Q A__5_(posted_13_April_2016).pdf

QUESTIONS ANSWERS

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Can we get a snapshot of the existing Tier 0 site?

Provided in the Bidder's Library/Reading Room

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations What activities can the customer currently perform on the existing Tier 0 self-service site? Does this include submission of tickets, requests, reset passwords, search knowledge articles, etc., or is this only available to FACCSM staff?

Provided in Tier 0 Snapshot and User Guide. Located in Reading Room.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Is there an existing remote access/control toolset available to the service desk? Is it utilized today?

Government currently uses Microsoft Remote Desktop and LANDesk.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations What is the current level of Tier 0 utilization as a %?

Utilization is very low; less than 1%

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations How many tickets/SLAs comprise KITSS support? How many devices are supported as “KITSS”?

KITSS supports about ~60 tickets/week. Workload estimates in Appendix D of PWS identify # of travel kits an personnel. # of devices includes quarters, travel kits, offices: ~300+ devices (computers, phones, iPads, printers, etc.)

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations What percentage of desk side dispatch calls, by service type if possible, are handled after hours?

Number of calls received after hours is about 20 per night. Most of these are handled remotely.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations What number of end user support tickets are resolved by FACCSM support prior to engagement with the USTRANSCOM Tier 1 Service Desk and End-User IT System Support?

Unfortunately, most FACCSMs don't log tickets so we can are unable to provide that information. General rule: Most people speak to their FACCSM prior to calling the Service Desk (~3850 tickets per month).

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Does USTRANSCOM currently have a Time on Task for End User Support activities that can be shared with bidders?

We do not collect this data, so it is very difficult to provide this level of detail. Time on task will depend on nature of problem, from a matter of minutes for a printer setup, to several hours to day for reimaging machines and restoring service to users.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Please provide historical incident rates for Client break fix resulting in a desk side dispatch, including expected Monthly dispatch volumes if possible.

We do not have that capability to provide that breakdown. But a good estimate of the 3850 monthly tickets, may be 10-15% require dispatch to desk side.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Please provide information on how are desktop images loaded.

Please describe the current Reimage Process and toolset.

Standalone Windows Deployment Server (WDS) that maintain windows sysprep and capture images. New workstations use PXE to server and load images. Images are updated once a month with sysprep to keep current with patches.

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Can USTRANSCOM estimate the number of "contracted out functional areas" we will be expected to perform FACCSM duties for under 1.3.2?

It is estimated between 15-25 functional areas. However, this may change based on how the Offeror organizes and staffs.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICE MANAGEMENT (ITSM) ENTERPRISE SUPPORT

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS #5

SOLICITATION NO. HTC711-16-R-D001

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations Are chat and remote control services currently available to the service desk? What are all of the available contact channels available to the service desk?

Yes, we have Lync, Microsoft Remote Desk and LANDDesk as available tools to the Service Desk. Contract channels are phone, email, web, chat (not fully integrated yet).

Ref: PWS, Page 6, Section 1.3.2., Task 2: Service Operations What is the current Average Handle time for each of the contact channels at the service desk?

Phone: 5-10 minutes, email: 2 minutes; web: 2 minutes

Ref: Section I-D Section I-D requires Offeror’s to provide either a copy of their latest adequate accounting system review or an explanation as to why they do not have a recent approval (within the last 3 years).

If a contractor follows modified Cost Accounting Standards and associated principles/guidelines but has not been awarded contracts or recognized revenues on a Cost Reimbursable type of contract that would require an audit, is the following explanatory paragraph adequate to meet the solicitation requirement.

“Company X’s Accounting System was audited by Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) in MMDDYY and Audit Report No. XXXX states that Company X’s “accounting system is adequate for accumulating and billing costs under Government contracts.” For the past ten years the government has not requested that DCAA or Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) perform an audit of Company X’s accounting system (Deltek). As of the submission date of this response, DCAA has confirmed that Company X is not on their audit calendar for 2016; however, they have reserved the right to conduct floor checks. Company X’s policies and procedures have continued to be materially similar to those audited in YYYY and Company X is confident that a pre-award accounting system audit in conjunction with this proposal response would have similar favorable audit results.

Yes. The paragraph provided, inclusive of rationale, is adequate to meet solicitation requirements.

Ref: PWS 3.5, page 145-152 PWS 3.5 defines specific education, experience, and certification requirements for key personnel. In the response provided to question 28 on April 2, the Government stated that certifications are required upon contract start, not at proposal submission.

Please clarify how the government will evaluate compliance of proposed key personnel with the PWS during proposal evaluation if the certifications are not being evaluated until contract start?

Would the government consider modifying the requirements of the RFP staffing plan to include resumes for proposed key personnel (outside of page count)?

The RFP will not be modified to include resumes of key personnel.

Required certifications as indicated in the PWS, should be reflected in Offeror's staffing plan. Possession of certifications should be held at contract start. If a contractor fails to provide such certifications, this may affect their ability to perform their required duties, as outlined in the PWS.

Ref: PWS, Task 2, Para 1.3.2 PWS States: “Identify Configuration Items (CIs) and CI attributes for tracking and ensure the Configuration Manager Database (CMDB) accurately reflects the appropriate CIs within the Service Operations area of responsibility. The contractor shall create and maintain Configuration Models. The contractor will make changes to CIs within the Configuration Management System (CMS) as prescribed by the Change Management & Service Asset and Configuration Management (SACM) process owners” How many configuration models exist today and planned. How many CIs are contained within the CMDB? How many relationship mappings are contained within the CMDB?

The number of configuration models and CIs will be based on the estimates provided in appendix D (Table 1 (servers, desktop, laptops, switches, routers, etc...) and Task 3 Subtask 3.2 - S/W Titles ~892).

Ref: RFP, Page 101, Section M-2.3 How will innovation be quantified in the evaluation factors? The Government may assign strengths to an aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds the specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance. Refer to Amendment #3 for clarification language.

Ref: RFP, Page 89, Section L-2.a L-2.a indicates that the electronic copies of all proposals are to be submitted to the following email addresses:

lynette.o.stevenson.civ@mail.mil and david.q.swaney.civ@mail.mil As many offerors may submit large proposals at the same time, how should offerors submit their proposals if these email addresses are not available for some reason (e.g., insufficient remaining capacity at the time of proposal submission)?

Max capacity per email is 20MB. In the event Offerors determine their proposal submission may approach that limit, recommend submitting proposals via multiple emails, if necessary. Note that .zip files cannot be accepted. It may be in an offeror's best interest to label emails "Email 1 of 3, Email 2 of 3, etc". to ensure receipt of all files.

Ref: RFP, Section L-4., Page 96; Section M-2.6, Page 106 “Factor 4 – Small Business Proposal will be evaluated as Acceptable or Unacceptable for each subfactor.” Pg 96 (L-3) indicates for both subfactors V-A and V-B that Offerors are encouraged to propose percentages greater than those specified in the RFP. Can the government please explain how the Acceptable/Unacceptable rating will be determined with regard to the percentages proposed? How will meeting vs. exceeding the RFP percentages be evaluated in the Acceptable/Unacceptable rating scheme?

While the Government advocates for small businesses, no additional credit will be provided to Offerors who exceed the recommended goals for proposed SB Subcontracting Plan. Similarly, no additional credit will be provided for meeting the minimum small business goal required for the SB Participation Plan. Both plans will be evaluated IAW Section M-2.6.1. of the RFP.

Ref: Solicitation Please clarify, within the stipulated page count in the proposal response, will macro level references to the Task Area suffice as the necessary compliance references in the proposal to meet the totality of the PWS.

The Government will only evaluate those items listed IAW Section M of the RFP. However, Offerors are required to successfully perform all task areas of the PWS.

Ref: PWS, All It was noted, Section M-2, Evaluation Factor 1: Technical Capability, contains four Subfactors which are related directly to four specific Tasks defined in the PWS. Namely, these relationships include:

Subfactor (1): Transition-In relates to PWS Task 1, Subtask 9, Transition-In Plan;

Subfactor (2): Service Operations relates to PWS Task 2, Service Operations;

Subfactor (3): Service Support relates to PWS Task 3, Service Support (Service Strategy, Design, and Transition);

Subfactor (4): Security relates to PWS Task 5, Security.

According to Section L, Instructions, and the aforementioned Section M, there is no requirement to respond to or the other four PWS Tasks, namely, Tasks, 4, 6, 7, and 8. Given the limited page count called out in the Section L Instructions, is it the Government’s intention to only evaluate those PWS Tasks which are called out in Section L and Section M as defined above? Or, will respondents receive evaluation credit for the responding to, even in a limited fashion, the four PWS Tasks which are not referred to by Section L and Section M?

The Government will only evaluate those items listed IAW Section M of the RFP. However, Offerors are required to successfully perform all task areas of the PWS.

Ref: RFP, Atch 8 – Pricing Matrix In the revised Attachment 8 included with Amendment 1, the Government added worksheets to allow for entry of subcontractor costs including unburdened labor rates, fringe, overhead, and G&A. This sensitive information would typically not be disclosed directly to the prime offeror by its subcontractors. Will the Government confirm that the prime offeror can use the new subcontractor worksheets to incorporate fully burdened subcontractor rates as well as any prime offeror pass through costs?

Yes, Offerors may incorporate burdened subcontractor rates exclusive of profit. Profit rate is applied at the CLIN level, on "Contract Summary" tab.

Ref: RFP, Atch 8 – Pricing Matrix The answer to Question 78 in Q&A #2 confirms that “printed copies of the staffing matrix only (orange tabs) are to be included in the Staffing proposal Volume”. However, Attachment 8 as provided with Amendment 1 is not configured to print compliant or easy-to-use pages from the staffing worksheets (orange tabs). We recommend the Government remove the requirement to submit printed copies of the staffing matrix, which currently require several thousand pages to print as explained below.

Details. The MS Excel settings for the staffing matrix worksheets as provided in Attachment 8 are configured to print only 3 pages wide (Page Setup > Page > Scaling: Fit to 3 pages wide). This prints the pages at less than 30% of their original size, reducing the 9-point text used in the table to 3 points when printed.

Changing the Scaling to print at 100% enables the font to remain at 9 points, but this will require 1,297 sheets of paper to print the orange tabs for each of the 5 required copies of Volume III, or 6,485 total pages from each bidder. While there are ways to reduce the number of printed pages by reconfiguring the Page Setup settings and/or adjusting the format of the staffing worksheets (if they were not protected), each copy will still require several hundred pages unless the number of rows and columns in the staffing matrix can be reduced as well. That is why we recommend removing the requirement to submit printed copies of the staffing matrix worksheets, and instead require an electronic PDF file containing only the orange tabs from Attachment 8 to be submitted with Volume III.

Requirement for printed copies of Staffing Matrix is removed from the solicitation.

Ref: PWS, Contract Management Plan – Task 1 Subtask 1, Page 4 / 118, 1.3.1.1 / Deliverable Table 1 The PWS references the requirements for Contractor Management Plan - In PWS Section 1.3.1.1 – Task 1 – Subtask 1:

“The contractor shall update the Contract Management Plan submitted within proposal within (15) days of contract award.” It is also referenced in Table 1 Deliverable Table – which outlines the delivery schedule.

Will the Government please clarify where the Contract Management Plan is allocated or required within Sections L&M?

The Contract Management Plan is not a requirement of Sections L&M.

Ref: Amendment # 0002 and Q&A responses dated 5 April In the Attachment 8 Pricing Matrix excel file row 45 (the row summarizing hours for subtask 4.6.3) on each of the purple Summary tabs (“Summary Base Onsite Task-LbHr” through “Summary OP5 Offsite Tasks-LbHr”) is adding the hours from the Prime and Sub tabs incorrectly. It should be adding the hours from row 45 on Prime and Sub tabs. Instead, it is adding the hours from row 44 on each of the respective tabs.

Can the government please make the appropriate correction to the attachment 8 and re-issue?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix In the Attachment 8 Pricing Matrix excel file, the fee percentage for the FFP and CPFF CLINS on the “Contract Summary” tab are pulling in from cells S2 and S3, respectively on the “Summary OP1 Onsite Tasks-Lbr Hr” tab. However, offerors can only enter fee on the “Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks-Lbr Hrs” tab. As a result, a fee percentage of 0 is being pulled into the “Contract Summary” tab. Can the government please make the appropriate correction to the attachment 8 and re-issue?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment. Note that fee percentage should only be entered on "Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks - Lbr Hours"

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix In the Attachment 8 Pricing Matrix excel file, for those labor categories where subcontractors are proposing rates but the prime is not, the “Weighted Average Rates” tab is returning an error (#VALUE!) for the weighted burdened labor rate. Can the government please make the appropriate correction to the attachment 8 and re-issue?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix Amendment # 1 has replaced Task 2, Subtask 6.1.1 with Task 2, Subtask 6.1. However, “Appendix D: Estimated Workload” has an hours estimate for 6.1.1 but no hours estimate for 6.1. Can the government please reconcile the Pricing 8 template and the workload hours for Tsk 2 Subtask 6.1.1? Was: 6.1.1 USTRANSCOM AV/VTC Operational Support (label is incorrect) Is: 6.1 USTRANSCOM AV/VTC Operational Support (no estimated workload) Should be: 6.1.1 Audiovisual Support

Capture hours associated with Task 2, Subtask 6.1.1 (Audiovisual Support) under Task 2, Subtask 6.1 (USTRANSCOM AV/VTC Operational Support) in Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix Amendment # 2 included a revised PPIS that removed dollar value reporting by PA altogether; the revised form now places a “Cost or Percentage of Contract Performed” at the overall header level of each citation. It is also noted the footnote (1) still includes reference to stating dollar values by specific Performance Area. This change may yield unintended results that negatively impact the Government’s ability to determine relevance by Performance Area. Specifically, the “Cost or Percentage of Contract Performed” value might very likely include costs not relevant to all or only the five Performance Areas.

Regarding QS_3 - this is assumed to be a typo “QS” vs “QA” however, it has introduced ambiguity; could the Government clarify this is a typo? QS_3 Question #44 it is understood that dollar values of specific performance areas are a critical reference point; the size ($ value) and scope of an Offeror’s experience paints a more complete picture for the Government. Please consider adding the Dollar Value information back to the PPIS for all PAs except for PA4 to enable objective evaluation of relevance by Scope and Dollar Value within individual PAs.

The PPI sheet has been revised and will be provided via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix In the answer to Q&A_3, question #11, the Government seems to have changed the unlimited page count in Volume VI – Cost/Price to “2 Pages (for narrative or brief overview; page limitations exclusive of pricing matrix)”. However, Section L has not been updated to reflect this answer. While the government may only desire a brief pricing narrative, two page isn’t enough space to thoroughly describe the detailed information required for a proposal. The RFP (page 61, section g) states the Cost/Price proposal volume will be incorporated into the contract by reference. As such, and in compliance to oversight agencies and internal to our pricing policies, there are several pages of documentation required to fully disclose our pricing methodology and structure, including the total compensation plan as referenced in Section L (FAR 52.222-46). Will the Government please clarify the page count for Volume VI - Cost/Price?

The page limitations for the Cost/Price Volume is as follows:

5 pages for Narrative or Brief Overview No page limits on Pricing Matrix (electronically submitted)

Ref: Attachment 4 - PPI The new Attachment 4 PPIs include a request to provide "Cost and Percentage of Contract Performed". The footnote refers to the estimate for Performance Areas, which are now removed.

Please confirm that the percentage USTRANSCOM is looking would be total work being performed minus the sum of the work performed by the subcontractors.

The PPI sheet has been revised and will be provided via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: RFP With regard to Q&A Item #3 from Q&A Set #4, we are seeing for the first time a potential requirement to respond to Task 1, which is not at all covered in the RFP. Is this perhaps an error by the government? If not, can the government provide in the Amended RFP specific Section L and M instructions/guidance related to Task 1, as done for Tasks 2, 3, and 5 in the current RFP? We would also suggest that the government might be best served by housing any Task 1 requirement (if there is one) in Volume III versus Volume II given the tight relationship between Staffing and Management.

Reference Q&A #4 released 8 April, Question 3.

While the Government does not require the Offeror to provide an approach for Task Area 1, if they choose to do so, the Offeror may provide their technical capability and staffing approach in the appropriate volumes of the proposal.

Please note, the Government will evaluate proposals IAW Section M of the RFP.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix_Amd1 On each OP# Summary worksheet throughout the template, Row 45 VDI Support (Task 2 Subtask 4.6.3), the formula picks up the data for End-User Device O&M (Task 2 Subtask 4.6.3).

This error causes the Contract Summary costs for Task 2 to be incorrect. Would the Government provide a corrected Pricing Matrix?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix_Amd1 On each Base worksheet throughout the template, estimated FTEs are calculated by dividing by 1860. Base period is only 1 month long (1860/12=155 hours), therefore the FTEs shown are incorrect for the period. Would the Government provide a corrected Pricing Matrix?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment. (Base = 155 hrs; Opt 5 = 1705)

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix_Amd1 On the Contract Summary worksheet, the FFP Proposed Profit rate and CPFF Proposed Profit rate are not populating from the Summary Base or Summary OPX worksheets. This results in incorrect total price. Would the Government provide a corrected Pricing Matrix?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix_Amd1 On the Labor Rates Summary worksheet, the first 4 “Other” Labor Category rates (rows 108-111) are not populating correctly for OP1 Offsite and OP2-5 Onsite and Offsite. Would the Government provide a corrected Pricing Matrix?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment. Only 5 additional labor categories may be proposed. Enter on "Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks - Lbr Hrs" tab.

Ref: Q&A#4, Question #14 Will the Government be providing a revised Appendix F to reflect the additional workload data stated in the answer?

Answer to #14 was written in error. Reference to "Appendix F" is in fact, "Appendix D".

Ref: Bidder's Library/ Reading Room Can offerors download and archive documents found in the bidder’s library/reading room?

Yes. Once all documents are downloaded, you will not be able to access the Bidder's Library unless additional documents are posted.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix The escalation factor in the "Labor Rates Summary" tab is pulled from the "Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks- Lbr Hr" tab and is applied to fully loaded rates in the "Labor Rates Summary,", but to Direct Labor in the "Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks- Lbr Hr" tab.

Additionally, the labor rate in the "Labor Rates Summary" tab pulls the weighted average rate of Prime and Sub. Therefore the rates in the rate summary tab will not equal the rates in the detailed labor hour tabs; especially if a sub has a different escalator than the prime.

The labor rate summary tab only shows the escalation factor for reference. Escalation is not applied on this tab, the rates are only listed for reference. One escalation factor may be proposed for option periods 2-5 on the “Prime OP1 Onsite Tasks-Lbr Hrs” tab and these will be applied on each individual sheet to the Direct Labor.

Ref: Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix_Amd1 On the Labor Rates Summary worksheet, when a Labor Category is populated with Subcontractor Values only (no Prime), the Weighted Value Labor Rate seems to result in an error. Would the Government provide a corrected Pricing Matrix?

Attachment 8, Pricing Matrix is revised and will be available via forthcoming amendment.

ITSM Q&A#5