 and 52.
78	Submission	Will any number of our team members' prime past performance be accepted in the self-scoring sheet?	78	See response to Question 53.
79	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)?	79	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."
88	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?	88	This will be corrected to the approriate number of volumes (six (6)) in the Final RFP.
89	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?	89	See Final RFP. Page limits for supporting documents have been removed.
90	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?	90	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.
95	OCI	How does NGA intend to define organizational conflict of interest as internal to CLOVER	95	NGA does not see this as a factor at this time.
101	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.”	101	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.
102	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.	102	There is no +/- for the LOE. The Government will award 1,860 hours per positions and it is expected that those hours are utilized.
105	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.	105	Final RFP will be updated.
107	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.”	107	Correction accepted, and will be reflected in the Final RFP release.
112	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.	112	All unique experience required will be annoted in the Task Order RFP.
113	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.	113	Correction accepted in Section L9.1. Six (6) volumes will be reflected uniformly in the Final RFP release.
116	Edit	This paragraph refers to the Green Lantern program.	116	No Green Lantern references are reflected in the latest draft RFP. These references are or will be replaced with Clover in the Final RFP.
117	Submission	Would the Government consider not requiring a glossary of acronyms for Volumes 2 and 5?	117	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.
118	Score Sheet	Would the Government clarify if offerors are required to provide representations and certifications for subcontractors?	118	OCI Compliance will be required from all subcontractors.
121	Submission	Would the Government consider allowing a compliance matrix with Volume 2 that ties source document contents to SOW / WSC requirements?	121	See response to Question 114. The latter portion of this response is most appropriate to your question.
123	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?	123	Sub-Volumes 2B/C/D all demonstrate a vendor's technical capability to perform.
125	Submission	For cited contracts, would the Government accept prime contractor points of contact in place of Government points of contact?	125	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.

126	Score Sheet	Would the Government clarify whether a single contract could be used as a project under multiple WSCs?	126	Yes. It falls upon the Offeror to ensure that the associated contract represents the score that is being claimed.
127	Score Sheet	Would the Government confirm that a prime contract used for relevancy and past performance could be an IDIQ where one or more task orders are (or were) being executed?	127	Yes.
131	Edit	This paragraph refers to the NEE contract and a template that is not in Section J. Would the Government clarify the security requirement?	131	The Government believes that the reference of this question is wrong, however the narrative of the Security Volume has been updated to remove this typo.
137	Evaluation	Would the Government specify the portions of the RFP that the Government will use to score a project for relevancy? For example, is relevancy determined solely by SOW paragraphs 3.1.1, 3.1.2, and 3.1.3, or other portions of the RFP as well?	137	The Government will utilize the entire IDIQ SoW to determine technical relevancy.
138	Score Sheet	Would the Government confirm that in order to the maximum total available points for relevant experience an offeror must submit nine projects for WSC Relevant Experience? This seems to be in contrast to past performance in M.6.2.2 where the total available points remains the same regardless of the number of past performance assessments.	138	Yes, in order to receive maximum points, 9 projects must be submitted.
139	Score Sheet	This paragraph refers to calculation methods outlined in Section L.XX. Would the Government clarify the calculation methods and/or referenced Section?	139	An updated Scoresheet will be released.
140	Score Sheet	Would the Government clarify that, if a project is submitted against a subcontract effort, the project value refers to the subcontract or the overarching prime contract value?	140	The Project Value referes to the entire effort if the offeror was the Prime on that example. For projects in where the CLOVER Prime Offeror was a subcontractor, the offeror should only claim the value of their portion of the project.
141	Score Sheet	Would the Government clarify whether the three projects need to be under different WSCs, or whether for example, they could all be under one WSC or any combination of WSCs?	141	The self score sheet allows for three examples for each of the WSC.
143	Evaluation	Would the Government provide evaluation criteria for any additional points available under sub-volume 2D?	143	There are no bonus points allocated within the Self-Scoring Sheet.
144	Edit	This paragraph refers to Section L.XX, WSC Relevant Experience (WSC Project). Would the Government clarify the Section L reference?	144	All references are updated in the Final RFP.
150	Score Sheet	On slides 56-57, the Government states that past performance with values up to and over $100M will received additional points. Given Clover is a small business set a side. Small business with the listed NIACs code do not have $100M+ past pro, will the Government revise the past performance dollar values to better align with to the task order level value vs master IDIQ funding levels? This would also allow for better alignment with the NIACs size standard and task order level activity. As written , only large business or Joint Ventures with a Large business backer would be able to effectively bid. I hope and believe it’s not the government intent to limit true small business competition.	150	The value has been downward adjusted to $75M.
151	Foreign Location	2D States: "WSC Group Relevant Experience Project in a Foreign Location". Please confirm Foreign location is using DoD OCONUS definition to include Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Puerto Rico, America Samoa, and U.S. Saipan. Does the Government anticipate any task orders will require performance in a Foreign Location ?	151	Foreign locations as that term is used in L.10.1 is limited to foreign locations not controlled by the U.S. Therefore, Hawaii, Alaska, Guan, Puerto Rico, America Samoa and the U.S. Saipan are not considered foreign locations. There is the possibility of performance in a Foreign Location.
155	Scorecard	Since staffing and retention, as well as personnel and task management, are so essential to successful performance, would the government consider a Management Volume to allow for assessment of these critical capabilities.	155	There is no management volume at this time.
156	Edit	Can the government provide more information regarding the Green Lantern program?	156	The name Green Lantern is no longer used. The program is called CLOVER. All references to Green Lantern will be removed.
158	Page Limit	The use of these clarifying documents, as a SOW or PWS, or any other "Meaningful Contract Documentation" will likely exceed the page count limits for Volume 2, as stated in L.10.1.

The Government states that "no narrative is required or desired".

Please clarify what is expected for this criteria. If a SOW or PWS is required, how can those documents be submitted within page count?		158	Page counts have been removed for supporting documentation.
	160	Evaluation	The Acceptability Review process (M.5) is tied to the compliance instructions in Section L.8 and L.11 which the Government indicates will occur upon receipt of proposals (M.3.3). This contradicts the statement in M.4 that reads "The first step in this evaluation process" (Section M.4) So, is the first step actually the Acceptability Check? Please clarify.	160	See Final RFP.
	162	Evaluation	Only Volume 1 - General (Contract Volume) is identified in the Acceptability Review. Did the Government intend that only VOLUME 1 - General (Contract Volume) be reviewed for acceptability? Please clarify.	162	See Final RFP. The entire proposal will be reviewed for acceptability.
	166	Scorecard	The table to illustrate this point assignment per project versus the total number of projects, is in conflict with the Government's statement.

The example table used to demonstrate the point assignment based on total number of projects submitted indicates a maximum of 3,000 points per project regardless of the number of projects submitted. Is the statement correct, or is the table correct?		166	For Past Performance the total available score is 27,000 points. This will be adjusted between the total number of submissions. The table in M.6.2.2 represents an example if Past Performance is scored for all nine possible projects.
	170	SCIF	Does the Government require the contractor to already have access to a SCIF at all NGA locations in order to submit a compliant proposal for TOs?	170	No.
	174	Scorecard	Would the Government consider adjusting the Project Size and Complexity thresholds? As this effort is a small business set-aside, it may be difficult for small businesses to meet the minimum threshold of $10M, much less provide a citation for a contract over $100M. A good solution would be to set a minimum threshold at half the NAICs size standard – for example a $16.5M NAICS code would warrant an $8.25M minimum contract value.	174	See response to Question 150.
	177	Delivery	Sub-Volumes. Please clarify if these sub-volumes need to be in separate binders or if they can be all contained in a single binder. If they can be included into a single binder, would the Government change “Sub-Volumes” to “Tabs” for simplicity purposes?	177	Yes. See final RFP.
	181	Page Count	Please clarify/verify the page allocations for Sub-Volumes 2A-2D, currently at 10 pages each or clarify our understanding of the number of projects for each sub-volume. Since 2A requires a maximum of 9 projects, while 2B, 2C, and 2D have a maximum of 3, 2, and 1 projects respectively, yet 2B, 2C, and 2D also are at 10 pages, and if this is correct, could the Government please adjust the page counts for each of the sub-volumes to better account for the maximum number of projects for each.	181	See response to Question 158.
	182	Post Award	With the lengthy security cross-over process from other agencies to NGA, will the government consider implementing the ability to allow candidates in transition to work on the contract in an appropriate unclassified setting, while in clearance cross-over?	182	There are specific rules in allowing this. If allowed it will be addressed inside the corresponding Task Order.
	184	Post Award	With the reduction in number of tasks orders and the combination of work with different periods of performance, will the government direct the transition plan or is the bidder required to account for the planning?	184	The Government is working a transtion plan between the two programs. Individual vendor transition plans may be evaluated as part of the Task Order process.
	185	SCIF	Given the COVID environment and space constraints at NGA, to minimize risk and provide additional classified workspace, will NGA implement a PRIME requirement to have a SCIF with connectivity?	185	There is no SCIF with connectivity requirement at this time.
	186	Post Award	May the company homebased computer equipment be included in the G&A? Rationale: for CMMC it is critical to have staff working in their homes to utilize company computers for compliance, monitoring, and security.	186	No. As discussed during Industry Day, Telework is a benefit not a requirement.
	189	OCI	Can the Government identify the specific Task Orders and specific elements of the Task Orders that are known to be OCI free?	189	NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to Question 13.
	190	OCI	Will GEO-SPI have an OCI issue with Clover? If so specifically what is the OCI?	190	No.
	191	Award Fee	Will the NGA Security process be counted as a factor in the –retention award fee?	191	Rentention has to deal with keeping staff in place. As far as the NGA Security process, assuming the question is on vacancy and staffing levels, yes: once a vendor has provided an approved eNomination for a position, the position would be considered fillled.
	193	ScoreCard	Will Prime’s receive additional points in the evaluation criteria for additional SCIFs provided by the Sub-Contractors?	193	There are no points associated with already having a SCIF at this time. See Final RFP for any changes to this.
	198	Scorecard	Will the Government provide a score or value to the Prime providing an exemplary team for qualifications and also to support NGA’s SBO goals?	198	No.
	202	Key Personnel	H.2(f) States that "Failure to comply with the above throughout the life of the CLOVER contract may result in a poor past performance survey in this area, and a requirement to provide the Government consideration for any performance impacts incurred."

The only key personnel listed in the RFP is the program manager, is this position billable? If the position is not billable, what kind of compensation would the government seek for performance issues in a non-billable role?		202	Individual Task Orders will have identified Key Personnel.
	203	Edit	L.10.2 States "establish the baseline rates for the Green Lantern program".

Can the Government please clarify the Green Lantern program?		203	See response to Question 116.
	206	Scorecard	Table M-X States that the verification of the offeror having an FCL is a pass/fail criteria but it is assigned a point value in the J.X Self Scoring Sheet.

Why is there a point value assigned if it is a pass/fail criteria?		206	Having an FCL is a pass/fail criteria. See Final RFP for update.
	207	OCI	H.22(c ) States that "This notification could consist of the entire task order, or parts of the task order. "

Since the OCI restrictions may apply to parts of or all of a task order, would the prime or subcontractors who are not performing work on a targeted portion of the TO be subject to the OCI restrictions? Does the OCI strategy only include the subcontractor and/or prime performing work in that area of the TO?		207	As the clause states, OCI could consist of the entire task or or parts of the task order. It is the Government's intent that OCI at the Task Order Level will be handled at the lowest possible level.
	209	SCIF	3.0 States that "(U) The contractor shall provide all necessary Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI)-cleared personnel with the proper expertise, facilities, and resources at time of staffing to support customer mission requirements defined herein, and further defined in subsequent task orders."

When a TO requires SCI work done at contractor facilities, will NGA extend NGA systems to contractor SCIF facilities? Will the cost of paying for these systems be part of the evaluation criteria?		209	The CLOVER PMO will not directly fund equipment installations.
	211	SCIF	4.2 States that "Any draft DD 254 approvals for contractor facility use will require a time estimate for finalization, and offer of consideration to the Government for any impacts to work performance until finalization."

Will award of TOs be allowed for companies who only have planned SCIF spaces? Will this be factored into the award criteria for a TO? 211 A) No.

B) Potentially.

212 Key Personnel 4.3 States that "Initial resume of the CPM him- or herself will be provided by the contractor company to these addressees, for Government approval."

Will the Government please clarify what they mean by the initial resume of the CPM and if this only applies when proposing the replacement of the CPM or other Key Personnel on subsequent TOs?		212	As it relates to the IDIQ-level work statement, yes.
	214	Foreign Location	6.0 States that "All proposed personnel must be eligible for outside the continental United States (OCONUS) travel."

Will the Government please clarify what requirements must be met for personnel to be considered eligible for OCONUS travel? 214 A) See Final RFP. This will be adjusted to stated that all proposed personnel must be eligible for outside the continental United States (OCONUS) travel, if it is a requirement of the individual requirement."

B) Specific Location instructions and the cooresponding requirements will be included in the Task ORder SoW/Contract.

216 Key Personnel Appendix B states that "the experience requirements for each Skill Level are the same across each WSC," but does not define any requirements for experience.

What criteria will the Government apply in the source selection and execution phases to ensure determinations whether proposed staff are qualified are objective vice subjective?		216	As discussed during Industry Day and as reflected in Section J, objective qualifications will be limited by design. Instead the Government will provide a set of requirements that need to be accomplished and a corresponding skill level which focuses on the individual's capabilities to perform.
	217	SCIF	3.0 States that "(U) The contractor shall provide all necessary Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI)-cleared personnel with the proper expertise, facilities, and resources at time of staffing to support customer mission requirements defined herein, and further defined in subsequent task orders."

Is SCIF access required at time of bid for the IDIQ or the TO?		217	No.
	219	Billing	The screenshot of the monthly activity report burn rate analysis only shows cumulative dollars at the TO level.

Will the Government break this down to the CLIN level to accurately reflect burn rate against available funding by CLIN?		219	This will be adjusted with the indivdual Task Orders once their CLIN structure is implemented.
	221	SCIF	F.3 States that "The primary place of performance is a Government facility, or at a contractor facility within 75 miles of the associated Government facility".

Will any work performed at the contractor's facilities be classified? If so, does the government require the contractor to have a SCIF? If a SCIF is required, will the government confirm what the minimum requirements would involve for the SCIF space and if the government will pay for any specific accommodations (e.g. extension of NGA systems to contractor's SCIF) that may be required?"		221	The CLOVER PMO will not directly pay for the cost of any SCIF. These should be captured in the Offerors' fully-burdened offsite rates.
	223	SCIF	4.2 States that "Any draft DD 254 approvals for contractor facility use will require a time estimate for finalization, and offer of consideration to the Government for any impacts to work performance until finalization."

Will the government be paying to extend NGA Systems to new SCIF spaces for the conduct of work on TOs? Will the cost of these systems be paid for by the government? Will the cost be part of the award criteria when choosing a vendor?		223	No.
	226	SCIF	4.4 States that "The Government will provide access to information and data, relative to the tasks required to include sponsoring classified network connectivity. "

Since the government is the only entity that can provide classified NGA systems, will NGA systems be extended to contractor provided SCIF spaces to meet TO requirements for off-site work? Will the government pay the cost? Will this be considered as part of the award criteria for each TO? Wil the contractor be required to compensate the government for any delays in getting access to classified networks?		226	The CLOVER PMO will not directly fund any equipment purchases or intallation. The requirement owner always has the possiblity to fund, however this should not be expected as a guarentee.
	228	OCI	(b) Various CLOVER task orders may contain significant, non-mitigatable OCI Restrictions.

Which of the 10 Task Orders identified will require OCI Total Avoidance?		228	NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to Question 13.
	229	OCI	(d) Due to the sensitive nature of the work within the CLOVER contract, contractors may have access to the most sensitive data, such as acquisition and financial information throughout the entire Agency. It is the Governments intent that these special OCI situations be minimized to the specific activities /requirements within a specific Task Order, and not be all inclusive to the Task Order in its entirety.

If it is the Governments intent that these special OCI situations be minimized to the specific activities / requirements within Specific Task Order, and not be all inclusive to the Task Order in it's entirety. Will these specific activities / requirements be identified by positions in the TO?		229	Yes.
	231	Definition	Labor Rate Matrix Table identifies CY-1 through CY-7

Is the Calendar year in Section J Attachment 3 based on the contractor's calendar year, or Jan 1- Dec 31?		231	CY stands for Contract Year, starting on the day of award.
	233	Definition	An offeror’s Security Volume must contain a listing of the proposed key personnel as stated in the RFP for the performance of the NEE Contract.

Will the final RFP define “NEE Contract”?		233	This will be changed to "CLOVER Contract" in the Final RFP.
	239	Billing	F.4 States that "billed to the task order without prior COR/GPOC coordination and CO approval."

Will Contractor PMO support be billable to the contract? If so, please include the PMO support in the pricing sheet.		239	No, Contractor PMO (or CPMO) support is not a direct billable item, and should be factored into the Offeror's fully-burdened rate.
	241	Billing	Will G&A be applicable for travel expenses?	241	No fee is allowed for Travel.
	242	OCI	Upon completion of the TO period and all option years for the Prime Contractor and Subs, the special restraints imposed by the clause shall apply for no less than an additional one (1) year, but no more than two (2) Years.

Does this mean that CLOVER Prime's and Subs that work on these TO's are OCI'd out of future NGA work for 1 to 2 years? If so, who or how is the 1 verse 2 years determined?		242	Determinations of individual OCI requirements will be made by the Contracting Officer during the development of an OCI Plan with the corresponding vendor.
	244	OCI	H.21 states that certain CLOVER task orders may have non-mitigable OCI restrictions.

Will CLOVER contractors awarded CLOVER task orders with non-mitigable OCIs be restricted from competing for all other CLOVER task orders?

Which CLOVER task orders are expected to have non-mitigable OCI restrictions?

What percentage of CLOVER task orders are expected to have non-mitigable OCI restrictions? 244 a) At this time, a contractor awarded a CLOVER task order will not be restricted from being awarded other CLOVER taks orders.

B) NGA does not intend to publish this information. See response to question 13.

246 Evaluation L.10.1 indicates that Proposal Volume 4 should include Industry Certifications, and the Self-Scoring Sheet indicates offerors will receive points for having a CMMI certification and/or an ISO certification.

How are CMMI and ISO certifications beneficial to NGA under the CLOVER Program?

Was a CMMI and/or an ISO certification a requirement for RDAS or EMERALD, and if not who do these certifications benefit the CLOVER contract?

Also, since this requirement was not included in the RFI, does the Government have confidence that there is market research to validate there are a sufficient number of small business companies that meet this requirement.		246	These certifications are not a requirement to become CLOVER Prime. However, they do provide benefit to the Government and as such NGA will award additional points in the self-scoring sheet to vendors who have demonstrated that they hold these certifications.
	253	Definition	Will the government clarify what is intended by the "unique nuances" and "unique mission requirements" in the following statement: This range will set a defined rate structure to allow for fair and reasonable rates to be utilized in the Task Order Proposal Period to allow for unique nuisances of the market based upon unique mission requirements. Are these government defined or contractor defined as regards the determination of what unique nuances and unique mission requirements are?	253	The Price Range allows vendors the opportunity to set a range at the IDIQ level, and not lock in a set rate until the Task Order proposal. This allows for a difference in unique skills between task orders.
	263	Post Award	Due to COVID, will the government consider having a virtual debrief for the Base Awardees and subsequent Task Orders Awardees to allow for open discussion to better understand the government's requirement verses a written document format as was done with NSE SOW 2.	263	Debriefing will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the FAR and DPC guidance; no specific method of debriefing will be established at this time. If a debriefing will be held in person, it will be handled safely according to NGA and CDC policy in effect at the time of the debrief.
	267	Key Personnel	This section names the Program Manager as Key personnel, but also implies that other positions are key. Section L.11.4.3 requires a “listing of the proposed key personnel as stated in the RFP for the performance of the NEE Contract …”.	267	Updated. See Final RFP.
	268	Key Personnel	Q – Will the government please clarify how many key personnel are required?	268	The Draft RFP only states that the Program Manager is a Key Personnel. This is subject to change in the Final RFP. Individual Task Orders will also have designated Key Personnel.
	269	Definition	Q – Is “NEE contract” relevant to this requirement? If so, please clarify.	269	No.
	273	Page Count	Each sub volume in Volume 2 is currently limited to 10 pages. However, this is the section for us to provide SOWs, PWSs, and other documentation used to verify relevancy. Please modify the page limitation to allow adequate page count to provide sufficient documentation or specify allowable truncation of documentation to meet this requirement.	273	Page counts have been removed for supporting documentation.
	274	Page Count	Table L.10 specifies a page limit of 5 pages per contract (max 25 pages). Section L.11.3 allows up to nine past performances to be cited. Are 5 pages per past performance allowed, up to 45 pages max? Please clarify the total number of pages allowed for this section.	274	Page counts have been removed for supporting documentation.
	281	Scorecard	The size of these contracts are impossible for only small businesses to reach. To get maximum points, small businesses MUST team with large businesses that have $100M contracts. This seems unreasonable for a small business set aside. Would the government consider modifying the Project Values downward to be more small business reasonable?	281	See response to Question 150.
	282	Scorecard	The section titled “WSC Group Relevant Experience Projects Size and Complexity” sub-totals to 9000 points. However, in reality each past performance can only score up to 1500 points (if $100M or above). Should the maximum number of points for this section be 4500?	282	Correct. The maximum score for this section is 4,500.
	283	Edit	Volume 2 – Relevant Experience. Line 26 of the spreadsheet states that “The submitted projects must meet the conditions listed in L.9.2.2”. L.9.2.2 does not appear in the RFP section L. Please clarify.	283	These typos have been corrected. Please see the Final RFP.
	287	Scorecard	WSC Group Relevant Experience Projects - Please clarify section L.11.2.2 (WSC Group Relevant Experience Projects Size and Complexity) of the HTRO scoring sheet: # of projects allowed, scoring, etc. What is the total possible maximum score?	287	The total maximum score is currently 71,000. This is subject to change in the final RFP.
	288	Scorecard	Certifications - Can self-scoring for Industry Certifications be from any of the contractors on the offeror’s team?	288	Industry Certifications should come from the Prime offeror. Clear instructions will be provided on the updated spreadsheet.
	289	Scorecard	Certifications - In the Industry Certifications section of the Self Scoring Sheet, can we take credit for Level II and Level III? The reason we ask is that they are both totaled in the Subtotal score. What is the total possible maximum score?	289	No, you should select the highest certification you hold.
	290	Scorecard	Past performance submissions - Since Clover will be solicited as Small Business Set Aside Under the 54611 NAICS why is there so much emphasis (i.e. scoring value) for Past Performance references > $100M? The current scoring puts small business at a disadvantage.	290	See Question 150.
	292	Page Count	Will the Government allow Offeror's to have an Unlimited page count in these areas so that the Offeror can properly address the Section L Cost/Price requirements	292	Page counts have been removed for supporting documentation.
	297	Evaluation	Q1: Paragraph L.11.3.1 Can Government make the recency requirement 5-years considering that:	297	No. The Government intends to still require Past Performance to be within the last three years.
	306	Evaluation	As the Relevant Experience is currently written there are not enough viable companies possessing relevant NGA Financial Management past performance of this size and scope. Our research indicates only a single Emerald incumbent at the subcontractor level as meeting this requirement. Furthermore even at lower project sizes, the only was to demonstrate NGA past performance is by being a current Emerald prime or significant subcontractor.	306	The Government does not require past NGA experience as a qualifying factor.
	307	Evaluation	4.For Sub-Volume 2D – WSC Group Relevant Experience Project in a Foreign Location - Recommend clarification regarding the specific requirements to be demonstrated in a Foreign Location relevant experience and recommend that ability to meet the specific requirements be considered in lieu of Foreign Location past performance.	307	Noted.
	309	Award Fee	6.Recommend that the Staff Award portion of the award fee remove the phrase “in the position they are initially assigned” as this will only incentive team members to look outside of their current Task Order for future opportunities versus providing employees growth opportunities and upward mobility.	309	Noted.
	313	Scorecard	· A CLOVER award is dependent upon being in the “Top 4” rated submissions. The initial “Top 4” ranking of proposal submissions will be based on the Offeror’s Documentation Verification and Self-Scoring Worksheet. The majority of available points is based on nine (9) WSC Project submissions. Will the scoring be normalized (averaged) across all submissions? For example, if Team #1 submits five (5) WSC Projects and Team #2 submits nine (9) WSC Projects, there would be a large disparity in scored points. Will the scores be averaged based on the number of submitted projects?	313	No.
	318	Edit	Please clarify the government expectations of industry and potentially update J.3 to align with B.6 and M.8.	318	The government believes its intent is clear in J.3, B.6 and M.8. The Award fee is not evaluated and will be added by the CO at time of Task Order Award.
	319	Award Fee	Please clarify if the government would like industry to account for the 2% Award/Incentive Fee Does the government desire to have industry include in our fully burdened rates? If not, please let us know how the government would like to handle within Volume 6 – Cost/Price Volume.	319	The Award Fee will be entered by the government into each individual Task Order. This is not to be included in the fully-burdened rates.

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 Feb 17, 2021.