HT001421R00040001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to make changes to the subject Request for Proposal as provided herein. See Summary of Changes.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 104

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 17-Dec-2021

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X HT001421R0004

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Nov-2021

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

17-Dec-2021

CODE

DHA CONTRACTING OFFICE-(NCR-CD) HT0014

8111 GATEHOUSE ROAD

2ND FLOOR

FALLS CHURCH VA 22042

HT0014 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HT001421R0004

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 28-Dec-2021 10:00 AM to 11-Jan-2022 02:00 PM.

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

SUBCLIN 0001AG

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Senior Quality Assurance Manager support in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

To:

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager

SUBCLIN 1001AG

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Senior Quality Assurance Manager

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager

SUBCLIN 2001AG

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Senior Quality Assurance Manager

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager

SUBCLIN 3001AG

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Senior Quality Assurance Manager

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager

SUBCLIN 4001AG

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Senior Quality Assurance Manager

Integrated Referral Management and Appointing Center (IRMAC) Support. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager support in accordance with the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for SUBCLIN 0001AG has been changed from:

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 30-JAN-2022 TO

29-JAN-2023

N/A NCR-MD

DEANDRE DIGGS

8901 WISCONSIN AVE BLDG 27 3RD FL

BETHESDA MD 20889

BETHESDA MD 20889

301-319-5631 FOB: Destination

HT0020

DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC /

CAGE

POP 30-JAN-2022 TO

29-JAN-2023

N/A NCR-MD

DEANDRE DIGGS

8901 WISCONSIN AVE BLDG 27 3RD FL

BETHESDA MD 20889

BETHESDA MD 20889

301-319-5631 FOB: Destination

HT0020

The following have been added by full text:

QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES

IRMAC RFP HT001421R0004 Vendor Questions and Government Reponses

1. RFP Reference: Page 92, Factor IV, RFP Documents: Offerors must include a Letter of Credit to demonstrate the offeror’s financial health and capacity to cover expenses for this requirement. The document, issued by a bank or other financial institution, shall provide the offeror a line of credit for a minimum of $6 million. The Letter of Credit shall include contact information of the issuing organization and the Letter of Credit may be contingent on award of this contract.

Vendor question: May the offeror and its major subcontractors (performing at least 25%) each provide letters of credit that in total sum to a minimum of $6 million?

Government Response Q1: The Letter of Credit shall be issued to the prime offeror alone and not the proposed partnerships.

2. RFP Reference: Page 91, Factor III: Price: Populate your pricing information into Tab B (Price) of Attachment 2, REVISION 2 (Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix) with Firm-Fixed unit prices for each Contract Line Item (CLIN) listed in the Government-provided Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix.

Vendor question: The Attachment 2 workbook posted on sam.gov only has one Tab – Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix. Could the government please provide a revised Attachment 2 with TAB B included?

Government Response Q2: There is no additional tab. The RFP and Price and Compensation Matrix have been appropriately amended.

3. RFP Reference: Page 92, Factor IV, RFP Documents: Offerors must include a Letter of Credit to demonstrate the offeror’s financial health and capacity to cover expenses for this requirement. The document, issued by a bank or other financial institution, shall provide the offeror a line of credit for a minimum of $6 million. The Letter of Credit shall include contact information of the issuing organization and the Letter of Credit may be contingent on award of this contract.

Vendor question: If the offeror is a Mentor Protégé Joint Venture (JV), will the government accept letters of credit from each partner that together sum to a minimum of $6 million?

Government Response Q3: See Government response to Question 1 above.

4. RFP Reference: Page 94, RFP.

Vendor question: I am writing to submit a question concerning Solicitation No. HT001421R0004 on behalf of a potential bidder. Specifically, page 94 of the Solicitation states “(n) the offeror must be considered an 8(a) small business by the specified NAICS code in block 10 at the time of proposal and award.” We respectfully submit that this is contrary to U.S. Small Business Administration regulations which state, in part, that a “concern that has completed its term of participation in the 8(a) BD program may be awarded a competitive 8(a) contract if it was a

Participant eligible for award of the contract on the initial date specified for receipt of offers contained in the contract solicitation.” 13 C.F.R. § 124.507(d). Additionally, as it relates to size, “SBA determines the size status of a concern, including its affiliates, as of the date the concern submits a written self-certification that it is small to the procuring activity as part of its initial offer or response which includes price.” 13 C.F.R. § 121.404(a). Will the Government consider revising this provision in order to comply with applicable SBA regulations?

Government Response Q4: Paragraph (n) has been revised to read, “The offeror must be considered an 8(a) small business by the specified NAICS code in block 10 at the initial date specified for receipt of offers, including price.”

5. RFP Reference: None.

Vendor question: I just wanted to ask if there is an incumbent contract or contractor associated to the requirement.

If any, please provide the contractor's name and contract number.

Government Response Q5: This information will be provided to the awardee.

6. RFP Reference: None.

Vendor question: In reviewing the documents posted to sam.gov for the DHA IRMAC RFP (HT001421R0004), I noticed that the Pricing Worksheet (labeled - Price and Compensation Matrix HT001421R0004.xlsx) does not include the referenced title of the required pricing worksheet for submission (labeled – Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix Attachment 2, REVISION 2) listed in Section L of the solicitation (pg. 91). The posted Excel worksheet also does not include the Tab A and Tab B as referenced in Section L of the solicitation (pg. 91). Can you please verify if the correct Excel file was posted for Offerors to review/submit since it does not match to the solicitation proposal instructions? If not, can you please post the correct worksheet?

Government Response Q6: There is only one tab. The solicitation, to include the matrix, has been amended accordingly.

7. RFP Reference: None.

Vendor question: Many companies are structured with multiple divisions or multiple legal entities that individually perform Prime Contracts but fall under a broader corporate umbrella. Recognizing such corporate structures exist across the industry, the procurement rules and numerous GAO decisions have made clear that procuring agencies may evaluate and credit an offeror with the past performance and corporate experience of affiliate companies where the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the affiliate (e.g., workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will be meaningfully contributed to contract performance. See GM–Bulltrack, B- 414591.6 (Comp.

Gen. Oct. 30, 2018) (holding that an agency may properly attribute the experience or past performance of an affiliated company), and Iyabak Construction, LLC, B-409196 (Comp. Gen. Feb.6, 2014) (holding that the agency failed to articulate a rational basis for solicitation’s refusal to consider experience and past performance of affiliates).

Please confirm that the Offeror may cite the prime contract past performance and experience of an affiliate company so long as the Offeror demonstrates how the resources of the affiliate will meaningfully contribute to the performance of the opportunity.

Government Response Q7: Confirmed

8. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix.

Vendor question: Please specify which labor categories are SCA.

Government Response Q8: The determination of which positions are subject to Service Contract Labor Standards is your prerogative, however refer to FAR Clause 52.222-42 of the solicitation, and the applicable Wage Determination.

9. RFP Reference: Attachment 2

Vendor question: Under Attachment 2, Estimated Workload Data, please confirm that the number of hours should be 24,960 (13 FTEs), and not 24.960 (comma instead of a decimal)?

Government Response Q9: The correct hours are 24,960, revised in the RFP.

10. RFP Reference: Factor I (b).

Vendor question: Under Factor 1-Past Performance, Item (b) (1), the solicitation states that Offerors shall submit at least one (1) but no more than three (3) relevant contracts and subcontracts with at least 6 months of performance that ended no earlier than six (6) years before the date this solicitation was issued, including contracts and subcontracts currently in process, which are similar in nature to this requirement.

Will the Government update the language for the time frame end date for past performance to no earlier than six (6) years before the date of the original solicitation response?

Government Response Q10: The language will remain as is.

11. RFP Reference: None:

Vendor question: Under Factor 1-Past Performance, Item (5), the solicitation states that For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the Offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror's performance.

Please confirm that a client authorization letter is only required for commercial past performance references, and NOT, for federal, state, or local government past performance references.

Government Response Q11: That is correct.

12. RFP Reference: Evaluation Factor I, Page 89.

Vendor question: Factor I: Past Performance on Page 89 of the RFP States that submissions “Shall not be more than one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor” and goes on to state “Offerors should not provide general information on their performance on the identified contracts and subcontracts.” On page 90. As written, a prime contractor using three past performance references only has one page (total) to provide basic contract information for all three references, and is not allowed to provide any substantive narrative related to work performed against the IRMAC Task Areas and experience supporting veteran’s health and or similar user communities. This approach severely limits Government evaluator’s ability to assign meaningful relevancy ratings IAW Table 2 (page 95 of the RFP).

Given that this is a best-value procurement, we recommend that the Government consider the following revisions to allow the Government the opportunity and means to assess if bidder’s experience "involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires” IAW Evaluation Table 2:

On page 89 [Factor I: Past Performance, Item (a)]

(a) Offerors shall submit the information requested below as part of their proposal for both the offeror and any proposed subcontractors for subcontracts expected to exceed 25% of the requirement. The information may be submitted prior to other parts of the proposal in order to assist the Government in reducing the evaluation time.

The document shall be submitted in Microsoft Word compatible format and shall not be more than three pages per contract reference for each one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor.

On page 90 [Factor I: Past Performance, Item (c)]

(c) Offerors shall provide details regarding the work performed under each contract specifically addressing the scope, magnitude, and how the work aligns with the complexities of the IRMAC requirement for each prime and subcontractor reference should not provide general information on their performance on the identified contracts and subcontracts not to exceed 3 pages per reference. General performance information will be obtained from the references.

Government Response Q12: The language will remain as is.

13. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix

Vendor question: Please confirm if the remaining fringe benefit costs which are not included in columns H-N are to be included as part of column P (Hourly Rate Fully Loaded).

Government Response Q13: Confirmed.

14. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix

Vendor question: Please specify what Offerors should include in column Q (Fully loaded annual salary of all FTEs) Government Response Q14: Your pricing structure is your firm’s prerogative which the Government does not dictate. Refer to Addendum to 52.212-1, Factor III: Price.

15. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix

Vendor question: Please confirm that Column L (Overhead and Security Clearance Costs) is Overhead?

Government Response Q15: See Government Response to Question 14.

16. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix

Vendor question: Please confirm that column S is the Hourly rates from Column R multiplied by the total number of hours for that row in column E.

Government Response Q16: See Government Response to Question 14.

17. RFP Reference: Performance Work Statement Paragraphs 1.0 and 1.7.1.

Vendor question: We have reviewed this RFP and we wanted to clarify if teleworking out of the National Capital Market is an option. Reading the RFP, we found two different definitions:

a. On 1.0 Introduction – it’s written that “or an authorized telework location within the National Capital Market.”

b. On 1.7.1 Place of performance – it’s written that “or an authorized telework location.” It seems that the National Capital Market requirement is omitted.

Please let us know if you authorize teleworking from other locations around the country? Also, would you allow Work from Home arrangement with the employees?

Government Response Q17: No, the National Capital Market is the only authorized teleworking location anticipated at this time.

18. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Will the Government allow CPARS in lieu of PPQS due to the Holiday's and Government Contracting Officer potentially taking leave?

Government Response Q18: No. Sufficient time has been provided for potential offerors to obtain PPQ past performance information. The Solicitation has been extended.

19. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Can the Government clarify the Key Personnel required for this effort? There is an on-site/off-site Project Manager mentioned on page 100 of 161 and a Senior Project Manager listed in the pricing matrix. Are these positions the same or different?

Government Response Q19: The only key personnel position is the Senior Project Manager. The Senior Project Manager and the Project Manager are one and the same. Paragraph 1.12 of the PWS has been revised to clarify this.

20. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Will the government consider extending the proposal due date January since the due date is right after a holiday?

Government Response Q20: Solicitation has been extended.

21. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Can the government confirm if there is an incumbent? If so, can the government share the contract number and name of the contractor?

Government Response Q21: Refer to Government Response to Question 5 above.

22. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Can the government share which positions are currently filled?

Government Response Q22: Refer to government response to question #5.

23. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Please confirm that the Executive Order on Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts dated November 18, 2021, is applicable.

Government Response Q23: Confirmed

24. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1(e) Basis for Award, Page 88.

Vendor question: What are the financial metrics used by the Government to arrive at the requirement for a $6.0M Line of Credit?

Government Response Q24: The Government may award the contract only to the firm which is financially and otherwise responsible.

25. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1(e) Basis for Award, Page 88.

Vendor question: A $6.0M Line of Credit seems excessive relative to the size and scope of this effort, which requires little to no initial capital investment. Please consider eliminating this requirement or significantly reducing it.

Government Response Q25: The Letter of Credit requirement will remain unchanged. See Question 24 above.

26. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1(e) Basis for Award, Page 88.

Vendor question: Our lenders advise it will take 4-6 weeks to approve a Line of Credit (LOC) and/or increases to existing LOCs. We believe this is not unique or unusual. Please revise the current LOC requirement from “time of proposal submission” to “time of award.”

Government Response Q26: A letter showing evidence of a line of credit for at least $6,000,000 signed by a financial institution will meet the requirements. This requirement will remain as is.

27. RFP Reference: Factor I: Past Performance, Pages 89 and 93.

Vendor question: Page 89 section (a) states page limitations “shall not be more than one page for prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor” and a maximum of 3 references are allowed. However, page 93’s volume format table states a 15-page maximum for the Past Performance volume. Will the Government please clarify the volume and per reference page limitations?

Government Response Q27: A maximum of three (3) references is allowed. The 15-page maximum includes the documentation requested in subparagraph (b)(2) of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Factor I: Past Performance. PPQs that are provided by references to the Government directly are not included in the page limitation.

28. RFP Reference: Factor I: Past Performance, Page 89.

Vendor question: Section (a) states page limitations “shall not be more than one page for prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor,” however, per (b)(1) a maximum of 3 references are allowed. Will the Government confirm whether an organization, individually or within a team, is allowed to submit more than 1 past performance reference?

Government Response Q28: See Government Response to Question 27.

29. RFP Reference: Attachment 2, Estimated Workload Data, Page 143.

Vendor question: How many of the estimated 162 FTEs are currently staffed?

Government Response Q29: See Government Response to Question 5.

30. RFP Reference: Wage Determination, Page 150.

Vendor question: The wage determination listed in the solicitation is revision 15 dated 7/21/2021. There is a revision 16 dated 10/20/2021. For the RFP response, should we use revision 15 or revision 16?

Government Response Q30: Revision 16. The RFP has been amended to reflect the new Wage Determination.

31. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix.

Vendor question: Of the 12 different labor categories listed in the Excel file, which are mapped to a Wage Determination under the current contract?

Government Response Q31: See Government Response to Question 8.

32. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix.

Vendor question: Annual Cost of Living Raise. Is the Government looking for an adjustment to be added in the base year? Does the Government have a preferred method to calculate this annual adjustment and does anything need provided as to how this amount is derived?

Government Response Q32: Your pricing of your proposal is your prerogative. The Government does not have a preferred method to calculate any annual adjustments, nor does anything need be provided to demonstrate how the amount is derived.

33. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix.

Vendor question: Column I states FICA Above $110,000. The current 2021 limit is $142,800. Should we base the FICA on $110,000 or $142,800 as the above calculation?

Government Response Q33: Base the FICA on the current $142,800 limit for 2021. The Price and Compensation Matrix has been amended accordingly.

34. RFP Reference: Factor I: Past Performance and Volume II: Past Performance, Pages 88 and 93, respectively.

“The document shall be submitted in Microsoft Word compatible format and shall not be more than one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor.” Maximum page limit 15 pages

Vendor question: Page 88 of the RFP states that past performance shall not be more than one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor, while the instructions on RFP page 93 state there is a total page limitation of 15 pages.

What information should be included on the one-page limit for the prime and subcontractor(s) as specified on page 88?

Are these pages part of the overall 15-page limit?

Government Response Q34: See Government Response to Question 27.

35. RFP Reference: Volume II: Past Performance, Page 93. Note: Proposal Copies: Offerors shall provide two separate electronic copies of their proposals. Copy (1) Un-Sanitized; Copy (2) Sanitized

Vendor question: The text before the table states that the offeror shall provide both a sanitized and un-sanitized version of its proposal, while the table shown on page 1 indicates that only an un-sanitized copy is required for Volume II - Past Performance and Volume IV – RFP Documents.

Is only an un-sanitized version of Volume II - Past Performance required?

Is only an un-sanitized version of Volume IV – RFP Documents required?

Government Response Q35: Yes to both questions.

36. RFP Reference: Factor IV – RFP Documents Volume IV – RFP Documents, Pages 92 and 93. (d) At its discretion, the offeror may provide additional information about the company’s history, capabilities, or any other details deemed appropriate. This document must be no more than 4 pages in length. Maximum page limit: 15 pages

Vendor question: If the Offeror provides 4 pages of additional information about the company’s history, capabilities, or any other details as appropriate, will these pages be considered part of the overall 15-page limit for the volume or in addition to the 15-page limit?

Government Response Q36: See Government Response to Question 27.

37. RFP Reference 1.7.2 Recognized Federal holidays Wage Determination, Page 97.

Vendor question: Section 1.7.2 of the solicitation identifies 11 Federal holidays and includes Juneteenth. The Wage Determination, WD2015-4269 REV 15, identifies only 10 Federal holidays.

Will the Wage Determination be updated to identify the addition of Juneteenth, thus requiring 11 Federal holidays?

Government Response Q37: See Government Response to Question 30.

38. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix. Column E – Annual Hours.

Vendor question: Will the Government confirm that all bidders must use 1920 hours for an FTE?

Government Response Q38: The Government considers 1920 hours as an FTE for the purposes of this acquisition.

39. RFP Reference: PWS Paragraph 1.8, Contractor Travel, Page 99. Contractor shall be authorized travel expenses consistent with the substantive provision of the Joint Travel Regulation and the limitation of funds specified in this contract.

Vendor question: There is no Contract Line Item for Travel. How will travel expense by reimbursed to the contractor? Will a Travel Item No. be added to the awarded contract?

Government Response Q39 There will be no travel CLIN in the basic IDIQ. Solicitation has been updated, to include amendment to the PWS.

40. RFP Reference: PWS Paragraphs 1.7.3.8 and 1.7.4, Page 98. Overtime authorization & Emergency Services.

Vendor question: RFP Section 1.7.3.8 states that overtime is not authorized. However, RFP Section 1.7.4 states that support outside of normal duty hours may be required.

In the event support is required outside of normal duty hours, requiring staff to work more than 40 hours in a work week, will the Government authorize overtime?

If so, should overtime billing rates be included in the price proposal?

Government Response Q40: Staff will not work more than 40 hours in a work week, so overtime billing rates should not be included in the price proposal.

41. RFP Reference: PWS Part 3, Page 103. 3.1 Services: The Government will provide Government Training/Orientation. Staff Orientation – New Employee. Contractor employees shall participate in all staff orientation and/or training. Contractor employees may need to attend a government-sponsored initial orientation to familiarize them with policies and procedures. Orientation attendance will be scheduled by the COR.

Vendor question: Would the Government confirm that all work-related trainings are considered work hours?

Government Response Q41: Yes, these are considered work hours.

42. RFP Reference: Contractor Turnover, Page 142. No more than 10% turnover during a performance period.

Vendor question: What is the definition of a performance period?

Government Response Q42: A performance period refers to a task order performance period.

43. RFP Reference: ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 (k), Pages 89 and 93. Submit your proposal in four (4) separate volumes as follows:

Factor I: Past Performance Factor II: Compensation Factor III: Price Factor IV: RFP Documents

Submit your proposal in four (4) separate volumes [listed in the table that follows as:]

Volume I: Price Volume II: Past Performance Volume III: Compensation Volume IV: RFP Documents

Vendor question: Would the Government please confirm the order and names of each of the Factors/volumes as they are named differently in these two sections?

Government Response Q43: The order and number of the volumes on Page 89 have been revised in the RFP.

44. RFP Reference: Wage Determination 2015-4269 REV 15, Page 150.

Vendor question: Wage Determination No. 2015-4269 Revision 15, dated 07/21/21 was included with the RFP.

Wage Determination No. 2015-4269, Revision 16, dated 10/20/21 is more current.

Would the Government consider incorporating Revision 16?

Government Response Q44: See Government Response to Question 30.

45. RFP Reference: Factor IV: RFP Documents (e). Offerors may submit a Letter of Credit with an initial expiration date to cover the entire performance period (5 years) or a letter with an initial expiration date that is a minimum period of one year for the date of issuance. If valid for the first year, the letter will be required to be renewed and provided to the contracting officer annually.

Vendor question: In this sentence the Government uses both “letter of credit” and “line of credit.” A letter of credit is generally accepted as a monetarily bonded agreement with a bank, while a line of credit is an agreement from a financial institution to provide credit to a borrower, if needed.

Would the Government please confirm that it is asking for a letter confirming a line of credit in the amount of $6 million?

Government Response Q45: A letter showing evidence of a line of credit for at least $6,000,000 signed by a financial institution will meet the requirements.

46. RFP Reference: Factor IV: RFP Documents (e), Page 92. Offerors may submit a Letter of Credit with an initial expiration date to cover the entire performance period (5 years) or a letter with an initial expiration date that is a minimum period of one year for the date of issuance. If valid for the first year, the letter will be required to be renewed and provided to the contracting officer annually.

Vendor question: If the offeror’s Letter of Credit is valid for one year, but that year is over prior to the end of the first contract year, is this acceptable, or should the offeror provide a Letter of Credit that is valid for the entire first contract year?

Government Response Q46: The offer shall provide a Letter of Credit that is valid for the entire first contract year.

47. RFP Reference: 52.212-3 OFFEROR REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (NOV 2020), and Factor IV: RFP Documents, Pages 49 and 93. The Offeror shall complete only paragraph

(b) of this provision if the Offeror has completed the annual representations and certification electronically in the System for Award Management (SAM) accessed through https://www.sam.gov. If the Offeror has not completed the annual representations and certifications electronically, the Offeror shall complete only paragraphs (c) through (v) of this provision.

(c) Representations and Certifications found at FAR 52. 212-3 Alt 1 and 52.209-7 - MUST be completed. These must be submitted in Microsoft Word compatible format. The Offeror is encouraged to cut-and-paste these clauses into a separate MiFactor IV: RFP Documents (a) Microsoft Word document to reduce file size. The Offeror should ensure that the appropriate NAICS Code for this procurement is included in the System for Award Management (https://www.sam.gov/portal/SAM/#1) and in the Representations and Certifications for the company.

Vendor question: Would the Government please confirm that the offeror needs to submit only paragraph (b) of the Representations and Certification if it has a current SAM registration?

Government Response Q47: That is correct.

48. RFP Reference: Factor IV: RFP Documents (a). Completed and signed SF 1449, page 1, Blocks 17a, 30a – c of the solicitation. Offeror must also put the total amount of the proposal (to include the summation of all CLINs, base and option periods) into Block 26, page 1 of the SF 1449. The offeror is not required to submit the entire SF 1449.

The offeror MUST submit the SF 1449 pages that have been filled out by the offeror.

Vendor question: Would the Government please verify that offerors do not need to fill in the amounts for Item Numbers 0001 – 4001AM on pages 3 through 35 of the RFP?

Government Response Q48: Vendors are instructed to fill in the amounts on Pages 3 through 35, Standard Form 1449. These are not included in the RFP Document Volume IV page or volume limitations.

49. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix, Column F – Hours Off/NA.

Vendor question: Would the Government please explain what it wants as hours under Hours Off/NA?

Government Response Q49: This is your prerogative and the Government will not dictate your approach.

50. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix, Column I – Row 4.

Vendor question: For 2022, the maximum earnings subject to social security tax will increase to $147,000, such that employers will be required to pay employment taxes (i.e., FICA) at 7.65% for the first $147,000 and 1.45% for earnings above $147,000.

Would the Government please confirm that cell I4 should say FICA above $147,000?

Government Response Q50: For 2022, cell I4 should read FICA above $147,000.

51. RFP Reference: Price and Compensation Matrix, Column S.

Vendor question: Cells R4 and S4 have the same title.

Q 21 a. Should cell R4 say Fully Loaded Hourly Rate with G&A and Profit?

Q 21 b. Should cell S4 say Fully Loaded Annual Salary with G&A and profit for all FTEs?

Q 21 c. If so, for each labor category should the amount shown in column S be the product of the Annual Hours in Column E multiplied by the Fully Loaded Hourly Rate including G&A and Profit in Column R?

Government Response Q51: See Government Response to Question 49.

52. RFP Reference: (e) Basis for Award, Page 88. Factor IV: RFP Documents included a certified Letter of Credit.

Vendor question: What constitutes a “certified” letter of credit? Will a letter showing evidence of a line of credit for at least $6,000,000 signed by a financial institution meet the requirements for a “certified Letter of Credit”?

Government Response Q52: Refer to Government Response to Question 45. A letter showing evidence of a line of credit for at least $6,000,000 signed by a financial institution will meet the requirements.

53. RFP Reference: PWS Paragraph 5.3 and Schedule B Item N. 0001AG (and all related Item No’s. and Price and Comparison Matrix Line 12. Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager (position description) and Senior Quality Assurance Manager, RFP Pages 110 and 6.

Vendor question: The text on page 110 has the position title/LCAT as noted, while the Schedule B CLIN descriptions and the Price and Compensation workbook has another.

Would the Government please clarify the correct position/LCAT title?

Government Response Q53: The RFP has been amended to revise all references to this position to be to a Quality Assurance Analyst/Manager in accordance with the position descriptions in the PWS.

54. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Since this is a small business contract will the contractor be permitted to invoice twice monthly?

Government Response Q54: Once a month billing will be permitted.

55. RFP Reference: General

Vendor question: Pages 35 – 38 references a table of minimum / maximum CLIN Order Values: What is the purpose of this table, and will it be necessary to complete for submission? Does this reflect that the subject work will be funded incrementally?

Government Response Q55: Our contracts software requires fill in by the Government of estimated maximum CLIN order values for Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contracts, which is represented on those pages. These are not hard values that must be adhered to in ordering, nor do these represent incremental funding or that funding will be incremental. No fill ins or other submissions based on this table are required or expected.

56. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Will travel to / from various locations be reimbursed as a separate ODC?

Government Response Q56: See Government Response to Question 39.

57. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Will government vehicles be available for travel use?

Government Response Q57: See Government Response to Question 39.

58. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Is there currently an incumbent performing this work?

Government Response Q58: Please refer to the Government response to Question 5.

59. RFP Reference: RFP Factor IV (e), Page 92.

Vendor question: The Letter of Credit requirement, as defined within Factor IV.e of the Solicitation on page 92 (see below), potentially creates an unnecessary barrier to entry to a multitude of 8(a) certified companies within the SBA’s 8(a) program given the requirement for a bank or financial institution to commit to provide a line of credit at a minimum level of $6 million. This is a services contract with a very definable and not inordinate amount of operating expenses and no anticipated capital expenses. Our calculations lead us to believe that a $6 million Line of Credit far exceeds the operating costs needed to maintain the contract pending normal billing cycles and receipt of government AR. As such, will DHA consider eliminating the specific line of credit minimum dollar amount in place of a financial worthiness document issued by the Offeror’s bank/financial institution, thereby allowing enhanced access by active 8(a) companies to compete for this procurement?

Government Response Q59: See Government Responses to Questions 24 and 25.

60. RFP Reference: General.

Vendor question: Will the government consider changing the NAICs code size to another Administrative class/size. By raising the size standard the government affords small companies the ability to work together, if the size stays as is, small companies who join together will have to combine their annual revenue possibly going over. Solicitation this late in the year during the Holiday season does not afford firms the ability to get the SBA to work on requested partnerships in time to meet the proposal deadline.

Government Response Q60: After conducting extensive market research for this acquisition, it has been determined the assigned NAICS code is most appropriate for this acquisition.

61. RFP Reference: RFP Items No. 0001-40001AM, Pages 3-38.

Vendor question: There are different numbers in the maximum quantities on page 36-38 versus the schedule B, pages 3-35 and the pricing sheet annual hours. Can the government please clarify which quantities are correct and update.

Government Response Q61: They are both correct, however, please refer to the Government Response to Question

55. .

62. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 89. Offerors shall submit the information requested below as part of their proposal for both the offeror and any proposed subcontractors for subcontracts expected to exceed 25% of the requirement.

Vendor question: For Factor I Past Performance, are Offerors allowed to submit a maximum of 3 PRIME Contractor past performance references and another maximum of 3 past performance references for each major subcontractor performing at least 25% contract workshare?

Government Response Q62: The requirement is no more than 3 past performance references total.

63. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 89. The document shall be submitted in Microsoft Word compatible format and shall not be more than one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor.

Vendor question: For Factor I Past Performance, Item (a) states, “the document shall be submitted in MS Word compatible format and shall not be more than one page for the prime contractor and one additional page for each major subcontractor.” Can the government clarify what “document” it is referring to in this paragraph?

Government Response Q63: The “document” refers to the Past Performance submission.

64. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Pages 89-93. (b)(2) The contracts and subcontracts listed may include those entered into with Federal, State, local governments and commercial businesses, which are similar in scope, magnitude, relevance and complexity to the requirement described in the RFP. Include the following information for each contract and subcontract listed:

(a) Name of contracting activity.

(b) Contract number.

(c) Contract title.

(d) Contract type.

(e) Brief description of contract or subcontract and relevance to this requirement.

(f) Total contract value.

(g) Period of performance.

(h) Contracting Officer, telephone number and e-mail address, if available.

(i) Program manager/project officer, telephone number and e-mail address, if available.

(j) Administrative Contracting Officer, if different from (h) above, telephone number and e-mail address (if available).

(k) List of subcontracts (if applicable).

Volume - II Volume Title - Past Performance Number of Copies - 1 Unsanitized Copy Electronic Format - Microsoft Word Maximum Page Limit - 15 Pages

Vendor question: For Factor I Past Performance, the information required for each contract and subcontract listed as a reference with the required information in (b)(2) items (a)-(k) seems contradictory to the Table on page 93 that provides an Offeror 15 pages for Volume II. Is the government requesting team structure information in the past performance volume? Please clarify.

Government Response Q64: No, this refers to the information required for the Past Performance references.

65. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 91. Factor II: Compensation: Populate your best proposed Compensation information into Tab A of the Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix Attachment 2, REVISION 2 for each of the labor categories listed.

The proposed ‘Hourly Base Salary’ (unburdened direct labor rate; Tab A, column D) for each labor category solicited for the base period of performance and each of the four Option Periods. An ‘acceptable’ ‘Hourly Base Salary’ is provided for the base period of performance (cells D8 – D18).

Vendor question: For Factor II – Compensation, item a) states that "An “acceptable” “Hourly Base Salary” is provided for the base period of performance (cells D8-D18)". The current worksheet posted to sam.gov does not have this information in it, nor does it have a Tab A. Please verify and provide updated version.

Government Response Q65: This statement has been removed from the Factor II instructions, see revised RFP.

66. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 93. Volume - II Volume Title - Past Performance Number of Copies - 1 Unsanitized Copy Electronic Format - Microsoft Word Maximum Page Limit - 15 Pages

Vendor question: Are PPQs (Attachment 3) excluded from the 15 page limit defined on pg. 93 in the table?

Government Response Q66: PPQs are excluded in the 15 page limit.

67. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 93. Volume - IV Volume Title - RFP Documents Number of Copies - 1 Unsanitized Copy Electronic Format - Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF Maximum Page Limit - 15 Pages

Vendor question: Volume IV – RFP Documents has a limit of 15 pages. With the Offeror having to complete the RFP documents (fill-in pages), unknown number of amendments, and other requirements in this volume, will the government consider removing the page limit?

Government Response Q67: No, however the fill-in pages are not included in the 15 page limit.

68. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 92(e). (e) Within this volume, offerors must include a Letter of Credit to demonstrate the offeror’s financial health and capacity to cover expenses for this requirement.

The document, issued by a bank or other financial institution, shall provide the offeror a line of credit for a minimum of $6 million.

Vendor question: May a Letter of Credit for $6M be extended to the bidding entity by the corporate parent, or does it need to come directly from the financial institution to the bidding entity?

Government Response Q68: It must come directly from the financial institution to the bidding entity.

69. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 92. (d) A business information document shall be submitted along with the RFP documents. At a minimum, this document must include contact information such as e-mail addresses and telephone numbers for the principals and other information about the business and major subcontractors as applicable. If there are major subcontractors (performing 25% or more of the work), the offeror must state what percentage of the effort the subcontractor(s) will be performing. This document must be in Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF compatible format. At its discretion, the offeror may provide additional information about the company’s history, capabilities, or any other details deemed appropriate. This document must be no more than 4 pages in length.

Vendor question: For Factor IV - RFP Documents, may we suggest item (d) on page 92 to be limited to no more than 4 pages for this section only and the rest of the volume be unlimited number of pages.

Government Response Q69: The requirement shall remain as is.

70. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 95. Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method:

Very Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Vendor question: In reference to the Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Table, can the government be more specific and define what it considers to be same and/or similar magnitude of the requirement (e.g., number of FTEs, dollar value, etc.)?

Government Response Q70: See addendum to FAR 52.212-2.

71. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Pages 94-95. Factor I: Past Performance: The Government will evaluate performance information on all offerors based on (i) the references provided by the offeror, and (ii) any past performance information obtained from survey/ questionnaires (Attachment 1), and (iii) any data independently obtained by the government. If a reference identified by the offeror in accordance with 52.212-1(m)(B)(4)(c), does not submit a survey/ questionnaire, the government may follow up with the reference POC, but the Government is not responsible for the failure of a reference POC to provide a survey/questionnaire. In addition to evaluation of recency and relevancy, the Government will perform a performance quality assessment of such work when assessing the entirety of an offeror’s Past Performance.

Vendor question: Will past performance references be rated individually or in aggregate to allow offerors who may not have the entire scope, magnitude and complexity of the requirement under one individual contract to still be considered acceptable if past performance with the full scope, magnitude and complexity of the requirement can be demonstrated within the allotted number of references?

Government Response Q71: In the aggregate, please refer to paragraph (b), Page 94.

72. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 95. Factor II: Compensation Plan: Insert base labor rate in the Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix (attachment 2, Revision 2).

Vendor question: Can the government confirm that it will use the contractor proposed rate to establish the total evaluated price, and not the government minimum allowable rate?

Government Response Q72: Please refer to Government Response for Question 65.

73. RFP Reference: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 95. Factor II: Compensation Plan: Insert base labor rate in the Labor Category Minimum Compensation Matrix (attachment 2, Revision 2).

Vendor question: Will the government indicate which positions it believes to be SCA positions, and what SCA Wage Determination Labor Categories it believes those positions map to?

Government Response Q73: Please refer to Government Response to Question 8.

74. RFP Reference: PWS Paragraph 1.7.1, Page 97. 1.7.1 Place of performance: The work shall be performed at the Dalecarlia Annex (Fremont Building), 6000 MacArthur Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20816, an MTF, or an authorized telework location. Based on mission requirements and expansion, the duty location for personnel may be located at the IRMAC, an MTF within the National Capital Market, or an authorized telework location. Contractor employees are authorized to telework if and only if approval is granted by the COR or Contracting Officer.

Vendor question: Place of Performance is defined at Dalecarlia Annex in Bethesda, MD. This section also allows for CSP to be located at local MTF and/or authorized telework location.

a. Under the current incumbent contract, how many FTEs are currently performing services via approved telework location?

b. As location can affect staffing and incumbent personnel capture, is it the government’s intent to allow the awardee to…