QA_posted.docx

Q1: please clarify the quantities listed in Attachment 2 “Price”. Are we assuming the following correctly:

· CLIN 0001 – 5 week course equals 25 academic days (200 hours)

· CLIN 0002 – 2 week course equals 10 academic days (80 hours)

· CLIN 0003 – 1 additional day equals 8 hours

Yes, each course day is assuming an 8 hour workday.

Q2: Per the PWS indicating class size (para 4.1.1.1) and the CLIN structure in Attachment 2 "Price", it is our assumption that 1-2 instructors would be required per 5-week and 2-week course. Understanding the uncertainty and possible surge requirements, is "1-2 instructors per course" a valid general assumption?

Per PLTCE regulations, the maximum number of allowed students per instructor for course is 10 students. Historically each course has typically required 1-2 instructors.

Q3: PWS Para 6.3.1 refers to Key Personnel. Is it a valid assumption that each proposed language instructor would be considered Key Personnel, or would you advise for Offerors to designate 1-2 principal (“key”) instructors, and the others as potential back-ups/substitutes

6.3.1 refers to the instructors under an awarded call order CLIN. The intention of the key personnel clause for language instructors is to have one instructor per course CLIN designated as "key" for the performance of the call order.

Q4. How many instructor resumes for each labor category does the Government require for proposal submission?

As Stated in Section 2.0 of the solicitation, quoters are instructed to propose two instructors capable of providing English for Specific/Academic Purposes (ESP/EAP) instruction services.

Q5. How many instructors does the Government anticipate needing for each year of the proposed BPA?

The estimated number of weeks of instruction are listed in Addendum 1, at the end of the solicitation.

Q6. Can you please provide the name of the previous contractor and contract number? Culmen International, HQ0236-09-D-0001

Q7. Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number HQ023615T0001 contain requirements similar to a current contract?

If possible, please provide the current contract number.

Or, is this a new requirement for the government?

Please see response to Q6.

Q8. Could you please confirm the due date and time (with time zone) of Solicitation HQ0236-15-T-0001 English Language Instruction Services BPA? Is it December 16, 2014 9:00 AM EST?On the right side of the FBO website, the current response date says Dec 16, but the Amendment clause says Dec 17th. Can you please clarify for us?

Amendment 01 revised the closing date to December 16th.

Q8: In Factor 4 of the PWS it references a PPQ but no example appears to be included in the solicitation. Can offerors receive a PPQ format?

A sample PPQ has been included in this amendment to the solicitation.

Q9. Q5: Related to the above, if offerors sent PPQs in response to the GCMC language BPA in April, will those PPQs suffice for this solicitation?

If PPQ's were sent in response to HQ0236-13-T-0004 the quoter must request to have the PPQ included in their quote.

Q10. Also, regarding the start date of the contract; I see only 2015. Is there a date specific intended?

The first course is anticipated to begin 22 January 2015.

Q11. As I look through the price matrix in order to provide unit and total amounts, I am not sure if the 2 sets of the 5-week and the 2-week courses are consecutive or split into various times in the calendar year. This will of course mean a difference in travel and accommodations for those of us out-of-country. Can you provide clarity around this question?

The rates for the 5 week and 2 week courses should not be assumed to be consecutive. With regards to the rate for “additional days” it should be assumed consecutive to a 5 or 2 week course. Vendors should build any potential price risk into their rates.