CDS_RFP_Questions_and_Answers_5.19.17.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 40 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Customer and Data Services in support of FIMAs Risk MAP program Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- HSFE60-17-R-0003
About this file
Answers to Questions from Contractors
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment_B_-_Established_Contract_Rates_5.18.17.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| CDS_Attachment_G_-Revised_May_18.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_B_-_Established_Contract_Rates.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_J_-_CDS_Transition_Out_Plan.pdf | ||
| Attachment_H_-_Past_Performance_Questionnaire_and_Client_Authorization.pdf | ||
| Attachment_G_-_CDS_Price_Evaluation_Worksheet_.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_C_-_CDS_GFE_Inventory_January_2017.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| HSFE60-17-R-0003.pdf | ||
| Attachment_D_-_DOL_Wage_Determinations.pdf | ||
| Attachment_I_-_CDS_Technical_Quantitative_Analysis_Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_A_-_CDS_Statement_of_Objectives.pdf | ||
| Attachment_F_-_CDS-PTS_Conflict_of_Interest_Analysis.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_E_-_DHS_Official_Seal_Approval.pdf |
Show all 13
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions
| correspondance |
| Solicitation Number: HSFE60-17-R-0003 |
| Document Origin/Source | Page # | Paragraph # | Paragraph Title | Question | Government Response | |
| 1 | Attachment A - CDS Statement of Objectives | 34 | C.11 | OCI | Similar to the concern for PTS contractors, is there an Organizational Conflict of Interest for the Risk MAP PMO Prime contractor and their subcontractors? | An Organizational Conflict of Interest may exist for the future CDS Prime contractor and its subcontractors, which could preclude them from competing for the Risk MAP PMO Prime contract, especially if they have routine access to program and project financial data stored within the systems. The incumbent Risk MAP PMO Prime contractor has a material conflict of interest and is not eligible to pursue the Customer and Data Services contract. Subcontractors do not share this conflict of interest, at present, due to the Firm Fixed Price nature of the current CDS contract. |
| 2 | RFP - HSFE60-17-R-0003.pdf and Attachment F - CDS-PTS Conflict of Interest Analysis | 34 | C.11 | OCI | This section states that an Offeror on the CDS requirement who currently works on, (or may work on) the PTS contract may have a conflict of interest. Attachment F in the header indicates that conflicts may be due to Offeror decisions to team with current / past PTS providers. Please confirm that past PTS providers are not excluded, consistent with C.11 | Correct, past PTS providers are not excluded from joining a team. However, as stated in C.11 (page 34) of the RFP, the offeror must submit an OCI Mitigation Plan with their proposal that sufficiently addresses how it will mitigate all potential conflicts of interest for its employees and subcontracted staff. Submission of an OCI Mitigation Plan does not constitute Contracting Officer approval of the plan |
| 3 | Attachment A - CDS Statement of Objectives | 8 | Objective 1 | Operate and Maintain Risk MAP non-IT solutions | Please elaborate on the activities completed by the Map Service Center (MSC): |
1. How many products are QC'd and published to the MSC website each year?
2. How many products are push-distributed to community officials by MSC operations each year? 1 - 2015- 39,143 2016- 20,035 2 - 18,000 - 20,000
| 4 | Attachment A - CDS Statement of Objectives | 19 | VIII Assumptions and Constraints | FMIX, Bullet 2 | Please provide the request volumes handled by the MIP Help Desk that are received through channels other than FMIX. | 718 tickets in April 2017 | |
| 5 | Attachment A - CDS Statement of Objectives, Attachment G - CDS Price Evaluation Worksheet | Row 13 | Appendix G | Attachment G refers to service levels for call volumes, we assume this includes contacts through all channels not just phone calls. Please confirm our assumption. | Attachment G has been clarified to change call volumes to contact volumes. All channels should be included not just phone calls | ||
| 6 | RFP - HSFE60-17-R-0003.pdf | 32 | 52.252-2 CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE (FEB 1998) | 52,227-17 Rights in Data Special Works (Dec 2007) | Given the commerciality of the products and services under this RFP, would the government consider changing the Rights in Data clause to 52.227-14 Rights in Data General (May 2014)? | The Government will not be changing the Clause for Rights in Data Sepcial Works to Rights in Data General. | |
| 7 | RFP - HSFE60-17-R-0003.pdf | 83 | E.9.3.c | Business Proposal | This paragraph states that the pricing submitted in Attachment G "will be used to establish the base vehicle's ceiling amount". To achieve the SOO's future-state vision, does the Government anticipate adding ceiling value for the IDIQ's period of performance to accommodate such implementation via task orders? | Attachment G will provide the Government with a baseline to help establish the overall ceiling amount for the awarded contract. | |
| 8 | Attachment B - Established Contract Rates | Attachment J.4_Instructions tab | Column A | All | This first tab in Attachment B appears to contain language that is not applicable to this procurement (e.g. PACTS II Request for Proposal, Section J-Attachment J-4, Functional Category, FC1 and FC2, etc.). | ||
| Would the Government please provide the instructions for the CDS B.4 template. | The Government reviewed the first tab in Attachment B and did not see the language that was referred to in this quesiton. There were columns added to the tab "Part II, Hourly Labor Rates" to provide some clarity into the contractor name and role. | ||||||
| 9 | Attachment A - CDS Statement of Objectives | 9 | Objective 2 | Operate and Maintain a Stakeholder-facing Contact Center | Please specify the contact center(s) that will be consolidated with FMIX, and associated call volumes, response times, channels, and types of inquiries handled. | NFIP - approx. 12,600 98% answered within 60 seconds - see RFP for types of calls | |
| 10 | General | The release of the Final RFP was the first opportunity for offerors to see the the full set of contract provisions, especially the instructions for offerors to prepare their price proposals. Due to the level of detail required for pricing, and given the accelerated proposal delivery requirements (less than 30 days), we respectfully request a 2-week extension of the proposal due date. | FEMA will provide 30 days. Proposals will be due June 8, 2017 at 11:00 am | ||||
| 11 | SOO; Attachment G | SOO VII | SOO VII Obj 4; Attach G CLIN 0004, SLIN 0004.1, SLIN 0004.2 | SOO pp 10-11; Attach G Base Year, OY1, OY2, OY3, OY4, 52.217-8 Extension | In order to provide reasonable estimates for CLIN 0004, and specifically for SLIN 0004.1 O&M for MIP and MSC-based systems, the non-incumbent offerors need access to some basic operational metrics for each system listed in the table on SOO pages 11-12, such as number and priority level of Service Tickets and Discrepancy Reports by year, or average number per year. In order to ensure a level playing field for all offerors, we request that the Government provide a reasonable set of base metrics or assumptions for the O&M of the Risk MAP CDS systems. This set of basic metrics or assumptions for all offerors to use is essential to develop their Firm Fixed Price bid. | Over a recent twelve month period, Operations & Maintenance (i.e., change requests and defect requests) for the MIP and MSC systems and their associated applications consumed nearly 13,000 developer hours, excluding Hazus development. This pool of hours was roughly split 60:40 (CR:DR). Demand for developer hours exceeded supply, especially for change requests. By dividing CLIN 0004 of the contract into FFP and T&M, the government seeks to introduce the flexibility to pursue change requests (i.e., enhancements to existing functionality) that can expand and contract to reflect demand and available budget. Note that this pool of "developer hours" does not include time spent on related tasks such as program management, outreach and communications, training, change management, solution engineering, or testing. |
MIP Help provides technical and process management support to all applications hosted on the Mapping Information Platform.
In March and April 2017, MIP Help:
* Received 864 tickets in March and 718 tickets in April
* Closed 796 tickets in March and 765 tickets in April
• Tier I processed 33 tickets (March), 23 tickets (April)
• Tier II processed 714 tickets (March), 719 tickets (April)
• Tier III processed 44 tickets (March), 28 tickets (April)
Hazus Support
* Received 45 Hazus tickets (March) and 46 Hazus tickets (April)
* Closed 55 Hazus tickets (March) and 26 tickets (April)
• Tier II processed 55 tickets (March) and 26 tickets (April)
• Tier III processed 0 tickets (March) and 0 tickets (April)
12 RFP Attach. G SLIN 0005.1 Base Year tab Unless a non-incumbent offeror completes migration of MSC and MIP to a consolidated data center by the end of a 90-day transition period, to ensure continuity of operations, they will need to maintain the incumbent's current hosting solution beginning day 91 for some length of time. In order to be able to bid a fixed-price for SLIN 0005.1 (and its successors) during the period the incumbent's current hosting solution at ABL and DC2 must be maintained, please provide a complete itemized list of the costs that must be assumed by the winning bidder to include leases, operating, software licenses and maintenance, and hardware maintenance. Also, please provide the specific dates that each item would be transferred to the winning bidder. Current pricing for HP's services for the MIP at DC2, and IBM's services for the MSC at ABL is confidential and therefore cannot be disclosed. The offeror's technical solution will dictate any extension of the current hosting solution for the MSC. These costs would need to be negotiated between the offeror and the current service provider at ABL. The government has supplied information in the Assumptions and Constraints and in the Virtual Library to estimate the cost for HP's service at DC2. For example, the CDS Asset Inventory and CDS Security Info and Tasks documents provide information that may help estimate hosting costs at DC2. Please refer to SOO Assumptions & Constraints for information about existing leases: "Information pertaining to the majority of the existing facility leases and contracts is provided within the incumbent contractor’s Transition-out Plan. The only facility not included in this Transition-out Plan is DC2. As a result, this facility’s contract information is listed below:
o Location: Hp Enterprise Services, LLC, DHS Data Center 2, Clarksville, VA 23927 o Primary Facility Purpose: IT Hosting o Lease Expiration: 6/26/17 o Landlord Notification Requirements: TBD o Maximum Months Extension: 3 remaining option years o Hp Customer Service Advocate for FEMA: PaulVanderVoort@associates.hq.dhs.gov.
o Contract COR: Eugene.Luke@dhs.fema.gov"
| 13 | RFP | Attach. G | SLIN 0005.1 | Base Year tab | Unless a non-incumbent offeror completes migration of MSC and MIP to a consolidated data center by the end of a 90-day transition period, to ensure continuity of operations, they will need to maintain the incumbent's current hosting solution beginning day 91 for some length of time. In order to be able to bid a fixed-price for SLIN 0005.1 (and its successors) during the period the incumbent's current hosting solution at ABL and DC2 must be maintained, please provide a complete itemized list of the costs that must be assumed by the winning bidder to include leases, operating, software licenses and maintenance, and hardware maintenance. Also, please provide the specific dates that each item would be transferred to the winning bidder. | Duplicate question to #12 |
| 14 | RFP | B | B.4.1 (a) | 5 | In RFP Section B.4.1(a), p. 5, Please provide clarification of the following: "the Contractor shall identify both Prime and Team Member (i.e., Subcontractor) labor using the Labor Categories that apply." Is the government asking for a blended rate tagged as Prime and/or Subcontractor, or a separate rate by Prime and Subcontractor? Labor rates will be blended for each labor category to be performed by the offeror, including Prime and Subcontractor. The fully-burdened labor rates include all direct, indirect, general and administrative, overhead costs, and profit associated with providing the required skill. Recommend adding a column in Attachment B to indicate provider. | RFP Section B.4.1(a) p. 5 is not asking for the blended rates. |
A Column has been added to Attachment B to indicate contractor as well as columns to indicate Prime or Subcontractor
| 15 | RFP | C | C.13 | 37 | RFP Section C.13 p. 37 Key Personnel or Facilities states: “Additional Key Personnel may be designated at the task order level.” Is the offeror permitted to designate additional key personnel for task orders? We request that the government permit offerors to designate additional key personnel for the initial CLIN 11 effort. Also, please clarity that offerors are permitted to include a two-page resume and commitment letter for this individual exclusive of the PWS page count. | Yes, the offeror is permitted to include one key personnel for CLIN 11 Inital Mobilization and Organization and provide a two page resume for that individual. |
| 16 | RFP | E | E.11 | 85 | RFP Section E.11 specifies that offerors shall submit their proposals via email using Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, or Adobe Acrobat format. Is there a size restriction for individual files, or a size restriction for the aggregate size of all files in a single email? It is our experience that many government email systems or servers enforce limits on the size of files that may be attached to emails, or limit the aggregate size of all files in an email. This information will enable offerors to appropriately divide documents into multiple smaller files to ensure successful delivery. | email limit is 50MB per email |
| 17 | RFP | E | E.11 | 85 | RFP Section E.11 specifies that offerors shall submit their proposals via email. Will the government provide immediate or automated confirmation that an offeror's email and the attachments have been successfully received? | Yes, we will provide a confirmation email that proposals were received. An automated confimation will not be possible but we will provide one as soon as possible after recipt of the proposals |
| 18 | RFP | E | E.12, Factor 1 | 86 | RFP Section E.12, Factor 1, p. 86 states: “The Government will evaluate the completeness and effectiveness of the offeror’s Technical Solution. Completeness is defined as providing all the requirements for this factor as described in E.10 of this solicitation.” Section E.10 refers to submission of vendor questions. Can the Government either confirm this is correct, or please clarify which solicitation section should be used for determining compliance to this factor? | Section E.12 states in bold "Proposals shall be prepared in accordance with the instructions set forth in section E.9 of the solicitation". Section E. 9 is Proposal Preparation Instructions |
| 19 | RFP | E | E.2 |
E.5 E.6 E.9.3.f
| RFP Section E.9.3.f, p. 85, requires offerors to submit “sufficient evidence of responsibility for the Contracting Officer to make an affirmative determination of responsibility pursuant to the requirements of FAR Subsection 9.104-1.” Is this requirement satisfied by offeror’s completion of E.2? We recommend that offerors provide responses to E.2 (52.209-7 INFORMATION REGARDING RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS (JUL 2013)) as well as E.5 (52.212-3 OFFEROR REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 2017)) and E.6 (HSAR 3052.209-79 REPRESENTATION BY CORPORATIONS REGARDING A FELONY CRIMINAL VIOLATION UNDER ANY FEDERAL OR STATE LAW OR UNPAID FEDERAL TAX LIABILITY (FEB 2014)) in Volume 2 – Business Proposal, Section f. | Yes, please respond to E.2, E. 5 and E.6 in the Business Proposal | ||||||
| 20 | RFP | E | E.8 | 79 | RFP Section E.8 states that small business subcontracting goals are applied to the total value of the contract. However, the example provided shows that the small business subcontracting goal percentage is calculated based on the total dollar value of subcontracted work. Please clarify whether that the small business subcontracting goal is calculated based on the total dollar of the contract, or based on the total dollar value of the contract's subcontracted effort. | Disregard the provided example, the small business subcontracting goal should be aligned to the total contract value | |
| 21 | RFP | E | E.9.1.a | 81 | RFP Section E.9.1.a specifies Times New Roman 11 point font for written text, but does not specify a font and point size for tables and graphics. We recommend Arial Narrow 8 point font for tables and graphics. Arial is a sans serif font that improves readability for tables and graphics. | The Goevernment is fine with Arial Narrow 8 point font for tables and graphics | |
| 22 | RFP | E | E.9.1.b | 81 | RFP Section E.9.1.b instructs the offeror to provide information that certifies EVMS compliance. However, there are noinstructions for where this information shall be included in the proposal volumes. We recommend that the government add a paragraph entitled "EVMS Compliance" to the Business Proposal Volume. | Please provide the EVMS Compliance with the Business proposal Volume | |
| 23 | RFP | E | E.9.2.c.i(6) | 82 | RFP Section E.9.2.c.i(6) instructs the offeror to describe its "initial transition-in activities" for objectives 1-5 and 7-8. This includes transition milestones and a cut-over schedule. By presenting seven separate transtion sections, it will be difficult for evaluators to confirm that the offeror has a comprehensive transition plan and schedule that accounts for and manages transition activities across all objectives in a manner that minimizes impact to on-going operations. We recommend that the government delete the "Initial Mobilization and Organization" section from each objective, and add a new section to the PWS to describe the initial mobilization approach corresponding to Task Order 1. This will enable evaluators to confirm that the offeror has a comprehensive transition-in approach, and a single integrated timeline that logically schedules transition activities for each of the objectives. We recommend increasing the PWS page count by 8-10 pages for this section. | Section E.9.2.c.i(6) is one of the topics that is required in the PWS (Max. 80 page limit) "The offeror shall propose a Technical Solution that considers and accommodates the incumbent contractor’s Transition-out Plan, Attachment J". The PWS page count will not be increased for the transition-in activities. | |
| 24 | RFP | E | E.9.3.c.iii | 84 | RFP Section E.9.3.c.iii, Subbullet 2, p. 84 states: “CLIN 4: The SOO objective related to rogue systems should be priced as T&M.” The SOO does not reference any rogue systems. Please clarify the requirement. | Rogue systems is the colloquial term used for those applications described in Bullet 12 of Objective 4, which states, "On a limited, case-by-case basis, assume responsibility for hosting, operating, and maintaining applications developed by other providers as work arounds. Use a transparent and predictable process to scope, plan, and execute the transition and ongoing operations and maintenance, including security scanning and patching, without jeopardizing existing Authority to Operate (ATO)." | |
| 25 | RFP | E | SF1449 | ||||
| E.9.3.a | 1 | ||||||
| 83 | The SF1449 requires the offeror to complete blocks 12, 17, 23, 24 & 30, but the RFP does not indicate where this document should be submitted. We recommend that offerors submit the completed SF1449 in Volume 2 – Business Proposal, Section a (new item ix.). | Yes, please provide this information as part of the Business Proposal | |||||
| 26 | RFP | E.9 | E.9.2.c | 81 | The Draft RFP required a separate 80-page Technical Proposal and a 25-page Performance Work Statement. The Final RFP consolidated all of this content into a single 80-page PWS. These 80 pages now include the "measurable performance standards and metrics" and "deliverables" sections that were previously in the separate 25-page PWS. We recommend that the government increase the Volume 1 PWS by 25 pages to 105 pages. |
The draft RFP didn't bind the government to any commitments. However, we will increase the page limit of the Technical Proposal Volume an additional 5 pages to a total of 85 pages
| 27 | SOO | XI | Table | 28 | SOO p. 28, Section XI, Deliverables and Milestone Schedule, Quality Control Plan Frequency and Due Dates. Are offerors required to submit a Quality Control Plan (QCP) with the proposal, or is the initial QCP to be submitted as part of Task Order 1 performance? Is a separate QCP required for each active task order? Is the QCP submitted for each task order to be updated annually? | The offeror will be required to submit a Quality Control Plan (QCP) for every Task Order executed against the IDIQ that will specifically align with the work required by that Task Order. After evaluation, and potentially negotiation of the Task Order Proposal Request (TOPR), the QCP will evolve into the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) used to monitor performance of the Task Order. The first QCP will be submitted during the TOPR for Task Order 2. Task Order 1, Initial Mobilization and Organization, will be governed by the offeror's response to the PWS's Performance Requirements' Topic 6 and the current contractor's Transition-out Plan. |
| 28 | Solicitation B.2 and B.17 | 4 and 11 | B.2: The Contractor shall provide all labor, materials, and facilities, (except as may be expressly set forth in this contract as furnished by the Government)… | B.2 implies that all work will be performed at contractor facilities; however B.17 indicates that place of performance is task order dependent. Should offerors propose contractor site rates only, or should Government site rates also be proposed? | Place of performance could be dependant on different site locations that the provider is including in their proposal and should be contractor site rates only | |
| B.17: Place of performance shall be set forth in individual Task Orders. | If both contractor site and Government site rates are required, then we recommend that Attachment B be revised to allow for different ceiling rates for each. | The Government site rates should not be required for this contract. | ||||
| 29 | Solicitation, B.4.1(b) | 5 | Contract-level program management support costs shall not be billed as a direct charge to the base contract or individual TOs. These program management support costs shall be included within each fully burdened labor category rate, and shall not be proposed as separate labor categories. | We recommend that Key Personnel be exempted from this requirement so offerors are able to correctly account for their hours in the pricing tables. |
No, Key Personnel will not be exempted from this requirement. Please submit as requested.
| 30. | Solicitation, C.15, E.8, and E.9, Volume 2 e | 38 and 79 | C.15 & E.8-The successful offeror or offerors, if more than one contract is awarded under this solicitation that meets the requirements for a subcontracting plan, will be required to submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.704. | The statements at C.15 and E.8 suggest that only the successful offeror or offerors will be required to submit a subcontracting plan. However, the statement at E.9, Volume 2 e. suggests the subcontracting plan should be submitted as part of Volume 2. Is the subcontracting plan part of the proposal submission or a post award document? | In accordance with the RFP's Submission Instructions (E.9, No. 3(e)), the Sub-Contracting Plan needs to be submitted as part of Volume 2 - Buisness Proposal. | |
| E.9, Volume 2 e- The offeror shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9. See Subcontracting Plan instructions in Section E. | ||||||
| 31. | Solicitation, E.12 | 86 | Evaluation of technical proposal | What rating approach will the Government use in evaluating proposals (e.g., Color or Adjectival ratings)? Can the Government provide the definitions that will be used in the Government’s evaluation rating approach? | The Governement will not be sharing the evaluation rating approach with the Offerors | |
| 32 | Solicitation, E.8 | 79-80 | Please disregard the example. Base your sub-conrating amount on the total contract value. | |||
| Subcontracting Plan Instructions:…The subcontracting plan will include the goals set forth below for small businesses and each socio-economic grouping. The goals will be applied to the total value of the contract, including options years, if applicable. | There appears to be a conflict between the introductory paragraph which states goals are applied to total value of the contract, and the example calculation that indicates that goals are applied to the total amount subcontracted. Given the complexity of the requirements and the need to transition existing systems and processes, we recommend making the small business requirements applicable to the subcontracted value rather than the total contract value. | |||||
| For Example:The total value of a base year contract with 4 option years is $5,000,000. The total amount to be subcontracted is 60% of $5,000,000 which equals $3,000,000. Of the $3,000,000, the total amount to be subcontracted to large businesses is 35% which equals $1,050,000. The total amount to be subcontracted to small businesses is 65% which equals $1,950,000. | ||||||
| $1,050,000 + $1,950,000 = $3,000,000. $3,000,000 is the total amount to be subcontracted. | ||||||
| 33. | Solicitation, E.7 | 81 | PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS | 1. | 2. Is it acceptable to use font other than Times New Roman in tables (e.g., Arial, Arial Narrow, or Calibri)? | Yes, that is acceptable |
| 1. Basic Instructions | 3. Is it acceptable to use a smaller font size for tables and figures (e.g., 9 or 10 point font)? | Yes, for tables, see answer line 26 | ||||
| For all written documents, type shall be in Times New Roman style font with an 11 point font size. The page size shall be 8 ½ x 11 inches and shall be formatted with single spacing and 1 inch margins on all sides. | 4. Is it acceptable to use 11x17” paper size for larger graphic and table elements? | Yes that will be acceptable | ||||
| 5. Part II of Attachment B (Established Contract Rates) uses a 10 point font size. Please confirm that 10 point font is acceptable for this document since the template was provided by the Government. | Yes that is acceptable | |||||
| 34 | Solicitation, E.8 (e) and E.9 | 80 and 81-85 | Large prime contractors must conduct Market Research to identify small business subcontractors. | Since it is not included in the proposal preparation instructions, is it a correct assumption that we are not required to submit the subcontractor market research with our proposal. |
Correct, per the instructions within the RFP the offeror doesn't need to submit their small business research; however, they MUST conduct it per FAR requirements.
35. Attachment A, 8 Objective 1: Collect fees for Letters of Map Change, distribution of products through the MSC, and distribution of engineering library materials through external data requests. Please provide the average number of payments received monthly? What percentage of payments is received electronically? On average, the Fee Admin handles 511 payments each month, split into:
177 electronic payments 334 manual payments
Fees for Library requests are all submitted manually There are 102 payments each month, on average, split into:
67 credit card payments 35 check payments
Fees for LOMC requests are submitted either electronically or manually There are 409 payments each month, on average, split into:
177 electronic payments (online credit card and ACH payments) 27 credit card payments (manually processed) 205 check payments (manually processed)
| VII, Objective 1 | ||||||
| 36. | Attachment A, | 8 and 10 | · Objective 1: Respond to any types of requests for data from internal and external customers. Manage digital and paper mapping data. | There appears to be an overlap in scope between Objective 1 and Objective 3. Please clarify under which Objective responding to external data requests will fall to assist with accurate staff planning. | While the scope appears duplicative, Objective 1 refers to retrieval of physical data (e.g., paper maps) and the transfer of digital data onto physical medium (e.g., CD/DVD). Objective 3 supports response to data requests for digital data not managed by the functions/entities listed within Objective 1. | |
| VII, Objective 1 and Objective 3 | · Objective 3: Provide professional services to fulfill external data requests for supporting documentation and support Freedom of Information Act requests. | |||||
| 37. | Attachment A, | 8 and 10 | · Objective 1: Collect fees for Letters of Map Change, distribution of products through the MSC, and distribution of engineering library materials through external data requests. | There appears to be an overlap in scope between Objective 1 and Objective 3. Please clarify under which Objective Letters of Map Change fee collection services will be provided. | Duplicate question to #36 | |
| VII, Objective 1 and Objective 3 | · Objective 3: Collect, account for and maintain records of all fees associated with the Risk Management Program. | |||||
| 38. | Attachment A, | 9 | Providing agent referrals: providing back-up support for inquiries into the NFIP training contract; phone support in case of flooding events; assisting with loss history reports…. | · | · Are these functions of the NFIP general call center? | Yes |
| VII, Objective 2 | · Will these services begin with contract inception or at the time of call center consolidation? | after consolidation | ||||
| · What contract(s) are these services currently provided under? | The NFIP General Inquiries Call Center contract number is HSFE60-14-C-0008 | |||||
| 39. | Attachment A, | 9 | Maintain relevance to the broader FIMA call center strategy | · | · Is the FIMA call center strategy a published document? | no |
| VII, Objective 2 | · Will the Government provide the Strategy to bidders? | N/A | ||||
| 40. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 8 | The call center shall offer Tier 0, Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 levels of service. | · | · What are the daily/weekly/monthly volumes for each Tier? | monthly ~ 11,000 |
| · What is the distribution of calls through a day? | this varies greatly with each day | |||||
| 41. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 8 | The call center shall offer Tier 0, Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 levels of service. | · | What are the volumes by contact type (call/email/other) for each tier? | Please refer to Assumptions & Constraints in the SOO and content posted in the CDS Virtual Library |
| 42. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 8 | The call center shall offer Tier 0, Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 levels of service. | What are the current SLAs and metrics: | The Offerors should inlcude this information as part of their solution | |
| · | · Average Handle Time (AHT), | |||||
| · Abandonment%, | ||||||
| · | · First Call Resolution (FCR), | |||||
| · Customer Satisfaction (CSAT)? | ||||||
| 43. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 9 | All systems must efficiently track users and caller behavior to support analysis and continuous improvement of usability and customer experience. | Does this refer to GFE systems? If yes, what tracking mechanisms are in place currently to measure usability and customer experience? | No. This refers to processes and tools proposed by the offeror for the purpose of tracking interactions with the FMIX (via phone, email, etc) in order to improve the customer experience when interacting with the FMIX. PhaseWare is currently used by the FMIX but alternative solutions (or additional components) may be proposed and should correspond to the offerors solution. | |
| 44. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 9 | Be prepared to plan and execute, no later than February of 2019, the consolidation of two contact centers into a single contact center. | · Where are the two contact centers located? | Please refer to Assumptions & Constraints in the SOO and content posted in the CDS Virtual Library | |
| · How many fulltime employees (FTEs) are at each location? | FMIX - 20 NFIP - 13 | |||||
| · Does the “To” facility have the extra infrastructure to absorb the FTEs from the other location? | Facility has not been identified | |||||
| · If this is supposed to be Contractor Owned-Contractor-Operated (COCO), then can we provide our own PBX or will we have access to the Avaya? | You can provide your own or you will have access to Avaya PBX | |||||
| 45. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 9 | Operate, maintain, and fix existing Contact Center processes and supporting technology to reduce operational costs and maintain relevance to broader FIMA contact center strategy. Anticipated fixed and business process improvements include, but are not limited to: better integrating call center and web content management; and improved dissemination of analytics summarizing policy, process, and customer experience insights gained because of normal contact center operations. | Please provide a list of supporting technology in use for: | These supporting technology components will be supplied by the offeror and as such they are solution dependent. Current technology can be found in the Virtual Library | |
| · Customer Relationship Management (CRM), | ||||||
| · web content management system, | ||||||
| · knowledge management system, | ||||||
| · customer experience measurement system, | ||||||
| · customer survey tools, | ||||||
| · reporting tools, | ||||||
| · etc. | ||||||
| 46. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 9 | All systems must efficiently track users and caller behavior to support analysis and continuous improvement of usability and customer experience. | Is the contractor required to track users and caller behavior using the PhaseWare GFE CRM system or a contractor-provided system? | Phaseware is not GFE - you can propose another CRM | |
| 47. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 2 | 9 | Operate, maintain, and fix existing Contact Center processes and supporting technology to reduce operational costs and maintain relevance to broader FIMA contact center strategy.” Anticipated fixes and business process improvements include, but are not limited to: better integrating call center and web content management; and improved dissemination of analytics summarizing policy, process, and customer experience insights gained as a result of normal Contact Center operations. | Please identify the product(s) currently used to provide content management for the call centers and for the web. | These supporting technology components will be supplied by the offeror and as such they are solution dependent. Current technology can be found in the Virtual Library | |
| 48. | Attachment A, | 10 | Objective 3: Collect, account for and maintain records of all fees associated with the Risk Management Program. | · Please provide the average number of payments received monthly? | Please refer to Assumptions & Constraints in the SOO and content posted in the CDS Virtual Library | |
| VII, Objective 3 | · What percentage of payments is received electronically? | On average, the Fee Admin handles 511 payments each month, split into: |
177 electronic payments 334 manual payments
Fees for Library requests are all submitted manually There are 102 payments each month, on average, split into:
67 credit card payments 35 check payments
Fees for LOMC requests are submitted either electronically or manually There are 409 payments each month, on average, split into:
177 electronic payments (online credit card and ACH payments) 27 credit card payments (manually processed) 205 check payments (manually processed)
| 49. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 3 | 9 | While initiatives may run in parallel, FIMA’s current approach is to focus first on data collection and clean-up, then dissemination and display, and finally, data analysis. | Please clarify what data is being collected. | |
| · What does “clean up” mean? | remove duplication, inaccuracies, etc. | ||||
| · Can the Government identify the specific tools / processes being used? | no specific tool required | ||||
| 50. | Attachment A, VII, Objective 4 | 11 | On a limited, case-by-case basis, assume responsibility for hosting, operating, and maintaining applications developed by other providers as workarounds. Use a transparent and predictable process to scope, plan, and execute the transition and ongoing operations and maintenance, including security scanning and patching, without jeopardizing existing Authority to Operate (ATO). | Please identify the current contractor-provided IT systems that require the offeror to successfully complete, the DHS security assessment and authorization (SA&A) process and receive an authorization to operate (ATO). | Although FEMA has awarded ATOs to both MIP and MSC these ATOs are not yet recognized by DHS. Both the DHS and FEMA ATOs for the MIP and MSC will need to be maintained by the future provider. |
| 51. | Attachment A, | 14 | Maintain the Hazards United States – Multi-Hazard (HAZUS-MH) software and associated national data sets and provide an appropriate level of end user support consistent with CDS objectives. | Does “end user support” include providing HAZUS training, such as that which is currently conducted at EMI? | Training curriculum development for HAZUS would be expected of CDS as part of end user support, but training delivery would not |
| VII, Objective 8 | |||||
| 52. | Attachment A, | 19 | The consolidated call center could see a potential increase of 12,600 calls per month. | Please confirm that the anticipated call volume of the consolidated contact may reach 23,600 per month (11,000 FMIX + 12,600) | |
| VIII, Contact Centers | yes | ||||
| 53. | Attachment A, VIII, Call Centers | 19 | The consolidated call center shall be located in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area in commercial space within 25 miles of FEMA HQs at 500 C Street, SW, Washington, DC. | FMIX & NFIP General Inquiries contact center operations are expected to be combined in 2019. | yes |
| Can we assume that the consolidation will occur under the CDS Contract and the CDS contractor will respond to both types of calls? | yes | ||||
| 54. | Attachment A, VIII, Call Centers | 19 | MIP Help Desk support is provided Monday through Friday. Peak periods occur during normal mitigation planning periods. | Please provide the call and ticket volumes for the MIP help desk. | April 2017 ticket receipts - 718 tickets 89 via call |
| 55. | Attachment A, VIII, Call Centers | 19 | The FMIX offers Tier 0 self-service options, Tier 1 general inquiries services, Tier 2 technical assistance for Risk MAP IT systems in addition to handling Tier 3 technical calls that require the assistance of the IT developers. | Please provide the performance metric goals for calls, emails, web chats for all tiers level of service for the FMIX contact center. | Please refer to Assumptions & Constraints in the SOO and content posted in the CDS Virtual Library |
| 56. | Attachment A, VIII, Call Centers | 19 | The consolidated call center shall be located in the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area in commercial space within 25 miles of FEMA HQs at 500 C Street, SW, Washington, DC. | Please provide the performance metric goals for calls, emails, web chats for all tiers level of service for the NFIP contact center. | Offerors should inlcude this information as part of their solution |
| 57. | Attachment A, VIII, Call Centers | 19 | The FMIX receives approximately 11,000 mapping inquiry and map change request calls in addition to approximately 1,000 emails and 1,000 live chats per month. The FMIX staff also performs MT1 processing to balance their workload. | Please provide the most recent FMIX quarterly performance report. | Please refer to content posted in the CDS Virtual Library |
| 58. | Attachment A, VIII, FMIX | 19 | The FMIX offers Tier 0 self-service options, Tier 1 general inquiries services, Tier 2 technical assistance for Risk MAP IT systems in addition to handling Tier 3 technical calls that require the assistance of the IT developers. | Please describe the types of | Please refer to content posted in the CDS Virtual Library |
| · Tier 0 self-services options currently provided (e.g., ordering products on the website and IVR), | |||||
| · identify the IT systems currently providing Tier 0 self-services, and | Please refer to content posted in the CDS Virtual Library | ||||
| · specify whether the IT systems are GFE or contractor-provided. | Please refer to content posted in the CDS Virtual Library | ||||
| 59. | Attachment A, VIII, FMIX | 19 | Current FMIX call center operators possess degrees related to the fields of hydrography, geography, environmental, etc., as well as possess a Certified Floodplain Manager certification. | · Are new call center operators required to have Certified Floodplain Manager certification at award? | No |
| · Can these certifications be obtained after award? | Yes | ||||
| 60. | Attachment A, IX, Security Requirements | Security Management | It is our assumption that systems containing sensitive data are themselves sensitive. Can the Government provide the percentage of systems that contain mission critical or sensitive data? | Both systems, the MIP and MSC, have a C-I-A classification of moderate-moderate-moderate. All applications hosted on these systems inherit the same designation. The MIP is considered a mixed-financial system and is subject to additional controls. |
| Requirements shall address how sensitive information is to be handled and protected at the contractor’s site, including any information stored, processed, or transmitted using the contractor’s computer systems, the background investigation and/or clearances required, and the facility security required. | |||||
| 61. | Attachment A, XI, Deliverables and Milestone Schedule, Column 1 | 28 | System Restoration Contingency Plan. | Please provide current System Restoration Contingency Plan(s) for each of the 31 systems listed in Attachment A, XIV, Detailed Systems List on Page 32-36. This will provide insight into the system complexity and system inter-relationships within the MIP, MSC & Hazus. | The Contingency Plan(s) contain sensitive security information and will not be distributed. Additional information about system complexity and inter-relationships can be found within the Virtual Library. |
| 62. | Attachment A, XIV, Detailed Systems List | 32-36 | Can the Government add two additional columns to the file: Attachment C – CDS GFE Inventory Jan 2017, to include: | Please see column 8, headed "Application (MIP/MSC/RiskMAP)", in Attachment C - CDS GFE Inventory and attachment D - CDS Security Info and Tasks v2_Oct 04 16 | |
| · Systems Name | |||||
| · FIPS 199 Rating of the System | |||||
| This will provide the necessary information to determine which hardware/software components support which of the 31 systems provided in the SOO and also identify the security category of each system. | |||||
| 63. | Attachment A, | 30 | Research of and response to controlled and non-controlled correspondence inquiries. | We assume the Operations Manager will have oversight for this activity. In what Objective area does the execution of research and response reside? Please provide the anticipated monthly volume associated with such responses? | The Research of and response to controlled and non-controlled correspondence inquiries is included in Objective 1. Anticipated monthly volume is between 5-10 inquiries |
| XIII, Key Personnel | |||||
| 64. | Attachment B | The Part II tab in the Contract Rates spreadsheet includes rows for 32 labor categories. Please confirm that contractors may add rows if needed. | Yes | ||
| Part II Tab | |||||
| 65. | Attachment G, Labor Tab | Please provide the historical level of effort by objective to ensure price reasonableness and consistency across bidders. | Staffing levels will depend on each offerors technical solution. Historical contact volumes are provided in the Assumptions & Constraints and the CDS Virtual Library. | ||
| 66. | Attachment G, | Services 1 through 3: To ensure the Government only pays for the exact number of calls handled, will the Government consider changing the CLIN Unit from "Per Month" to "Fixed Unit Price Per Call" and allowing the contractor to provide a "Fixed Unit Price" (FUP) per call for each band? For example, if the contractor handles 9,000 calls in the first month, the Fixed Unit Price Per call would be multiplied by 9,000 to establish the CLIN invoice amount. | The government expects email and chat volume to be somewhat predictable, but call volumes can vary each month. The total monthly contact levels vary between the levels shown in Service 1, 2 and 3. The government is asking for simplified pricing for this SLIN based on tiers of total contact volumes, rather than total calls. The government therefore does not wish to change the pricing structure for this CLIN. | ||
| Base Year Tab, SLIN 0002.1 | |||||
| 67. | Attachment G, | Service 3: If the Government does not move to a Fixed Unit Price (FUP) per call, what is the maximum ceiling of calls to be invoiced under this band? | The government expects email and chat volume to be somewhat predictable, but call volumes can vary each month. The total monthly contact volumes vary between the levels shown in Service 1, 2 and 3. Historically, total contact volumes exceeding 12,000 per month are rare. Contact volume thresholds for services will be re-evaluated after any future consolidation of contact centers. | ||
| Base Year tab, SLIN 0002.1 | |||||
| 68. | Attachment G, | Services 1 through 3: In the event that the contractor handles 13,000 calls in a single month, can the Government please confirm that the contractor would bill for all three services, or would the contractor bill for Service 3 only? | The contractor will bill for only one Service each month. | ||
| Base Year tab, SLIN 0002.1 | |||||
| 69. | Attachment G, Contract Price Summary Tab and Option Yr. 4 Tab | The Government has a separate line in Contract Price Summary Tab for CLIN 13. But CLIN 13’s price was added into the Total Price for Option Year 4. Therefore there is an issue of double accounting for CLIN 13. Also the link of CLIN 13 in Contract Price Summary Tab is corrupted. Could the Government fix both of the problems? |
Option Year 4's CLIN 13, within Attachment G, is not a double accounting error. Based on 12 months of service for this Option Period, standard operational services are required for 9 months and "transition-out" services (CLIN 13) are required for 3 months equating to a total of 12 months of service. The error on the Contract Price Summary tab of Attachment G has been corrected.
| 70 | Attachment_G_-_CDS_Price_Evaluation_Worksheet_.xlsx | In the future Task Order process, can the bidder propose task order CLIN/Sub-CLIN pricing that deviates from what is submitted as Attachment G CLIN/Sub-CLIN price? | Attachment G is for evaluating this procurement. The CLIN/Sub-CLIN as submitted/structured in Attachement G will not apply to future task order. |
| 71 | Evaluation methodology for Task Order 1 - Initial Mobilization and Organization | How does the government intend to evaluate pricing for Task Order 1, CLIN 11, within the base year of performance, and how will this affect the contract award decision? | To ensure fair and consistent evaluation of each proposal's pricing and CLIN 11 activities, the government will apply a uniform price amount to all submitted proposals to address incumbent advantage. CLIN 11 pricing will be evaluated to determine whether or not is fair and reasonable before awarding Task Order 1. |
| 72 | Submission instructions - OCI Mitigtation Plan | What are the submission requirements for the OCI Mitigation Plan as it relates to page count, font size, etc.? | The OCI Mitigation Plan shall not exceed 10 pages in length. The font size shall be 11 point Times New Roman, as required for Volume 1. |
image1.emf
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .