QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES 3.12.2012.pdf

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES TO

HSFEMW-12-R-0001

3/12/2012

Q1: Reference: RFP Attachment 2: Technical Proposal Instructions, 2. Technical Experience Section and 3. Past Performance Section.

2. Technical Experience states “Offerors should provide information on relevant technical experience, similar to the Statement of Work, which was performed by the proposed prime, subcontractors or key personnel. Offerors should identify the client for whom the work was performed, as well as information about the scope, dollar value, contract type, complexity, staffing, and management of the project. Proposals should address any challenges or problems encountered while performing relevant projects, and any unique solutions or methodologies successfully utilized by the offeror to perform the work, and resolve any challenges or problems. Offerors should provide detailed narratives describing their Technical Experience…”

3. Past Performance states: “Offerors shall provide a description of the work performed and explain how it is relevant to the tasks in the SOW, and the offeror's approach to supporting NCP under this contract. For each project/contract, the following information should be provided: …” In addition, this section requires Project name, client, contract type, dollar value, relevance to SoW task areas, issues/challenges and resolution.

Would the Government please provide some guidance as to the difference in content expectations for each of the sections?

A: There are some similarities in the information requested, but the information will be utilized differently. Under Technical Experience, the Government requests information about work the offeror has performed in the past that is relevant to that in the SOW, including narrative content that addresses Task Areas A-M, similar work that would help prepare the contractor to perform this requirement. Under Past Performance, the Government also requests contact information for references that can provide an assessment of the quality of work performed on those relevant projects.

Q2: Currently, there are incumbents performing work under NCP, will the Government require a transition plan? If so, are there any mandatory guidelines?

A: No formal transition plan is contemplated at the IDIQ contract level. Task Orders will be issued on a staggered basis as existing contracts expire. Individual Task Orders may require transition plans, which will be addressed at the time the Fair Opportunity competitions are conducted.

Q4: The answer to Q.45 states offerors are to use labor rates for cleared personnel to calculate total price. In order to have the same assumption evaluated for all offerors, If an offeror has a different rate for on-site versus off-site which one of those should be used with the cleared assumption?

A: If an offeror has both on-site and off-site rates for cleared personnel, the offeror should use the rates for cleared, off-site (Government facility) personnel to calculate total price.

A5: The answer to Q.42 states offerors may provide multiple versions of the sample pricing table to provide the different pricing scenarios. Does this mean offerors should submit up to 4 separate spreadsheets (if they have different rates) using the same amount of hours for each scenario? This means we would have a total of 4 different prices?

A: That is correct. Please provide information on all potential rates that could be utilized in the contract, but for consistency in calculating total contract price, offerors should use the cleared, off-site rates.

Q6: The answer to Q.52 defines what should be identified on the TO pricing spreadsheet in terms of subcontractors. It was the assumption based on other answers that we will not have to provide that spreadsheet since TO pricing is not required. Please clarify.

A: The TO Pricing spreadsheet is no longer required.

Q7: To follow-up on the questions and answers released last Thursday, March 8th. Does the response to question 28, listed below, mean that all companies (primes and all subs) on each team require an existing facilities clearance to be considered for award? This would mean some incumbent subs could no longer participate.

“Q28: In the Q&A issued by FEMA on Friday, March 2, FEMA restated the RFP requirement that any individual proposed for cleared work must be employed by a firm that has a facility clearance. We interpret the Government’s guidance that only the prime contractor is required to have a valid facility clearance. Is this correct?

A: The prime contractor must have a valid facility clearance. In order for cleared individuals to work on projects requiring a clearance under this contract, they must be employed by a company (prime or subcontractor) that has a facility clearance. If cleared subcontractor personnel do not work for a company that has a facility clearance, they may not work in a cleared capacity under this contract. It is not sufficient that just the prime has a facility clearance if cleared subcontractor personnel are also proposed to work under the contract.”

A: If personnel are proposed to work on tasks where clearances are required, they must have an active individual clearance AND the company that they work for (prime or subcontractor) must have an active facility clearance. Even if an individual has recently held a clearance, they cannot work on tasks requiring cleared personnel UNLESS the company for which they work holds an active facility clearance.