Attachment 9 - Questions and Answers.pdf

Question RFP Document Page Section Paragraph Text or Observation Question or Recommended Change Rationale Answer (to be completed by Government)

HR001123R0001

Section L 60 L.13.5 1

The government's response to Q43 of the TASS IDIQ Pre-Solicitation Questions and Answers reads: ‘Offerors shall propose one maximum rate for each labor category each year regardless of Government-site, contractor-site, and hybrid work location.’

This response strongly implies that all of the rates submitted by offerors must fundamentally be based on the assumption of personnel working at contractor site, which traditionally include higher indirect costs due to the facilities and equipment that must be provided by the contractor. This response also appears to contradicts the language in the RFP Section L.13.5, which states: "The Offeror shall assume that the personnel proposed under these rates will receive Government furnished facilities and equipment in accordance with PWS Section 8."

Will the Government modify or clarify the language in L.13.5 or its response to Q43, and also clearly state whether the rates proposed by offerors in pricing Attachment 3 should be based on only Government site indirects with the facilities and equipment provided by the Government, or whether the rates in Attachment 3 should be based upon the Contractor providing the facilities and equipment?

Clarity is important here for potential offerors and the Government as it will allow all offerors to submit accurate rates for evaluation, and also preclude a potential protest due to uncertainty in the instructions to offerors.

Offerors shall consider the language as written in RFP Section L.13.5 and PWS Section 8 to apply.

HR001123R0001

Section L

L.8.2 (a) and L.6

The solicitation requires Offerors to provide "a copy of its letter from the Defense Security Service, Facility Clearance Branch, or equivalent accreditation agency, that grants its facility and security clearance level at the Top Secret level...".

Will the government accept a PDF copy of our facility clearance record from the National Industrial Security System (NISS), which is the government system of record for contractor facility clearances?

Will the government revise the guidance in Section L.6 to accept an encrypted proposal submission as the NISS document is marked

FOUO?

The letters that the government references in Section L.8.2(a) have not been issued in a number of years are no longer a required document. Additionally, the organization that issued them, Defense Security Service, has been re-named and restructured into the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA).

RFP Sections L 8.2(a) and L.6 are now revised.

Attachment 1 PWS/ Attachment 3 LCAT

3 3.1.1 All contractor personnel proposed shall meet the required qualifications set forth in the personnel qualifications as detailed in Attachment 3 or as identified within each task order.

In order to expand the pool of qualified individuals, would the government consider allowing additional educational degrees to compensate for years of experience and vice versa? Specifically, can an additional level of education substitute for 5 years of experience (if the LCAT requires a Bachelors and 12 years of experience then someone with a Masters and 7 years of experience would qualify)?

Conversely, can 10 years of experience substitute for an additional educational degree (if the LCAT requires a Masters and 6 years of experience then someone with a Bachelors and 16 years of experience would qualify)?

There are several recognized SMEs who hold lesser educational degrees than required by labor categories and are therefore not competitive for positions. In the end, DARPA may not be able to get the proven performers they want simply due to educational decisions made 30 years ago.

See PWS Section 3.1.5 for language regarding education/experience waiver requests for personnel.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

61 L.14.4

Page limits are identified below. The page limits do not include tables of contents, response matrix, index, and/or glossary.

Please confirm title pages/cover pages are also excluded from the page limits identified in L.14.4.

Including a cover page/title page for each volume is based on industry standard practice and allows Offerors to include essential company information, as well as their Use and Disclosure Statement, to which all subsequent proposal pages refer back.

Cover/title pages are excluded from the page limits as long as there is no information contained in them to be evaluated. RFP Section L.14.4 is now updated.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

55 L.11.b

Summary Page (1 page limit) The Summary Page shall describe the role of the Offeror and each teaming partner, if applicable, for the proposed TASS effort.

Please clarify the purpose of including the role of the Offeror and each teaming partner for the proposed TASS effort in the Past

Performance Volume, as this volume describes the Offeror's past efforts on various contracts and not the current proposed TASS effort. We recommend this information be removed from the Past Performance Volume and be instead included in Volume II -

Administrative, under the Subcontracting Plan requirement (L.8.6).

This requirement seems more applicable to Volume II - Administrative, under the

Subcontracting Plan requirement (L.8.6), as it is requesting information regarding our teaming partners for the proposed TASS effort.

This language allows the Government to assess which of the Past Performance was performed by the prime contractor versus its subcontractors. It will not be revised.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

55 L.11.b

Summary Page (1 page limit) The Summary Page shall describe the role of the Offeror and each teaming partner, if applicable, for the proposed TASS effort.

We recommend the page limit for the Summary Page be removed.

For the proposed TASS effort, Offerors may have many subcontractors/ teaming partners.

Listing all teaming partners and describing the role of each in a single page, while abiding by the font and layout restrictions in L.14, will not be possible for Offerors with many teaming partners.

Page limit now removed for Summary Page.

HR001123R0001

Attachment 9 - Questions & Answers (March 3, 2023)

TASS RFP

56 L.11.c viii

Demonstrate how the Offeror's or proposed subcontractor(s)' performance is relevant (in scope, magnitude, and complexity) to the PWS requirements.

As the Past Performance volume is to directly link with Technical Experience, please confirm Offerors' past performances in Volume V must demonstrate relevance to the same exemplar section of the PWS as Volume III - Technical Experience (PWS 7.1.2, 7.2.2, and

7.9.1) and not all tasks in PWS section 7.

Given the 2-page limit for Past Performance References, it is difficult for Offerors to demonstrate relevance to all tasks in PWS section 7 while also including the required information in L.11.c i-ix.

No, brief statements of relevance to any PWS sections will be accepted if applicable. RFP Section M.3.3 is revised to address relevance. RFP Section L.9 is also revised to remove requirement for all past performance submissions to be referenced in Factor 1 (in case any do not pertain to PWS Sections 7.1.2, 7.2.2, or 7.9.1)

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

55 L.11.a

The table of contents should include page numbers for each CPARS evaluation by contract and applicable Period of Performance.

Please confirm that the Table of Contents for Volume V can include page numbers for all required sections in Volume V in addition to the page numbers for each CPARS evaluation.

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

50 L.8.1

The Offeror shall provide, if applicable, a summary describing the Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangement established for this solicitation and a document establishing the legally binding nature among the joint venture/teaming parties.

For Offerors not proposing as part of a Joint Venture, is the government requiring Offerors to provide the signed first page of Teaming Agreements between the Prime and each subcontractor?

No.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

50 L.8.1

The Offeror shall provide, if applicable, a summary describing the Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangement established for this solicitation and a document establishing the legally binding nature among the joint venture/teaming parties.

If Offerors are required to provide the signed first page of Teaming Agreements between the Prime and each subcontractor, please confirm Offerors can provide these as an Appendix to Volume II - Administrative.

N/A. See Question 10.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

52 L.8.8

A completed copy from SAM and any additional Section K information required by this solicitation shall be included in this Volume.

Please confirm Offerors can provide a completed copy from SAM as a separate attachment to Volume II - Administrative.

Recommend allowing Offerors to include a completed copy from SAM as a separate attachment due to the length and differing format of the downloaded SAM representations and certifications.

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

52 L.8.8

A completed copy from SAM and any additional Section K information required by this solicitation shall be included in this Volume.

Please confirm Offerors can provide completed Section K as a separate attachment to Volume II - Administrative.

Recommend allowing Offerors to include the completed Section K Representations and Certifications as a separate attachment to preserve the format of Section K provided in the RFP.

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001

TASS RFP

52 L.8.6

Subcontracting Plans shall reflect the Offeror's commitment, in terms of the value of the total acquisition, to small businesses as proposed in response to Factor 4: Small

Business Participation.

Confirm that notional Small Business Participation goals (based upon historical performance levels) are acceptable for this IDIQ proposal.

Depending upon the specific requirements listed with a Task Order, an Offeror may need to utilize a different Small/Large business mix based upon the capabilities available from those small businesses. Actual values can be provided with Task Order proposal submissions.

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

L.6 Proposal Submission

Requirements

Section L.6 paragraph four states "All proposal documents shall be in Adobe (.pdf) or compatible format except portions of the price submission, which shall be in MS Excel 2016 (.xlsx) or compatible format. Attachment file sizes may not be larger than 10MB."

Can the Government specify that individual attachment file sizes may not be larger than 10MB, but the email containing the proposal can be up to 70MB?

Confirmation of proposal file size No, the entire email file size may not be larger than 10MB, so multiple emails may be sent if needed.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

L.6 Proposal Submission

Requirements

Section L.6 paragraph four states "All proposal documents shall be in Adobe (.pdf) or compatible format except portions of the price submission, which shall be in MS Excel 2016 (.xlsx) or compatible format. Attachment file sizes may not be larger than 10MB."

Will the Government accept multiple sequential emails for proposal submission due to email file size restrictions?

Confirmation of email submission format Yes, see Question 15.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

Page 6 of

F - Deliveries or Performance

DELIVERY

INFORMATION

; CLINs 0001, 0002, and 0003

(1) In Section F, the DELIVERY DATE for the CLINs reads "POP 13-AUG-2023 TO 12-AUG-2028"; (2) Section M.3.5 states in part, "Per FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, the possible 6-month extension period will be evaluated at the same rates as the Year 5 rates."; and (3) Attachment #3 TASS Labor Hour Labor Category Spreadsheet requires 10-years of Labor Hour Rates.

Please confirm you require 10-years of Labor Hour Rates in Attachment #3, although Section F POP is 5 years, and Section M.3.5 states that Year 5 rates will be used for evaluation purposes for the possible 6-month extension period.

Labor Hour Rate compliance Confirmed that 10 years of rates are required, but Section

M.3.5 is revised to state that FAR 52.217-8 evaluation will use Year 6 rates.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

Page 58 of

L.13 Volume

VII -

Evaluation Factor 5: Price

The third sentence reads in part, "The straight time hourly rates shall use a forty-hour week for the conversion of salaried employees to the hourly basis and shall be inclusive of loading factors...". The last sentence reads, "Offerors shall submit their cost/price for Labor Hour labor rates via Attachment 3, using 1920 hours as a baseline and shall not convert it to a .pdf file."

Please confirm the third sentence correlates to Salary divided by 2080 hours, as the formula to establish the unburdened hourly basis for salaried employees.

Price compliance Confirmed, and RFP Section L.12 is now revised.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

Page 58 of

L.13 Volume

VII -

Evaluation Factor 5: Price

The last sentence reads, "Offerors shall submit their cost/price for Labor Hour labor rates via Attachment 3, using 1920 hours as a baseline and shall not convert it to a .pdf file." There is no provision in the Attachment 3 spreadsheet for the application of 1920 hours, as Attachment 3 only requires Rates be entered into the spreadsheet.

Please confirm that there is no requirement or request for Offeror to apply Full Time Equivalent (FTE) or Direct Productive Labor Hours (DPLH) of 1920 hours to the proposed burdened Labor Hour Rates in Attachment 3 or in Volume VII.

Price compliance Confirmed.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

Page 49 of

L.6 Proposal Submission

Requirements

Section L.6 paragraph three states "The proposal shall be formatted into a transmittal letter and six (6) separate electronic folders by volume number and title as follows:"

Please confirm the submission email will only contain files. Folders are unable to be attached via email.

Submission compliance Confirmed. RFP Section L.6 is now revised.

Attachment 5 - Past

Performance Questionnaire

Contact

Information

HR001123R0001+(TASS+IDIQ+RFP), Section L.11.c.vi. states, "Identify the Government customer office name for the submission and provide the names, titles/roles, phone numbers, and email addresses of the following Government customer points of contact (POC) that may be knowledgeable of the Offeror's performance on the submission: Program Manager, Contracting Officer (CO), Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), and Contracting Officer's Representative/Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COR/COTR)."

Please confirm past performance questionnaires (PPQs) are intended to be completed by only one individual contract POC as listed in Section L.11.c.vi (i.e., Contracting Officer [CO], Contracting Officer's Representative/Contracting Officer's Technical Representative [COR/CTOR]).

It is unclear if there is a requirement on which government point of contact should complete the past performance questionnaire. Offerors shall only request Past Performance

Questionnaires be submitted by Government customers if CPARS evaluations are not available. The Offeror may make the determination which Government customer

POC is most appropriate. The POC information requested in RFP Section L.11.c.vi is included in case the Government deems it necessary to validate past performance directly with any of the POCs.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

55 L.11 2

"Offerors shall provide a two-page summary for each Past Performance Information Submission."

Suggest changing "two-page summary" to "three-page summary" The extensive PWS requirements cannot be addressed in two pages. Page limit will not be revised.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

63 L.18 L.18

Clauses incorporated by reference include 252.216-7002 ALT A T&M/Labor Hour Proposal Requirements - Non-Commercial Item Acquisition with Adequate Price Competition Alternate A, which requires offerors to "establishe fixed hourly rates using separate rates for each category of labor to be performed by each subcontractor, for each category of labor to be performed by the offeror, and for each category of labor to be transferred between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the offeror under a common control." However, the pricing spreadhseet provided and narrative guidance in section L.13.5 indicates that Offerors should propose a single maximum rate for each labor cateogry.

If the intent is for offerors to bid a single maximum ceiling labor rate for each Labor Category in Attachment J, LCAT Pricing Spreadsheet, that will apply to all personnel, including subcontractors and the offeror's other divisions, could the government please remove 252..216-7002 ALTA A from the RFP?

Remove ambiguity about whether offerors need to propose separate rates for each subcontractor, the offeror and its divisions or a single rate to cover all.

DFARS 252.216-7002 Alt A is now removed.

HR001123R0001+(TA

SS+IDIQ+RFP)

10 G G-5.2

This section states that on TO proposals, we need to define that percengage of the proposed price that will go to Small Businesses (SBs) and also for past TO's, the actual percentage that went to SBs. It states that SB's should be defined by the size standard based on NAICS code 541990.

FAR 19.703 explicitly states that "For Subcontracting Purposes, a concern is small if it does not exceed the size standard for the NAICS code that the prime contractor determines best describes the product or service being acquired by the Subcontractor." It is understood that the prime's NAICS code may not always be the subcontractors' NAICS. Could the Government please revise the RFP to read: "Small business prime contractors shall be defined by the applicable size standard associated with the NAICS code 541990. Small business subcontractors shall be defined by the applicable size standards associated with the NAICS code that the prime contractor determines best describes the product or service being acquired by the Subcontractor."

Clarifies the application of NAICS consistent with the FAR.

Section G-5.2 is now revised.

Attachment+1+-

+PWS_02.10.23

3 3 Scope 3.3

The PWS states in 3.3 Data Rights that the Government shall retain unlimited rights to all data and deliverables. However, Section I appears to be missing the appropriate DFARS data rights clauses that explicitly clarify the contractors’ and the government’s rights and obligations.

Please incorporate DFARS 252.227-7013 and DFARS 252.227- 7014 into Section I.

Adding these DFARS clauses will comply with requirements to incorporate appropriate Data Rights clauses into the contract to ensure common understanding of boht parties rights and obligations.

DFARS 252.227-7013 and DFARS 252.227-7014 are now incorporated to be flowed down to future task orders in case of applicability.

25 PWS 3 3.1.5 Personnel

"In the event the IDIQ existing labor categories does not satisfy a task order requirement, the Government reserves the right to include additional categories to the contract after award. The labor category minimum degree and/or experience requirements listed in Attachment 3 may be waived by the Contracting Officer based on written rationale on why proposed contractor personnel has the right combination of education/experience and/or unique skill set to perform the duties described."

Would the Government please confirm that offerors may substitute years of experience for education LCAT requirements for the key personnel being proposed as part of the Program Management

Team?

Only individuals being proposed as key are required to be named in an offeror's proposal.

An offeror does not have the opportunity to request a waiver of requirements before contract award. Allowing such substitution ensure that LCAT ceiling rates proposed for these named individuals are fair and reasonable while also allowing offerors to select the appropriate LCAT for these named individuals.

The Program Management Team is not required to fall under the Attachment 3 labor categories.

26 RFP 52 L.9 2

"This section shall be written to enable evaluators to make a thorough evaluation as to whether the Offeror has demonstrated experience and shall contain specific descriptions and examples of work performed to include value, complexity, and nature in exemplar

PWS Sections 7.1.2, 7.2.2, and 7.9.1, listed in order of importance."

Would the Government please provide definitions of each of the following terms, "value," complexity," and "nature," without using the cited term in the definition, as used in RFP Section L.9? In addition, would the Government please clarify whether there are any differences in the connotations of these terms in the other areas of the RFP in which they are used?

The terms “value,” “complexity,” and “nature” are used in multiple places in

Sections L and M, including L.9, L.11c Past Performance Information Submissions, M.3.1 Factor 1: Technical Experience, and M.4.2.2 Relevance. Providing the requested clarification will allow offerors to submit compliant proposals and allows evaluators to use a defined standard in evaluating proposals.

The Offeror shall consider standard definitions for these terms in demonstrating how their experience correlates to this requirement.

27 RFP 53 L.9 4

"Factor 1: Technical Experience will focus on what work the Offeror has done correlated to this requirement, while Factor 3: Past Performance will focus on how well the Offeror has historically performed. Therefore, Offerors shall demonstrate a direct link between technical experience cited in this factor and contracts submitted for past performance."

Would the Government please confirm that it will evaluate past performance relevance against PWS sections 7.1.2 (Technical Expertise/Subject Matter Expertise (SME)), 7.2.2 (Program

Financial Execution), and 7.9.1 (Event Assistance)?

Offerors are required to address technical experience in Volume III against PWS

Sections 7.1.2, 7.2.2, and 7.9.1. Since the RFP establishes a "direct link" between

Technical Experience and Past Performance, it is necessary for a fair evaluation to require offerors to address the same PWS Sections.

See Question 7.

28 RFP 61 L.14.3 1

"Print shall be of a minimum 10-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch (10-pitch, Times New Roman) spacing including graphic presentations and tables."

Would the Government please confirm that offerors may use any font of a minimum 10-point font size?

Clarification will allow offerors to submit compliant proposals.

Times New Roman is the specified font.

29 RFP 65 M

52.222-46

EVALUATION

OF

COMPENSATIO

N FOR

PROFESSIONA

L EMPLOYEES

(FEB 1993)

"Additionally, proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintaining program continuity, uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional service employees. Offerors are cautioned that lowered compensation for essentially the same professional work may indicate lack of sound management judgment and lack of understanding of the requirement."

Offerors without predecessor contracts do not have compensation level information for predecessor contractors. Would the

Government please provide information that will enable non-incumbent offerors to comply with this requirement?

Offerors do not have access to information pertaining to compensation levels of predecessor contractors.

No, the Government will not share predecessor contracts' proprietary information. Offerors shall consider industry standard rates in developing their proposals.

30 RFP 66 M.1 2

"DARPA has determined that the Highest Technically Rated Offerors with a Fair and Reasonable Price best value evaluation approach will best achieve the objective of awarding contracts to Offerors with qualities, experience, and approaches that are most important to DARPA."

Would the Government please describe how “Highest Technically Rated” relates to: Factor 1: Technical Experience; Factor 2:

Management Approach; Factor 3:

Past Performance; and Factor 4: Small Business Participation?

Specifically, does Highest "Technically" Rated mean highest ratings only for Factor 1: Technical Experience or Factors 1 through 4?

This answer aids in understanding the Government’s evaluation methodology.

"Highest Technically Rated" applies to all non-price factors 1 through 4 , listed in descending order of importance.

Attachment 3 - LH

LCAT Pricing Spreadsheet_02.10.23

Master Sheet

Column C, Row 33-34

N/A The years of experience for the Financial Analyst IV and Financial Analyst III on row 33-34 column C of the pricing spreadsheet are both listed at 10 years, is this correct?

Yes, see descriptions for more discriminators between the two positions.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

58 L.13 2 This Volume shall be a complete and detailed breakdown and shall include all elements of cost, and other data as considered appropriate, to support the Offeror's proposal.

Is the government requesting offerors to show a full build up of each rate, detailing how we went from direct labor through each indirect to our proposed fully burdened rate? If so can the government provide offerors with a uniform revised template to add our indirect burdens and fee?

No, a narrative discussion of cost elements is sufficient at the IDIQ level.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

59 L.13.2 1 All information relating to the proposed cost/price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as Volume

VII Price Proposal.

Is the government requesting offerors to provide direct labor documentation for each proposed rate?

No, a narrative discussion of general direct labor bases is sufficient at the IDIQ level.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

60 L.13.5 1 The Offeror shall assume that the personnel proposed under these rates will receive Government furnished facilities and equipment in accordance with PWS Section 8.

Can the government please confirm offerors are to propose a single government site rate in attachment 3?

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

L.13.4

Estimating Method

Provide a summary description of the Offeror's standard estimating system or methods.

The summary description shall cover separately each major cost element (e.g., Direct

Material, Engineering Labor, Indirect Costs, Other Direct Costs, Overhead, G&A, etc.).

Can the government clarify how it interprets "Engineering Labor" and how or if offerors distinguish it from other forms of direct labor?

RFP Section L.13.4 is now revised.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

L.11 Volume V - Evaluation Factor 3: Past Performance,

c. Past Performance Information Submissions

Offerors may provide up to six (6) past performance information submissions, of which at least half of the submissions must be from the prime contractor.

Will affiliate past performances within a corporate construct of wholly-owned subsidiaries be evaluated as prime past performances?

Yes.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

50 l.8.3 1

Under DARPA organizational conflict of interest policy, without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Deputy Director, in accordance with Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) 9.503, a contractor cannot simultaneously be a scientific, engineering, technical assistance (SETA) support contractor and also be a research and development performer at DARPA.

If a TASS prime contractor leased conference space (PWS 7.9.3)from another contractor who currently performs as a DARPA R&D performer, would that be considered an OCI under DARPA policy?

This could be considered a potential OCI, so if it is proposed, the Offeror's OCI mitigation plan should address how it plans to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate such a conflict.

Attachment 8 - Draft

DD254_No POC Info_02.10.23

Box 2 Box 4

2, 6

The DD254 specifies that Top Secret safeguarding is required, is marked "No" for "Is this a follow on contract?", states "Performer will conduct all activities involving SCI (including discussions) in Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFS)", and states "the performer requires access to existing Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) terminals."

Will the government confirm that the specifications in the DD254 are correct? If so, will the government confirm that conference space is only required up to the secret level and the contractor is not responsible for providing a SCIF or our own secured networks? Is safeguarding information at a contractor-provided a requirement for this program?

It is our understanding that this is a follow on contract and the PWS references conference room space up to the secret level. As occasionally used conference space will have different cost impacts than s SCIF where personnel will be working daily. We want to ensure our pricing is realistic and accurately reflects the costs of meeting the security requirements.

1. This is a follow-on contract, but that field in the Draft DD254 was left blank as there are currently seven (7) incumbent contracts.

2. Confirmed.

3. To be determined at the task order level.

Attachment 1 - PWS

02.10.23 5 6.2 1

The contractor shall identify a project manager as the focal point of contact for work performed under any specific task orders.

Is it the Government's intent that contractors appoint a single project manager responsible to be the focal point of contact for work performed under all task orders? Or is the intent that each Task Order have its own, dedicated TO Project manager? If the latter, does the Government wish for offerors to provide multiple TO PM resumes?

Without knowing the number or type of Task Orders issued, it will be impossible for offerors to provide an accurate number of TO PM resumes; additionally, some TOs may require that the TO PM requires specialized experience, which won't be known until the

TO is issued.

1. No. The Government's intent is to appoint a single IDIQ Program Manager separate from any Task Order

Project Managers who would be the focal point for work performed under task orders.

2. Yes.

3. No, TO PM resumes are not expected at this time unless they are also being proposed as part of the

Program Management Team.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

55 L.11.c

3(i)

Section L states that "when submitting for an ID/IQ contract, the obligation amount shall represent the combined obligation of all awarded task orders" but also states that

"each task/call order is considered a submission."

Will the Government confirm that contractors may address multiple task orders within the citation for a relevant IDIQ program, provided

CPARS and/or PPQs are provided for each task order cited?

If the obligation amount is evaluated based on the total of all task orders, the work considered should also be considered across all Task Orders.

Confirmed.

41 HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP)

60 L.14.1 1 Are 8x11 pages oriented horizontally acceptable for graphics? Yes.

42 RFP Document 60-61 14.3 Font Size Print shall be of a minimum 10-point font size or a maximum 10 characters per inch (10-pitch, Times New Roman) spacing including graphic presentations and tables.

Will the Government confirm that a font size no smaller than 8-point Times New Roman font is acceptable for tables and graphics? Allows greater use of graphics to better explain critical processes.

No, font style and size specifications apply to graphic presentations and tables.

43 Draft Q&A #15

Draft Q&A #15 says cover sheets count toward page count and are not needed;

however, Vols. II and VII will include CUI information that requires a CUI control box that we typically include on a cover sheet. Since cover sheets are being removed, where would the Gov't recommend we add CUI label.

Can the Government please confirm that a cover sheet can be included with an Offeror’s Volumes II and VII submission is acceptable to ensure the appropriate CUI markings are in place, since those volumes are both excluded from page count?

See Question 4.

44 RFP Document 51 L.8.3 4 The Offeror shall acknowledge the requirement for a Non-Disclosure Agreement in the format prescribed by Attachment 2 by including a copy within this Volume submission for the authorized representative listed in in Section L.8.4.

The NDA is DARPA focused and based on performance, we recommend it should be signed by the Key Personnel and not the person signing the SF 33 (L.8.4).

Signature is for acknowledgement of the requirement by the person officially associated with the proposal at this time.

45 RFP Document 49 L.6 4 Submissions shall not be locked, encrypted, or otherwise contain barriers to opening.

Can the Government please confirm that password protecting proposal files containing CUI content is acceptable for the secure electronic transfer of these files via email to the Government?

This will impact Vol II and Vol VII Confirmed.

46 Solicitation 61 L L.14.2 L.14.3

L.14.3 specifies text shall be no less that 10pt Times New Roman, but L.14.2 does not specify a font size limitation for tables, charts, graphs and figures, only stipulating that these items be legible.

Question: Will the government accept any font style and size for tables, charts, graphs and figures as long as these items are clear and legible?

The page limitations inhibit offerors from being able to fully respond to requirements in the level of detail required by the RFP.

No, font style and size specifications apply to graphic presentations and tables.

47 Solicitation 48 L L.3 L.3 Proposal Due Date. Proposals are due by 10:00 am Eastern on Monday, March 13, 2023.

In order to comply with FAR 15.208 Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals and benefit from the intent of this clause, offerors will be required to submit proposals Friday, March 10, 2023 which is prior to 5:00 PM. This will decrease the overall response time for proposal submission by two full days because the current due date is Monday, March 13, 2023.

Question: To allow offerors to remain compliant with FAR Clause and not lose additional days to work proposals, will the Government consider an extension of three (3) additional business/working days, moving the Closing date to March 16, 2023?

Ability to comply with FAR 15:208 is compromised unless the proposal due date is extended.

No, Offerors shall submit their proposals to reach the Government by the time specified in the solicitation in order for the Government to not need to rely on the late proposal acceptance allowance outlined in FAR

15.208(b)(1)(i). It is noted that this FAR language is not a FAR clause with which to comly as stated in the question.

48 Solicitation 50 L L.8.1

The Offeror shall provide, if applicable, a summary describing the Joint Venture/Teaming Arrangement established for this solicitation and a document establishing the legally binding nature among the joint venture/teaming parties. The Government encourages teaming to the maximum extent practicable required to meet solicitation requirements. The Offeror shall indicate on the summary if any teaming arrangements are exclusive. In order to promote maximum competition, the Government discourages exclusive teaming arrangements.

In reference to the TASS IDIQ Pre-Solicitation Questions and Answers released on February 7, 2023, the Government affirmed that the Offeror is permitted to submit only the first page of a Teaming Agreement as long as it shows the name of both parties, the purpose of the agreement, and evidence of full execution.

Question: Please confirm that a signature is NOT required on the first page of the Teaming Agreement in response to L.8.1.

Submitting the entire Teaming Agreement for all Teammates will result in a very large file size. Most Teaming Agreements do not contain signatures on the first page.

Confirmed.

49 Solicitation 51 L.8 L.8.3

The Offeror shall acknowledge the requirement for a Non-Disclosure Agreement in the format prescribed by Attachment 2 by including a copy within this Volume submission for the authorized representative listed in in Section L.8.4. This Non-Disclosure Agreement will be included in successful IDIQ awards and will be mandatory for all personnel working under task border awards.

Clarification: Please confirm that Offerors are only required to acknowledge the requirement for completing Attachment 2 for IDIQ task orders. Also please confirm that offerors should submit only a an unaltered copy of IDIQ Attachment 2 within the IDIQ proposal submission.

Requirements unclear.

Offerors shall submit a copy of Attachment 2 signed by the authorized representative listed in RFP Section L.8.4. RFP Section L.8.3 is now revised.

50 Solicitation 61 L.14 L.14.4 L.14.4 Page Limits. Page limits are identified below. The page limits do not include tables of contents, response matrix, index, and/or glossary.

Question: A table of contents is required for Volume V, but not for other volumes. Must Offerors include a Table of Contents for Volumes I, II, III, IV and VI?

Requirements not provided. No.

51 Solicitation 68 L.10 M.3

L.10.b L.13.2

M.3.2.b

L.10.b states, "In accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, the Offeror shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for all professional employees (per FAR 22.1102 definition) who will work under the contract. The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty. NOTE:

Total Compensation Plan does not count towards the overall 10-page limit for Management Approach."

L.13.2 states, "All information relating to the proposed cost/price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as Volume VII Price Proposal. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal unless expressly stated otherwise."

M.3.2.b states, "In accordance with FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, Offerors will be evaluated on their total compensation plan and how it supports the Offeror’s overall management approach. NOTE: Price evaluation will not be conducted in this non-price factor. NOTE: Total Compensation Plan does not count towards the overall 10-page limit for Management Approach.

Recommendation: Require offerors to submit the Total Compensation in Volume VI, not Volume IV so offerors can comply with the requirement to provide pricing information in the Total Compensation Plan. Permit offerors to provide a narrative description of all information required by L.10.b, excluding salary rates and ranges. Permit offerors to refer from Volume IV to Volume VI for detailed information in the Total Compensation Plan submitted with Volume VI in order to comply with requirements stated in L.13.2.

Conflicting requirements. Pricing shall not be included in the Technical Submission.

It is determined that salary rates and ranges do not necessarily indicate fully burdened rates, so it is appropriate to evaluate on a non-price basis. The total compensation plan is being evaluated within a technical evaluation factor.

52 Solicitation N/A Attachment 3 Lines 33 and 34

Solicitation Attachment 3 shows that Financial Analyst III and Financial Analyst IV are required to have a Master's degree and 10 years of experience which will result in nearly identical rates and does not take into consideration that many senior financial analysts do not possess advanced degrees. This degree requirement will also drive up the cost of Financial Analyst II category requiring a Bachelors and 8 years of experience since any financial analyst without a Masters, regardless of seniority, will fall into that category.

Recommendation: Adjust the degree requirements of the Financial Analyst categories (similar to recent TTO RFP) or provide ability to substitute years of experience for degree.

Recommend Financial Analyst IV cateogry require 15 years of experience to differentiate rates

RFP labor category definitions will result in very similar and very high rates for Financial Analyst II-IV labor cateogries. Adjusting as recommended witll provide ability to spread and differentiate rates across labor categories for better rate visibility to the Government assiting prime with negotiate best T&M rates with subs at theTO level

Financial Analyst labor categories will not be revised.

See Question 31.

53 Solicitation 58 L.13

Particular emphasis will be placed upon the reasonableness of applied fringe and burden of the labor rates, along with any pass-through fees. The straight time hourly rates shall use a forty-hour week for the conversion of salaried employees to the hourly basis and shall be inclusive of loading factors (i.e., vacation, sick leave, holidays, overhead, General and Administrative rates (G&A), fee, etc.).

Question: Can the Government please confirm if SCA will be applied to LCATs that are generally considered non-exempt?

If so, can the Government please specify which LCATs will fall under this category?

SCA minimum wage and fringe benefit will need to be factored into applicable SCA labor categories.

The Government considers all labor categories to be non-exempt, so SCA would not apply.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf n/a n/a n/a There is no Section D (Packaging and Marking). Please clarify/confirm.

Need confirmation that there is no Section D that addresses packaging/marking requirements.

None required at the IDIQ level.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf n/a n/a n/a There is no Section H (Special Contract Requirements). Please clarify/confirm.

Need confirmation that there is no Section H that addresses any applicable special contract requirements.

No special contract requirements to address. However, please see Attachment 1A for additional requirements.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 13 I 52.216-11

52.216-11 (Cost Contract--No Fee) is included in Section I. As prescribed in FAR 16.307(e), 52.216-11 shall be inserted in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract is contemplated that provides no fee and is not a cost-sharing contract.

Please clarify the intent of 52.216-11 and/or remove the clause from Section I.

There is nothing in the solicitation that says that no fee shall be applied to any cost element(s).

This clause is included as it may be applicable at the task order level.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 15 I 252.242-7004

DFARS 242.7204, 252.242-7004 (Material Management And Accounting System) is included in Section I. In accordance with DFARS 242.7204, 252.242-7004 should be inserted in solicitations and contracts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold

(SAT) that are not for the acquisition of commercial items and are cost-reimbursement contracts.

Please clarify the requirement for contractors to have a Material Management and Accounting System (MMAS).

We respectfully request that 252.242-7004 be removed from Section I.

An IDIQ contract may not exceed the SAT, all task orders may not be cost reimbursement, and there are no significant requirements for managing materials in the

PWS. There is also no requirement in Section L to address an Offeror's MMAS, nor is there any related evaluation criteria in Section M.

This clause is included as it may be applicable at the task order level.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 49 L.6 4th

Section L.6 states, in part: "Offerors shall submit their proposals via email to TASSIDIQRequirement@darpa.mil" and "Attachment file sizes may not be larger than

10MB."

Is there a limitation on the total combined size of all email attachments?

If so, what is the email size limitation?

Offerors need to know in advance if multiple emails need to be sent that encompass the entire proposal submission.

See Question 14.

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 52 L.8 L.8.6

The requirement in Section L.8.6 cites FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation 2016-O0009).

Remove the reference to "Deviation 2016-O00009."

Deviation 2016-O0009, dated AUG 2016, is an archived deviation and is no longer valid.

The current version of FAR 52.219-9 is dated

OCT 2022.

RFP Section L.8.6 is now updated.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 57 L.11 L.11(d)

The paragraph just before L.11(e) seems to include the same information as the preceding paragraph.

Please clarify the inclusion of the last paragraph in L.11(d).

The requirements included in the last paragraph seem to be duplicative.

The last two paragraphs of RFP Section L.11(d) are now updated.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 58 L.13 L.13.1

Section L.13.1 states, in part: "When responding to the Price Volume requirements of this solicitation, the Offeror and associated subcontractor(s) may use any generally accepted estimating technique…" There are no other instructions for subcontractor price proposal submissions.

Please confirm that subcontractors are not required to submit price proposals, including RFP Attachment 3.

Need clarification of price proposal instructions for subcontractors.

Confirmed.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 60 L.13 L.13.5

Section L.13.5 states, in part: "The Offeror shall assume that the personnel proposed under these rates will receive Government furnished facilities and equipment in accordance with PWS Section 8."

Please clarify the apparent inconsistency as contractor-site rates are generally higher than Government-site rates. We recommend that two sets of rates be provided: one set for Government-site and one set for contractor-site. Clarify if maximums should be priced at Government-site or contractor-site.

There is an apparent inconsistency. Also, Offerors may have employees located on their site that support multiple contracts/customers.

Maximum Labor Hour rates shall be priced at Government-site. If that is not required at the task order level, hybrid or telework would be permitted with Government furnished equipment. Contractor-site work is not expected to be required for DARPA requirements.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf 61 L.14 L.14.4

Section L.14.4 makes reference to a glossary. There is no other reference to a glossary in the solicitation.

Please clarify whether or not a glossary is required. If so, is a glossary required in each volume?

Unclear proposal requirements. No, a glossary is not required.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf

CLAUSES

INCORPORA

TED BY

REFERENCE

n/a The solicitation includes FAR 52.215-22 (Limitation on Pass-Through Charges--

Identification of Subcontract Effort) which is required in solicitations containing the clause at 52.215-23. However, FAR 52.215-23 is not included in the solicitation.

Remove 52.215-22 from the solicitation.

52.215-22 requires Offerors to identify the total cost of work to be performed by the offeror and each subcontractor. This information is not known for the IDIQ proposal. (The clause is better suited for individual task order proposals.)

This clause is included as it may be applicable at the task order level. FAR 52.215-23 is also now included.

HR001123R0001

(TASS IDIQ RFP).pdf

CLAUSES

INCORPORA

TED BY

REFERENCE

n/a The solicitation includes DFARS 252.225-7003 (Report of Intended Performance Outside the United States and Canada--Submission with Offer) which requires submission of DD Form 2139 with its proposal.

Remove 252.225-7003 from the IDIQ solicitation (and include in task order RFPs instead).

Not enough information is known at the time of the IDIQ proposal submission to complete DD Form 2139. This clause is better suited for task order proposals.

This is a required clause, so it will not be removed. The form is only required if the circumstances outlined in the clause are applicable, which is not expected.

Attachment 3 - LH LCAT Pricing

Spreadsheet_02.10.23.

xlsx n/a n/a n/a According to Section F, the period of performance is five (5) years. However, Attachment 3 requires Offerors to enter labor rates for ten (10) years.

Please confirm that the requirement to provide ten (10) years of rates is to cover LH task orders that may extend up to five (5) years past the contract end date (IAW 52.216-22).

Clarify the requirement to provide ten (10) years of rates.

See Question 16.

Attachment 4 - Technical Experience

Referenced Contracts_02.10.23.xls x n/a n/a n/a

Section L.9 on Page 53 of the RFP states, in part: "All referenced contracts shall be listed in Attachment 4, providing a minimum of the following information: contract number, period of performance (including months/years), contract value, the amount invoiced to date, and Government point of contact (POC)."

Remove Column J from Attachment 4.

There is no specific Section L requirement to complete Column J in Attachment 4 and there is no associated Section M evaluation criteria.

Column J will not be removed as it is included as a Section L requirement in Section L.10.b and a Section M evaluation criteria in Section M.3.2.b.

RFP Document 52, 67, 70 L.9, M.3.1, M.4.1

L.9: Volume III shall be specific, detailed, and complete to demonstrate clearly and fully that the Offeror has the technical experience to accomplish all requirements of the PWS.

M.3.1: The Government will evaluate how well the Offerors' technical experience in exemplar PWS Sections 7.1.2., 7.2.2, and 7.9.1 (listed in order of importance) demonstrates the ability to accomplish all requirements of the PWS.

Demonstrated experience specifically and directly related to the value, complexity, and nature of the Science & Technology (S&T) and Research & Development (R&D) requirements of the PWS will be rated higher. The more relevant the demonstrated experience is to the contemplated work, the more valuable the experience is to the Government. Likewise, Offerors who, within PWS area 7.1.2., demonstrate S&T and R&D expertise across the spectrum of required DARPA technical expertise (e.g., Biological Technologies, Defense Sciences, Information Innovation, Microsystems Technology, Strategic Technology, and Tactical Technology) will be rated higher.

M.4.1 Table:

[removed for space reasons]

Section L9 states that offerors are to provide evidence ot their experience providing the technical services. Section M.3.1 says that government will evaluate the offeror's experience.