Questions_from_Amendment_8_ _ICE_Responses.pdf

HSCEDM-14-R-00003

PIDC Solicitation HSCEDM-14-R-00003

Amendment 8 Questions & ICE Responses

1.

Section/Subsection Number: C.13.1

Question: Will the source selection team perform a cost reasonableness evaluation in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d)(3), when considering the impact of proposed discounts from proposed staffing prices?

ICE Response FAR 15.404-1(d)(3) relates to Cost Realism analyses (not cost “reasonableness”). As per FAR 15-.404-1(a)(1), “The contracting officer is responsible for evaluating the reasonableness of the offered prices.” In addition to this, FAR 15.404-1(d)(3) provides for Cost Realism analyses on Firm-Fixed Price contracts.

2.

Number: C.13.1

Question: Will the source selection team perform a financial capability to perform assessment, FAR 9.104-1(a) to protect the ICE from accepting a low cost offer that will increase the offeror’s contract performance risk?

ICE Response As per FAR 9.103(b), “No purchase or award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility.”

3.

Number: 13.1

Question: Regarding Post ID #8, QA Officers, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

ICE Response No.

4.

Question: Regarding Post ID #11, Training Officer, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

5.

Question: Regarding Post ID #13 QC, Standards & Compliance Unit Staff, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

6.

Question: Regarding Post ID #14, Safety Officer, are these currently CBA/Union

7.

Question: Regarding Post ID #16, Physical Security Inspectors, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

8.

Question: Regarding Post ID #17, Communications Control Specialist, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

9.

Question: Regarding Post ID #18, Supply Specialists, are these currently CBA/Union

10.

Question: Regarding Post ID #24, Transportation Coordinator, are these currently CBA/Union positions?

11.

Question: Regarding Post ID #27, Shift Commander, are these currently CBA/Union

12.

Question: Regarding Post ID #28, Administrative LT., are these currently CBA/Union

ICE Response Yes, Lieutenant positions are part of the Federal Contact Guards of America International Union for Lieutenants (see solicitation Attachment 09).

13.

Question: Regarding Post ID #29, Operations LT., are these currently CBA/Union positions?

ICE Response Yes, Lieutenant positions are part of the Federal Contact Guards of America International Union for Lieutenants (see solicitation Attachment 09).

14.

Number: 16.4

Question: All detention officers are required to have 40 hours of annual refresher training. How many additional hours are required for annual refresher training for armed officers?

ICE Response Refresher training for armed officers (in addition to Detention Officer refresher training):

1. Four (4) hours Collapsible baton training (annually).

2. Four (4) hours Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) spray training (annually).

3. Firearms qualification in accordance with the state of Texas requirements for a commissioned officer (quarterly).

15.

Number: B, Pricing

Question: Would ICE consider adding a CLIN for “On Demand” guard hours? If an “On Demand” CLIN was added to the Pricing Schedule, the Offeror would be able to submit the most efficient staffing ladder to ICE by lowering the risk to the contractor of understaffing the contract.

ICE Response The Government has included an “Overtime (Transportation/Stationary Guards)” CLIN for overtime incurred by Transportation/Stationary Guards which has been authorized by the COR in the case of Stationary Guard assignments exceeding standard shift hours. The Contractor is expected to maintain adequate staffing to avoid Overtime, and to provide an adequate staffing plan meeting the requirements of the Statement of Work.

16.

Number: 16.1 (Initial Training Required Topics)

Question: Are the 40 hours of ACA training listed in the initial training just for Food Service personnel, Guards or both?

Food Service personnel and Guards must complete 40 hours of initial ACA training.

17.

Number: 5.2 Section B

Question: Please clarify the word “reasonable” in the following statement, “The Bed Day rate for quantities above the guaranteed minimum shall be reasonable when compared to the Contractor’s proposed rate for the guaranteed minimum quantities.”

How will this Bed Day rate be evaluated for overall contract pricing?

ICE Response Pricing below and above the Guaranteed Minimum shall reflect a realistic and balanced allocation of costs. A true correlation of costs and proposed pricing shall exist at both tiers (below and above the Guaranteed Minimum), and shall be evident in Offerors’ proposals.

18.

Number:

C.6.4 Food Services/L.6(1)/Amend 5 Q&A #22

PIDC currently provides an average 22,000 sack meals per month (over the past 12 months) for staging, J-PATS, and Air Flights. These sack meals go to detainees who are NOT on PIDC’s daily count. The contractor will not be able to recoup the food cost for these meals since pricing is based on daily count. The food cost for these meals will deplete the food budget for meals for detainees who are assigned to PIDC.

Question: Can the cost for these sack meals be included in the Food Service pricing in the FS CLIN in order to offset costs?

ICE PIDC records indicate that in April 2014, there were 7,948 JPATS and offsite sack meals served separate from the regular ADP count. There is no record for this prior to April 2014. Below is the total amount of sack meals for the last six months that were provided to the PIDC ADP, and any JPATS and offsite detainees:

Month Regular ADP bag meals JPATS & offsite November 2013 23043 bag meals December 2013 19407 bag meals January 2014 18582 bag meals

February 2014 19873 bag meals March 2014 26917 bag meals April 2014 25681 bag meals + 7948 JPATS meals

ICE expects 7,500 – 10,000 JPATS and offsite sack meals to be required monthly from this point forward under current transportation initiatives, in accordance with ICE PBNDS 2011. Therefore, a JPATS & Offsite Sack Meal CLIN will be included (only) for these sack meals outside of the regular ADP count in a forthcoming amendment.

19.

C.6.4 Food Services/L.6(1)/Amend 5 Q&A #22

Question: In reference to Question #[18]: Will the Government consider a “Sack Lunch” CLIN to allow the contractor to recoup the cost of providing meals to detainees who are not a part of PIDC’s formal count?

Please refer to the ICE response to Question 18.

20.

C.6.4 Food Service

In regards to the question regarding ordering and paying for food, the Government’s response has not provided a clear answer regarding precisely how food will be ordered, paid for, and recouped. The current system in place has the contractor ordering food products through the government’s vendors, the government pays for the food, and the contractor must conform to a pre-set monthly limit for food cost.

Question: Will this system be continued?

No, the current Food Ordering system will not be continued. The forthcoming requirement shall transition food ordering and purchasing responsibilities to the Contractor, subject to inspection/rejection by ICE.

21.

response was unclear regarding precisely how food will be ordered, paid for, and recouped.

Question: Will the contractor be ordering food products, paying for the food products, and receive reimbursement for food cost through the Food Service CLIN?

Please refer to the ICE response to Question 21. Please also note that all Food Supplies CLINs are Firm-Fixed Price CLINs.

22.

response has not provided a clear answer regarding precisely how food will be ordered, paid for, and recouped.

Question: Will the contractor price in the cost of food products into the bid, order food, pay for the food, and recoup food cost through regular contract rate remuneration?

This is a Performance-Based contract and, accordingly, the Government has not dictated ordering processes. Firm-Fixed Price Food Supplies CLINs have been created on a tiered ADP basis.

23.

C.20.8 Funds Management

A question was asked about whether detainees will be allowed to carry money in view of the “cashless” commissary system to be established and the Government’s response was unclear.

Question: Will detainees still be allowed to carry $100 on their person even though commissary purchases will be “cashless”?

There is a need for Detainees to carry cash at this time as the Detainee Telephone Services works on a cash deposit system. The amount of cash that Detainees are allowed to carry on their person may be revisited in the future.

24.

Question 41 Amend 5

Question: A question was asked about what firearms are authorized. The Government’s response referred bidders to attachment 14

Question: Attachment 14 does not list the S&W model M&P 40. Is this firearm no longer authorized?

This firearm is not an ICE Approved Firearm as specified in the Interim ICE Firearms Policy dated July 07, 2004 as amended August 26, 2004 (solicitation Attachment 14).

25.

Number:

Section I, 52.222-42 Amendment 5 Question 55

Question: Above FAR Clause provides a table of equivalent rates; however, it does not provide equivalent rates (or Wage Determination Codes) for the Communications Control Specialists or the Supply Specialists. What are the equivalent rates and WD Codes for these new positions?

ICE Response It is the responsibility of the Offeror to propose the suitable administrative labor category to meet all the requirements of the solicitation in accordance with all applicable local, state and Federal labor laws.

26.

Number:

C.6.4 Food Services/L.6(1)/Amend 5 Q&A #22

Question: Are the 22,000 sack lunches per month above the food service costs for PIDC to be included in the Food Service pricing in the FS CLINS?

Please refer to the ICE response to Question 18.

27.

Section/Subsection Question 178 Amend 5

The Government’s response to Question 178 states that interactive training will “replace” the 8 hours per month training, yet the RFP does not contain a requirement for 8 hours per month training. The original question asked was: how can a contractor determine the quantity of hours of training to price when no definite quantity is given other than it “may” be ordered.

Information: 96 hours of monthly interactive training will cost approximately $1 million per year in staff wages. By clearly defining the number of hours required for interactive training, the government will be able to control costs.

Question: Can the government state a definite requirement for interactive training that enables accurate pricing to avoid all bidders having to price 96 hours to ensure this training is adequately funded?

Interactive training requirements will vary. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to bid its labor hours based upon the information provided in the solicitation. How the Offeror chooses to do this is at the discretion of the Offeror.

28.

Amend 8 Q&A and Section C.16.1 and 16.2 Training

Question: Would a Supervisor, who is hired from the detention officer ranks, be required to complete only 40 hours of additional supervisor training?

An officer promoted from the Detention Officer ranks to a supervisory position shall complete the 40 hours of additional supervisor training.

29.

Number:

Section I, 52.222-42 page 158

The Government’s response to question #90 did not address all parts of the original question. Specifically, the answer stated the Communications Control; Supply Specialists and QC staff were administrative positions and should be priced from the appropriate classification codes on the Wage Determination.

Question: Does the government still contend that the Communications Control, Supply

Specialists, and QC staff are “administrative” and not subject to the CBA for Detention Officers at PIDC?

ICE Response The Government made no mention of “…pric[ing] from the appropriate classification codes on the Wage Determination” in its response to Question 90 in solicitation Amendment 5 (as indicated in this question above). The ICE response to Question 90 in solicitation Amendment 5 actually stated: “…The Government considers this an administrative position. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to propose the suitable administrative labor category to meet all the requirements of specifications in accordance with all applicable local, state and Federal labor laws.” ICE maintains this position in response to this question.

30.

Number:

Question 103 C-6.2.7 “Commissary”

A question was asked about how the commissary remittance is calculated. The Government’s answer was 15% of gross profits. The question also asked if the contractor’s expense for running the commissary was deducted before profit was calculated. This part of the question was not answered.

As clarification, GAAP recognizes gross profit as being the remaining monetary value of sales operations, after the cost of goods sold (COGS) have been deducted from the total value of sales.

Question: Is it the Government’s position then, that the 15% commissary remittance is calculated after contractor’s COGS have been deducted?

The Contractor is expected to follow generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP).

31.

Number:

Question 103 C-6.2.7 “Commissary”

In regards to the commissary:

Question: Are items such as postage stamps and other items that can’t be marked up subject to being included in the gross sales and profit calculation?

All Commissary items sold for profit are to be included in the gross profit calculation.

32.

Section/Subsection

Question 143 C - 13.1 Facility Post Table/C-16 Training

Question: Does a new supervisor complete the 40 hours of supervisory training, AND 60 hours of supervisor OJT training?

Yes.

33.

Section 5.3.7 Pricing Template Instructions, Attachment 12

Question: How shall unprogrammed overtime be calculated into the pricing for such unavoidable things as being required to stay past shift due to another employee being late or missing shift or having to finish a write-up or report?

ICE Response ICE is not familiar with the term “unprogrammed overtime”. The Contractor is expected to maintain adequate staffing to avoid Overtime. The Government shall not be expected to assume Overtime expenses due to Contractor employee tardiness or absences.

34.

6.2.5 Mobile Communication Plan for Detention Officers

Is the antenna currently in use owned by the Government and will therefore be available for the new contractor to use?

The antenna currently in use is not Government owned equipment and will therefore not be made available for a new contractor. The incumbent Contractor installed the antenna and has its own frequency and FCC license.

35.

6.2.5 Mobile Communication Plan for Detention Officers

Question: Can the Government provide the model number of the current repeater system?

The current repeater system is not Government owned equipment.

36.

C.7 Post Orders

Question:

Section C.7 says “In accordance with the post requirements of the facility, the Contractor shall incorporate a muster time at the beginning of each shift in order to ensure continuity of operations.”

Would the Government consider a solution for reducing or eliminating scheduled muster time if the solution met the stated goal of providing for continuity of operations and information sharing between shifts?

The Government shall consider a solution for reducing the scheduled muster time.

37.

C.16.1

The Initial Training Required Topics and hours listed in C.16.1 include 40 hours of “American Correctional Association (ACA) Training.” While we are familiar with ACA training resources and certifications, we are not certain what type of training or training content the Government is seeking from these additional 40 hours. Could the Government please clarify exactly what ACA training is expected to be provided in these 40 hours?

ICE Response Offerors are instructed to review the requirements of the American Correctional Association (ACA) Standards for Adult Local Detention Facilities (ALDF), and Standards Supplement.

38.

Also, could the Government please clarify whether the Contractor is expected to hire ACA staff members to provide this training, or whether ACA-certified instructors employed by the Contractor are permitted to provide the instruction?

ACA-certified instructors employed by the Contractor are acceptable.

39.

The revised initial training requirements add up to 130 hours of classroom training for new hires plus 60 hours of On-the-Job Training, for a total of 190 training hours before new hires are fully qualified. This equates to almost 5 full weeks of training.

While we recognize the importance and sensitivity of the work being done at PIDC, the volume of initial training seems significantly out of line with the requirements at other ICE Detention Centers. The current requirements are likely to drive up training costs and increase the risk of under-staffing without creating commensurate increases in the quality of officer performance. Would the Government consider revising the initial training requirements to bring them in line with the more standard 70-80 hours of initial classroom training?

ICE Response There is no ICE “standard 70-80 hours of initial classroom training”. The training requirements are specific to PIDC as stated in the solicitation.

40.

C.14, C.13.1

We recognize that the Facility Post Table is provided for informational purposes rather than as a required list of posts. However, the Government also notes that CBA and DOL Wage Determinations mean that the Contractor must use the position descriptions in the Statement of Work. With this in mind, we seek to clarify a disconnect between the information in the position descriptions and the positions listed in the Facility Post Table.

The list of Key Personnel in section C.14 includes positions named “Detention Lieutenant,” and “Transportation Lieutenant.” On the Facility Post Table, however, there are no positions with these titles, though all other Key Personnel positions are listed.

Does ICE mean for the Facility Post Table position #24, titled “Transportation Coordinator” to be the Key Personnel Transportation Lieutenant position?

Does ICE mean for the Facility Post Table position #28, titled “Administrative L.T.” to be the Key Personnel Detention Lieutenant position?

If ICE does not intend this match between these two Key Personnel positions and

Facility Post Table position descriptions, could ICE please clarify whether the Transportation Lieutenant and Detention Lieutenant Key Personnel positions are elsewhere in the Post Facility Table or whether they must be added to this table?

ICE Response Facility Post Table Post ID# 24 (Transportation Coordinator) is not considered a Transportation Lieutenant position. Please see the ICE response to Question 10.

Facility Post Table Post ID# 28 (Administrative LT.) is considered a “Detention Lieutenant (Shift Supervisor)” position as identified within Key Personnel Section C.14.

Please see the ICE response to Question 12.

For clarification, the “Detention Lieutenant (Shift Supervisor)” position identified within Key Personnel Section C.14 refers to the unarmed Lieutenants shown in Facility Post Table Post ID#s 28-33 (13 Posts in total). The “Transportation Lieutenant (Shift Supervisor)” position identified within Key Personnel Section C.14 refers to armed Transportation Supervisors shown in Facility Post Table Post ID# 25 (three [3] Posts in total).

41.

L.6

The proposal names as Key Personnel both management level positions (Program Manager, Assistant Program Manager, Chief of Security Services, Quality Control, Standards Compliance and Occupational Safety and Health Manager, Transportation Coordinator/DOT Compliance Manager, and Training Director) as well as supervisory positions (Transportation Lieutenant, Captain (Shift Commander), and Detention Lieutenant).

It is unusual for proposals to require resumes and letters of intent for supervisory positions since these are typically filled upon contract award from the incumbent pool.

Given that there is little industry expectation that people would relocate for a Lieutenant level position, it is likely that all Offerors must reach out to the current Lieutenants to secure resumes and letters of intent. This process is often time-consuming and disruptive for the incumbent Lieutenants. It also has a tendency to bias the process in favor of the incumbent company, since they have the best access to the current personnel and may seek to prevent current personnel from communicating with other Offerors.

Given the issues of possible disruption to current operations and bias towards the incumbent, would the Government consider aligning the Key Personnel designations with typical industry practice and including only managerial level positions (those with a single person filling the position) and excluding supervisory level positions (those with

16/7 or 24/7 post coverage, requiring multiple persons to fill the position)?

ICE Response The Offeror’s Key Personnel and Contractor Staffing Plan must provide rationale for the selection of personnel to fill key positions, including the individual’s background, education and experience, qualifications, and their proposed assignment/role in the contract. The plan must clearly demonstrate the required experience and knowledge identified in the solicitation. The resumes and/or commitment letters are therefore required. It is at the Offeror’s discretion to fill Key Personnel positions from the incumbent pool or outside sources.

42.

L.6.5 Volume II: Past Performance (Factor 6)

This section states: “Offerors and prospective major Subcontractors providing an estimated total value of services under this effort in excess of $500,000.00 shall provide contact information for at least three (3) but not more than five (5) contracts for same or similar services which were held within the past five (5) years at a total value exceeding at least $10,000,000.”

In the previous Q&A (Question 2), ICE stated that this requirement should be read to mean “The $10,000,000.00 figure is the cumulative total for one contract.”

We take this response to mean that each of the 3-5 contracts the Offeror and prospective major Subcontractors each submit must have a cumulative total value of $10 Million. While most large business prospective subcontractors would not have any trouble meeting this requirement, it seems to significantly restrict the potential small business concerns eligible to bid.

Would the Government consider amending the Past Performance instructions to remove the total contract value minimum while leaving the existing evaluation language concerning similarity of size, scope, and complexity? This would achieve a similar aim of seeking relevant, substantial past performance without unduly restricting the pool of potential bidders.

ICE Response Neutral past performance ratings shall not eliminate proposals from further consideration and the above reference to “restricting the pool of potential bidders” is not applicable.