Copy_of_Questions_from_Vendors_II.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Amendment 08 September 2016
- Solicitation number
- HQ0034-16-R-0210
- Issued by
-
DOD Washington Headquarters Service
About this file
Questions and Answers Part II
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Labor_Categories_Attachment.docx | DOCX document | |
| 8_Sept_16_FINAL_AMENDMENT.docx | DOCX document | |
| Pricing_Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Amended_Solicitation_removal_of_key_personnel_DoD_Portfolio_Management.docx | DOCX document | |
| Administrative_Amendments_to_Solicitation_HQ0034-16-R-0210_06_September_2016.docx | DOCX document | |
| Amended_Solicitation_HQ0034-16-R-0210.docx | DOCX document | |
| past_performance_questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| DD254.pdf | ||
| Pricing_Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Non_Disclosure.pdf | ||
| Q_ _A_Vendors.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Pricing_Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DD254.pdf | ||
| Q_ _A_Vendors.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Non_Disclosure.pdf | ||
| past_performance_questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| Amended_Solicitation_HQ0034-16-R-0210.docx | DOCX document | |
| past_performance_questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| past_performance_questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| DD254.pdf | ||
| BA_Combined_Synopsis_Solication_Business_Analytics.docx | DOCX document | |
| BA_HQ0034-16-R-0210.pdf |
Show all 22
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
Sheet1
| QUESTION | Question continued | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| Would you be able to tell me if there is an incumbent contractor for this requirement? If so, could you please provide the contractor name and the contract number that was awarded? | Contract # is HQ0034-13-C-0096 and the incumbent contractor is Koniag Information Security Services, LLC |
| Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number HQ003416R0210 contain requirements similar to a current contract? If possible, please provide the current contract number. Or, is this a new requirement for the government? | This a follow on requirement and the current contract # is HQ0034-13-C-0096 |
| As a small disadvantaged business program participant, we do not have work that currently requires a facility clearance, although we currently meet the necessary requirement for sponsorship. As a way to increase competition and limit barriers to potential 8(a) respondents, would the Government be willing to sponsor the Prime contractor for a SECRET facility clearance post submission rather than at the time of the proposal's submission? Post contract award and prior to our receiving our facility clearance, a subcontractor working with Paragone on this project will provide FSO services. This is aligned to NISPOM Section 2-100 which states that "Contract award may be made prior to the issuance of an FCL" as well as the DSS FCL FAQs (Caution-http://www.dss.mil/isp/fac_clear/per_sec_clear_proc_faqs.html). | At this time, prime contractors must have an active SECRET facility clearance at time of proposal submission in accordance with the solicitation. |
| In Section L of the PWS, Sub-Factor 3, Demonstration Project subsection i) it states "The offeror shall describe their approach to applying audit and accounting best practices to DoD as identified in the BA Solicitation in accordance with Seed Task Order PWS 3.2. and in sub-section ii),"The offeror shall describe their approach to requirements analysis of DoD financial reporting to include SFIS, SLOA, and USSGL as identified in the BA Solicitation in accordance with Demonstration Task ORder PWS 3.2" . Can you confirm that we should not address Tasks 3.1 IDIQ Program Management Capability and 3.3 FIAR project management expertise? | Vendors are required to address those tasks in the initial demonstration task order, this is outlined in the solicitation. This will be the first task order issued |
| Are Letters of Intent excluded from the page count? | Yes. Intent letters are excluded from the page count. |
| The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s staffing plan for meeting the defined requirements for the Base IDIQ PWS and Call Order 0001 PWS. As this is an IDIQ is the Government going to provide the expected Level of Effort for the IDIQ portion of the contract? This will aid in the determination of the size of the contractor facility required to house the workforce. | We cannot provide an expected level of effort for the IDIQ portion due to budget constraints. Pls review pricing template for minimum LOE requirements. Any work conducted outside DCMO can be performed via teleworking at the contractor employee home. Use of a contractor facility is not expected nor required to house the workforce during authorized teleworking |
| Besides a completed Section B, is there a requirement to provide any other additional pricing information? The table provides pricing for the seed effort but no pricing or labor designations for the IDIQ submission | Please see attached Pricing Template. Offerors should provide pricing for the Demonstration Task Order as well as, provide rates for the IDIQ and its option periods |
| Under the Instructions for Volume III, Price, Factor 3, page 58 of the RFP, it states: “Offerors shall provide the following per RFP Section B, Pricing Table paragraph and format specified in Section B, Table B-1.” Section B, the pricing table, and Table-1 is not included in the solicitation. Can the Government provide Section B, the pricing table, and Table-1? | Yes, pricing template is attached to the amendment |
| The solicitation lists five key personnel/labor categories. In drafting of the price volume, does the Government desire a pricing proposal limited to only the LOE associated with the five LCATs or is there another LOE that the Government desires to see in the pricing volume? | Please see attached pricing template which contains the labor categories estimated. However, it is noted within the pricing template that offerors may proposed additional labor categories if needed. |
| Offerors are responsible for having each of their customer POCs complete a Past Performance Questionnaire and submitted NLT two days BEFORE the response date identified on solicitation to be included in Factor 2 - Past Performance. Due to the Labor Day weekend and the Government POCs workload, is it possible to extend the due date for the PPQs? | No. Due to tight deadline requirement, we need all PPQs by the solicitation deadline- 09 September 2016. |
| Will the Government consider evaluating CPARS in lieu of PPQs, to lessen the workload on Government Contracting Office personnel? | No |
| Due to the level of detail responding to the RFP, an extremely quick expected turnaround, and Labor Day weekend, would the Government consider extending the due date until 16 September? | No. Due to tight deadline requirement, we need all proposals by the 09 September 2016 deadline |
| The table in Section L Submission requirements states "3-One original and two copies" plus a CD ROM for each volume. The Combined synopsis states "All offers shall be sent to the Washington Headquarters Services Acquisition Directorate using the email address, dimitria.h.antonopoulos.civ@mail.mil." Please clarify if this is a hard copy submission or email. | Due to tight deadline, no hard copies required. The Government will accept email proposals only. Please email proposals directly to: dimitria.h.antonopoulos.civ@mail.mil and anthony.j.weedin.civ@mail.mil. A confirmation email will be sent to all offerors upon receipt of their emailed proposals. |
| 1. Offerors should submit past performance information on IDIQ/BPA orders that have occurred within the five (5) years of the proposal date. Offerors shall provide (3) three summaries of each experience outlining the details of management of the IDIQ/BPA task orders, duties and how the work was accomplished. Page 63 - 2. Factor 2- Past Performance: |
“Recent” means contracts that are on-going or have been completed within three (3) years from the closing date of this RFQ. Please see following 4 questions below:
| Question: Past performances should be "Recent" 3 years or 5 years? | 5 years |
| Question: From closing date or Issuing date? | From closing date of contract |
| Question: What is the date to be used? | The date within the 5 years of proposal date |
| Question: Does the government mean 3 past performance summaries total? | Yes |
| Can the government consider extending the proposal deadline to at least one more week? | No |
| Can the government clarify if it wants the Quality Control Plan (ref PWS 3.1.4) “within 10 days after contract award” as stated on Page 69 of the RFP? Or, does the government want the Quality Control Plan with submission of the proposal, as stated on paragraph 2.9.1? | Within 10 days of contract award |
| 1 | The Combined Synopsis/Solicitation page 2 asks the Offeror to list exceptions to the terms and conditions, but RFP Section L Paragraph 2 states that any exception will cause the proposal to be rejected and not considered for award. Can the Government please confirm that exceptions to the terms and conditions will not disqualify an offeror? | If an offeror does not meet the terms and conditions within the solicitation, it would not be eligible for contract award |
| 2 | In RFP Section L section on submission requirements, the RFP lists hard copies and CD-Rom requirements, but the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation states on page 2 that Offerors shall submit one electronic copy to the Contract Specialist. Please clarify the submission requirements, including the method of submission as well as the page limits for each section. | Per previous response above, the Government has amended proposal submission to be only email submission due to tight deadline. All proposals shall be emailed directly to: dimitria.h.antonopoulos.civ@mail.mil and anthony.j.weedin.civ@mail.mil |
| 3 | Please confirm that resumes are only to be provided for the Demonstration Task Order Key Personnel. | Yes |
| 4 | RFP Section L does not reference PWS Section 2.3 Task 3 Surge Support. Please confirm that there is no need to address Section 2.3 Task Surge Support in a response to the RFP. b. If Task 3 Surge Support is to be addressed, would the government consider increasing the page count for the Technical Proposal to 25 pages? | There is a need to respond to a Surge Support, pls review the revised solicitation, yes technical proposals may be increased to 25 pages. |
| 5 | RFP Section L.Factor 1.Sub-factor 2.iii states “The Offeror shall demonstrate the depth and breadth of their experience delivering functional DoD subject matter experts via a staffing plan that describes proposed labor categories, manning levels and skill mix to meet the requirements of the solicitation Seed Project.” In RFP Section M.Subfactor 2, the RFP references a staffing plan for both the Base IDIQ PWS and Call Order 0001 PWS. Please confirm that the required staffing plan/matrix is only for the Demonstration Project. | Please see updated solicitation attached for edits to this section |
| 6 | RFP Section L.Factor 2.Volume II.1 states that Offerors should “submit past performance information on IDIQ/BPA orders.” a. Please confirm that offerors can submit relevant past performance on efforts that are relevant to this effort that are not an IDIQ nor BPA | Yes, offerors may submit relevant past performance on efforts that are relevant to this effort that are not an IDIQ or BPA |
| 7 | RFP Section L.Factor 2.Volume II.1 states “Offerors shall provide (3) three summaries of each experience.” a. Could the government please clarify what is meant by this statement? | This means that the Government would like to see at least 3 past performance sources |
| 8 | RFP Section L.Factor 3. Volume III states “the pricing schedule is for the demonstration/seed project and the offeror shall price all labor categories as displayed.” a. As there was no Seed TO and IDIG Labor Category Price Template included as an attachment to the solicitation, please clarify what is meant by “price all labor categories as displayed.” | Please see attached pricing template for further clarification. |
| 9 | RFP Section M.Subfactor 1.A.i. states “The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s approach to delivering skilled resources against the tasks described in PWS section 2.0, to include their strategy and approach to preparing for and executing customer engagements.” This work is not referenced in IDIQ PWS 2.0. Please clarify. | Pls review revised solicitation. |
| 10 | RFP Section M.Subfactor 1.A.ii. states “The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s approach to applying the government’s standard practices (PWS section 2.1.5) when developing, utilizing and assessing performance, business, service, and data reference models, to include enterprise architecture and modeling tools.” There is no PWS section 2.1.5. Please clarify. | Pls review revised solicitation. |
| 11 | RFP Section M. Subfactor 1.A.iv references work that does not seem to be part of the work included in this solicitation. Please clarify. | Please see revised Section M |
| 12 | In the first paragraph of RFP Section M.Subfactor 2, the RFP references PWS section 2.1. PWS Paragraph 2.1 specifically references Task 1 Portfolio Management. a. Please clarify that the staffing plan in Subfactor 2 is to address only the requirement of PWS |
2.1 rather than all of PWS section 2.
| Staffing plan is to address IDIQ/PWS and initial demonstration seed task order requirements, pricing spreadsheet provided in Amendment 3 | |||
| 13 | RFP Section M.Subfactor 2 references a ‘Call Order.’a. Please confirm Call Order 0001 refers to the Demonstration Task Order that begins on page 66 of the RFP | Yes, the Demonstration Task Order refers to Call order 0001 | |
| 14 | IDIQ PWS Paragraph 2.5.1 Key Personnel does not list a PMP requirement for the Lead Program Manager, but the PWS for the Demonstration Task states on page 68 that a “PMP certification (or equivalent) and at least 1 year experience managing to the principles of the PMBOK is preferred. a. Please confirm the requirements of the Lead Program Manager | Please see updated solicitation for the requirements of the Program Manager. | |
| 15 | IDIQ PWS 5.2.8 states government does not have any permanent working space for the contractors but F.3 and Seed Task Order 10.1 states that Telework will not be authorized unless approved in advance. a. Please clarify if the Seed Task Order should be priced using government or contractor- facility rates. | The seed should be govt pricing, not contractor-facility pricing. Telework is normally pre-approved very quickly. | |
| 16 | RFP Section H.1 Key Personnel lists Lead Program Manager, Subject Matter Expert 2 (Acquisition), Subject Matter Expert 2 (Human Resources), Subject Matter Expert 2 (Logistics/Supply Chain), and DoD Portfolio Management Subject Matter Expert (SME) as Key Personnel. The IDIQ PWS 2.5.1 lists Lead Program Manager, Subject Matter Expert 2 (Financial Management/Audit), Subject Matter Expert 2 (Acquisition), Subject Matter Expert 2 (Human Resources), and Subject Matter Expert 2 (Logistics/Supply Chain) as Key Personnel. The Seed Task Key Personnel are listed as Program Manager, DoD Financial Management/Audit Subject Matter Expert, and DoD Project Management SME. a. Please confirm what Key Personnel required | Please see updated solicitation as IDIQ and Demonstration Task Order key personnel are identified | |
| 17 | Is the Key Personnel referenced as Program Manager in the Seed Task the same resource as the Lead Program Manager listed in IDIQ PWS 2.5.2 and RFP H.1? | The Government expects a Program Manager to manage the IDIQ. However, it is up to offerors to propose whether this person will also have specific subject matter experience. | |
| 18 | RFP Section L.Factor 1.Sub-Factor 3 references only PWS 3.2. However, Demonstration Task PWS Paragraph 3.3 is also relevant to the approach. a. Please confirm the exclusion of 3.3 from the evaluation of this sub-factor was intentional. |
| Please see updated solicitation for the subfactor information | ||
| 19 | IDIQ PWS 2.7 Deliverable Management states the Quality Control Plan (QCP) will be due on the proposal due date. a. Given the scope of the Demonstration Task Order, please confirm that the QCP and the specific items requested as part of the QCP in the proposal are applicable to the IDIQ and/or Demonstration Task Order. |
b. If the QCP is to be included in the proposal, is it included in the page count?
c. Would the government consider changing the requirement to a QCP to be submitted upon award?
The QCP is expected within 10 days of award
DIMITRIA ANTONOPOULOS: DIMITRIA ANTONOPOULOS:
| 20 | RFP Section J states that there are 3 attachments to the RFP but only two have been posted to FBO; DD254 and Past Performance questionnaire. a. Will the government make the remaining attachment available “Seed TO and IDIQ Labor Category Price Template. | The solicitation has been updated. Please see updated attachments section. |
| As PRIME we have not yet received our Secrete Level Clearance but many of teaming partners have Secrete & Top Secrete Level Cleared Facilities within 35 miles radius of DCMO. Can government allowed PRIME (SBA 8a) Contractor to use one of teaming partner facility to be eligible for award (Section 2.13) | No | |
| Is this a new solicitation or replacement of existing Contract? If YES: Can government provide the list of current incumbents supporting existing Contract? |
When will be the existing contract expires and the new Contract will be active?
| This is a follow on requirement. The incumbent contractor is Koniag Information Security Services, LLC. The current contract expires in FY16 and the new contract is expected to be active in FY16. | ||
| When government is expecting to award this Contract? | Fiscal Year 2016 | |
| When work under 1st Task Order awarded under this Contract is expected to start? | Fiscal Year 2016 | |
| How many Task Orders Government is Planning to award during the entire length of the Contract & Approx. value of the Task Order? | This information is unavailable at this time | |
| Do we need to submit Paper copies or electronic copies of our proposal? Can government provide guidance on following statement page 4 of solicitation document "all offerors shall submit the following: one (1) complete electronic copy of their proposal. | Per previous comments above, please submit all proposals via email to: dimitria.h.antonopoulos.civ@mail.mil and anthony.j.weedin.civ@mail.mil | |
| Can government extend the RFP proposal submission date from 9th September to 16th September? | No | |
| Do all past performance requirement listed is only for PRIME or it can be combination of PRIME and SUB? | No | |
| Can we propose additional labor categories for key personnel besides those were listed in H.1 based on our past experience supporting similar effort? | Yes, please see attached pricing template with note to offerors allowing them to proposed additional labor categories as needed. | |
| Can government increase the page limit of technical proposal from 20 pages to 25 pages? | Yes, page limit for technical proposal is increased to maximum 25 pages. | |
| Can government increase the page limit on Past Performance from 5 pages to 9 pages (3 pages each per Past Performance)? | Yes | |
| Is Sample Task Order Response is within the current Technical Proposal limit of 20 pages? | No |
| Page 15 & 16, Section C, Performance Work Statement, Key Personnel, Lists: Lead Program Manager, SME 2 Financial Management/Audit, SME 2 Acquisition, SME 2 Human Resources, SME 2 Logistics/Supply Chain. | Page 37, Section H.1 Key Personnel, lists key positions as defined as: Lead Program Manager, SME 2 Acquisition, SME 2 Human Resources, SME 2 Logistics/Supply Chain, DoD Portfolio Management SME. Question: which key personnel list should be used, page 15/16 or page 37 | PWS Paragraph 2.5.1 entitled "Key Personnel" should be used as the key personnel list | ||
| Page 55, Sub-factor 2, Staffing Plan including the Qualification Matrix, iii. The Offeror shall demonstrate the depth and breadth of their experience delivering functional DoD subject matter experts via a staffing plan that describes proposed labor categories, manning levels and skill mix to meet the requirements of the solicitation Seed Project. | Is the solicitation Seed Project the "Demonstration Task Order" starting on page 66, please advise. | Yes, the seed project was also referred to as the demonstration task order. However, the Government has updated the solicitation in order to reflect consistent language (demonstration task order) throughout the solicitation. | ||
| Page 55, Sub-factor 3: Demonstration Project, i. The offeror shall describe their approach to applying audit and accounting best practices to DoD as identified in the BA Solicitation in accordance with Seed Task Order PWS 3.2. | Is the "Seed Task Order PWS 3.2" referring to the "Demonstration Task Order" starting on page 66, please advise. | Yes, per previous comment above, the Seed Task Order was used to describe the demonstration task order, however the Government has updated the solicitation in order to reflect consistent language (demonstration task order) throughout the solicitation. | ||
| Page 56, Sub-factor 3, paragraph ii., The offeror shall describe their approach to requirements analysis of DoD financial reporting to include SFIS, SLOA, and USSGL as identified in the BA Solicitation in accordance with Demonstration Task Order PWS 3.2. | Is the Demonstration Task Order PWS 3.2 what is described starting on page 66, please advise. | Please see revised solicitation. Yes, the demonstration task order starts now on page 65 and is entitled " Demonstration task order" Title: Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) Project Execution Support. | ||
| Page 56, Sub-factor 3, paragraph iii, The Offeror shall submit resumes for the individuals designated personnel on the demonstration Task Order only. | Request confirmation resumes are only required for the Demonstration Task Order for positions on page 68: Program Manager (one person); DoD Financial Management/Audit Subject Matter Expert (SME) (one person); DoD Project Management SME (one person). This indicates there are no resumes required (provide a staffing plan) in the proposal for the Key Personnel listed on pages 15/16 and page 37, please confirm. | Correct. In accordance with the solicitation, offerors shall submit resumes for the individuals designated as key personnel on the Demonstration Task Order only. | ||
| Page 62, Subactor 1 - Management Approach, A. Management Approach for IDIQ, paragraph ii, The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s approach to applying the government’s standard practices (PWS section 2.1.5) when developing, utilizing and assessing performance, business, service, and data reference models, to include enterprise architecture and modeling tools. | 2.1.4 on page 11/12, 2.2 on page 12. Please advise location of PWS section 2.1.5 or where it might be incorporated in another section. | Pls review the revised solicitation to address the business analytic approach/requirement | ||
| 7. Page 62, Subfactor 2 - Staffing Plan - The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s staffing plan for meeting the defined requirements for the Base IDIQ PWS and Call Order 0001 PWS. | Call Order 0001 PWS, please advise if this refers to the Demonstration Task Order starting on 66. | Yes, this refers to the Demonstration Task Order. The Government has updated the solicitation to reflect Demonstration Task Order throughout the solicitation for consistency. | ||
| Page 45, Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments, Attache # 01 Seed TO and IDIQ Labor Category Price Template | Please advise location of this document or instructions regarding the price template | Please see attached Pricing Template | ||
| Page 58, INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III, PRICE, FACTOR 3 Pricing Schedule. Offerors shall provide the following per RFP Section B, Pricing Table paragraph and format specified in Section B, Table B-1 (the table is provided as the template/format for submission; the burden of providing mathematically accurate and complete pricing proposals (total overall evaluated price) using the format provided in Section B, Table B-1 rests with each offeror): - Working this Section. | ||||
| The pricing schedule is for the demonstration/seed project and the offeror shall price all labor categories as displayed. | Please advise location of this document or instructions regarding the price template. Is the pricing ONLY for the Demonstration Task Project or for both the PWS and the Demonstration Task Project. | Please see attached Pricing Template. Offerors are required to price for both the Demonstration Task Order and IDIQ rates for Option Years. | ||
| Will There be any type of pre-proposal conference regarding this solicitation? Will there be a set time for questions and answers? Who is the incumbent? | There will be no pre-proposal conference. Deadline for questions to the solicitation were noted within the solicitation. Incumbent is Koniag Information Security Services, LLC. | |||
| In Section L, Instructions to Offerors, the following language is provided:“Type format shall be Microsoft Word Times New Roman Font Size 12 with normal proportional spacing with the exception of charts. Text lines shall be singlespaced. The font style and size for graphics, tables, organizational charts, drawings, and other inserts shall be Arial.” |
Can the government clarify that this is correct and that two font types are requested for use in the document?
| Times New Roman 12 font is sufficient for all documents and charts | ||
| Instead of a single/comprehensive qualification matrix in the body of the Technical Proposal, would the government allow for position-specific qualification matrices to be included with the individual resumes? | No | |
| In the Section L guidance for Volume II – Past Performance Proposal, the government indicates that the page maximum is 5. However, the government also established a page restriction of 1 page per past performance reference, for a maximum of three, indicating 3 pages total. Given that there is 2 pages that are allotted but not able to be used, would the government consider removing the 1 page per reference restriction to provide additional detail up to the volume’s 5 page maximum? | Yes | |
| In Section L guidance for Volume II – Past Performance Proposal, the government provides guidance in the first bullet/paragraph of the guidance, listing the following information required in the references: “. Summary should be no more than 1 page for each summary and include name of project, name of customer, contract number, dollar value, and period of performance.” However, further down this same guidance, there is an expanded bulleted list of criteria that government requests that is different from the before-mentioned guidance. Can the government clarify? | The following information should be limited to one page: • Company/Division name |
• Description of service and a detailed explanation of relevance to this requirement
• Small business participation, as applicable
• Contracting Agency/Customer point of contact or reference having knowledge of contract performance
• Contract Number
• Contract Type and Dollar Value
• Designation as prime or subcontractor
• Period of Performance
• Completion Date
• Verified, up-to-date name, address and telephone number of the Contracting Officer
• Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.
| In Section L guidance for Volume III – Price Proposal, the government references a “Section B, Table B-1” that is necessary to populate out the pricing. However, this table was not provided with the current solicitation materials. Can the government please provide this in its next amendment? | Please see attached pricing template |
| The below questions were inadvertently missed when this Q&A was authored. | |
| Will the Government please extend the due date by three weeks to 30 September to provide sufficient time for bidders other than the incumbent to respond? The brief given at industry day stated that we would have five weeks to respond. | The incumbent will not be the only vendor to respond in a timely manner. We cannot extend the proposal due date, this was addressed in the initial Q&A. |
| On page 58, INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III, PRICE, FACTOR 3, the solicitation references a “Table B-1” and a pricing “template/format” for the demonstrations/seed project. Offerors are asked to price all labor categories as displayed in this table. This pricing schedule/table was not included. Please mod the solicitation to include the table and clarify the language in this section to make it clear what pricing information is required. | The pricing table is available from the previous amendment |
| Section L instructions to offerors on page 57 of the solicitation states that Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) are due “two days before the response date identified on solicitation.” The cover of the PPQ states the PPQ is due “no later than September 9, 2016 at 5:00 PM Eastern Time.” Due to the short response time of this effort, and the time of year with many customers on vacation, we respectfully request that you modify the solicitation so that the PPQ is due on the response date and time identified on the solicitation. | Due to tight deadline requirement, we need all PPQs by the solicitation deadline- 09 September 2016. |
| Section L’s instructions for Past Performance on page 56, #1, states that “offerors shall provide (3) three summaries of each experience”. Will the government please clarify this requirement as the wording is unclear? Is the intent that we provide up to three past performance citations? Since there is a (5) five-page limit for past performances, and each past performance is limited to (1) one page, can we presume that this is a mistake and the requirement is to submit up to (5) five past performance summaries? | Yes, companies can submit up to 5 PP summaries |
| Section M, 2.A on page 63 states that “each project provided will be assigned a relevancy rating” and Section M, 2.B defines “Relevant” as “performance of work facilitating change scale on a national/global scale government or commercial engagement.” While “facilitating change scale” is an important dimension of the SOW, it should not be the sole criteria by which a past performance is deemed relevant or not. We respectfully suggest that relevance should also include the contractor’s performance of work similar to the tasks described in Section 2 of the solicitation and work performed similar to the Seed Task. | Evolution factors are outlined in the amended solicitation. |
| Will past performance summaries be evaluated in aggregate? A one-page limit per past performance constrains our ability to address all the SOW tasks as well as the Section L and M requirements. | evaluation factors are outlined on the amended solicitation, the PP questionnaire was provided |
| Will the government clarify how many key resumes are required? Section 2.5 on page 15 appears to list 6 Key Personnel LCATS: Lead Program Manager |
Highly Qualified Subject Matter Expert - Financial Management/Audit Highly Qualified Subject Matter Expert - Acquisition Highly Qualified Subject Matter Expert - Human Resources Highly Qualified Subject Matter Expert - Logistics/Supply Chain Highly Qualified Subject Matter Expert - DoD Portfolio Management The definitions below this list does not have a definition for the SME – DoD Portfolio Management. Section H.1 on page 37 lists 5 LCATS as Key, missing the Financial Management/Audit LCAT from the list on page 15. Subfactor 3, iii of section L on page 56 states that the “offeror shall submit resumes for the individuals designated personnel on the demonstration Task Order only.” The demonstration Task Order lists three “Required & Preferred Skills” of Program Manager, DoD Financial Management / Audit SME, and DoD Project Management SME. Are these three “Preferred Skills” the Key employees? Or, are just the Financial Management /Audit and the Lead Program Manager SMEs the only key requirement since that is the only LCAT that matches those defined as Key in PWS section 2.5.1 on page 15?
| Please see attached pricing template with note to offerors allowing them to proposed additional labor categories as needed. Key personnel are also identified on the solicitation. | ||
| On page 62 Section M, paragraph ii, the solicitation states that the “offeror’s approach to applying the government’s standard practices (PWS section 2.1.5)” will be evaluated. There is no section 2.1.5 of the PWS. Will the Government please clarify this requirement? | The solicitation was revised on Amendment 3 | |
| 1. On page 62 Section M, paragraph v., the solicitation states that the “agency shall evaluate the quality of the quoter’s experience via its scope, magnitude (dollar value) and complexity”. This evaluation criteria appears to be a typographical error as this type of evaluation factor should apply in Factor 2 - past performance section, not the Subfactor 1 - management approach section. Is this correct? | The solicitation was revised on Amendment 3 | |
| Subfactor 2 – Staffing Plan on page 63 states that the government will evaluate the Offer’s staffing plan for meeting the requirements of the Base IDIQ PWS and Call Order 0001 PWS. What is the difference? Did the government intend to reference the Demonstration Task Order (Seed Task Order)? The paragraph goes on to state that this sub-factor is met when the Offeror clearly describes an approach to recruit and retain resources to ensure support of all requirements defined in PWS Section 2.1. Section 2.1 references only the Portfolio Management Task. Will the government please provide clarity as to what is desired and how the Staffing Plan will be evaluated? Section L only asks for a staffing plan describing the “Seed Project”. Did the government mean to request multiple staffing plans? | The solicitation was revised on Amendment 3 | |
| Please clarify the difference between the following terms: Base IDIQ PWS = the PWS that accompanies the IDIQ 0001 PWS = CLIN 0001 PWS Seed Project = the initial task order to be issued Demonstration Task Order = the initial task order to be issued Seed Task Order PWS 3.2 = the initial task order PWS Seed TO = the initial task order BA Solicitation = Business Analytic | Answers provided embedded after question | |
| Section 2.5.1 Key Personnel on page 15 describes the required experience of the Lead Program Manager as requiring “three (3) years of experience in the functional area identified in the TO.” What functional area is this referring to? Is the Lead PM for the Overall IDIQ or is this role unique to each TO that is issued under the IDIQ? | A Business Analytics functional area; the Government expects a Program Manager to manage the IDIQ. However, it is up to offerors to propose whether this person will also have specific subject matter experience. | |
| Is the Seed TO FFP or Time and Materials pricing? | FFP | |
| How should pricing for the overall IDIQ be presented? Section B only provides the opportunity to provide Monthly FFP pricing for 12 months. There is not sufficient details in the PWS to provide a Monthly FFP. | A pricing sheet was provided | |
| Section 52.216.1 on page 41 states “The Government contemplates award of a single award Firm Fixed Priced IDIQ contract resulting from this solicitation.” What is the Firm Fixed Price based on? | FFP is Based on Labor Hours | |
| Please share Attachments 1 and 2 described on page 45 and referred to in section 5.2.5 on page 26. | Available on Amendment 3 | |
| The INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II, PAST PERFORMANCE, FACTOR 2 on page 56 requires “Offerors should submit past performance information on IDIQ/BPA orders that have occurred within the five (5) years of the proposal date. The evaluation Factor 2 evaluation on page 63 states “Recent” means contracts that are on-going or have been completed within three (3) years from the closing date of this RFQ”. Please update the evaluation factor to define recent as within five (5) years. | Recent is defined within five years | |
| Can we only submit Past Performance work conducted on IDIQ/BPA orders? | No, other contract vehicles can be submitted | |
| What information needs to be provided in the Qualification Matrix? | Labor Mix of personnel | |
| The RFP states that “the Contractor shall not compete for any requirement that incorporates, involves or relates to any work performed by contractor under this solicitation unless otherwise authorized in writing by the Contracting Officer.” Does this mean we cannot provide similar portfolio management services to other DoD Agencies if we win this contract? | Yes that is correct | |
| Does “The font style and size for graphics, tables, organizational charts, drawings, and other inserts shall be Arial 10” mean that all of the text in graphics needs to be in Arial 10, or that the labels of graphics needs to be Arial 10? | Times New Roman 12 font is sufficient for all documents and charts | |
| The Key Personnel section (2.5.1) states: “Subject Matter Expert 2 (Financial Management/Audit) Education/Experience: Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and Master’s degree in an associated technical or line business discipline and or thirteen years (13) of progressive experience in high level technical and organizational support services”. Based on this, is this Key Personnel requirement met by an individual with a CPA and related Master’s Degree OR 13 years of progressive experience in high level technical and organizational support services? | The proposal should clearly identify your Key Personnel for the positions outlined. | |
| The sample task order asks for a “DoD Financial Management/Audit Subject Matter Expert” on page 68. Can the government clarify if the Key Position for the “Subject Matter Expert 2 – Financial Management/Audit” specified in page 15 would be expected to participate/lead the sample task order upon award, or would the government expect that we deliver 2 Financial Management/Audit personnel – one for the IDIQ and the other for the task order? | The Government expects a Program Manager to manage the IDIQ. However, it is up to offerors to propose whether this person will also have specific subject matter experience. | |
| Please provide additional detail about how the work within the demonstration task order is linked to the work of OUSD(C) and the FIAR Directorate. | No additional details can be provided without exposing classified work. | |
| In Section L, the page limit for the Technical Proposal is 20 pages overall with a maximum of 3 pages per resume. The RFP then notes that resumes don’t count against the Technical Proposal limit – should we simply include a separate section for Resumes that we then know will not count toward our 20 page limit? | You can include a section for resumes and it will not be counted towards the new 25 page limit. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .