The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Questions from ID04150090 RFP Question
| RFP REFERENCE |
| PAGE NO. |
| QUESTION |
| RESPONSE |
| 1 |
| ITO Sec. 8.c Past Performance, 2nd para.; Past Performance Questionnaire |
| 4 |
| Question: Will the Government consider allowing the offeror the option to submit Interim or Final reports from the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) as equivalent and verifiable past performance assessments in lieu of using the Past Performance Questionnaires? |
| Offerors have the option of submitting a CPARS in lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire. However, Offerors are cautioned to ensure the information is recent, relevant and adheres to the requirement defined in the ITO. |
| 2 |
| ITO Sec. 8.c Past Performance, 2nd para. |
| 4 |
| The ITO makes specific reference to a Past Performance volume, as follows: “The Government will evaluate only the three (3) PPQs received from the point of contacts referenced in the Past Performance volume.” |
Elsewhere the ITO states the requirement for two (2) volumes: “The pricing and technical volumes shall be submitted as separate documents.”
Question: Can the Government please specify the total page count of the referenced Past Performance volume?
The ITO paragraph 5. FORMAT. Has been revised as follows: Past Performance may be submitted as a separate volume and does not count against the previously mentioned page count.
| 3 |
| ITO Sec. 5; ITO Sec. 8.c Past Performance |
| 2 |
| The total page count of the technical volume is not to exceed 25 pages. Resumes and teaming agreements, if included, do not count toward the page total. |
Question: Can the Government please allow Past Performance information to not count toward the page total of the technical volume?
The ITO paragraph 5. FORMAT. Has been revised as follows: Past Performance may be submitted as a separate volume and does not count against the previously mentioned page count.
| 4 |
| ITO Sec. 4 OFFERS |
| 1 |
| “All questions and answers will be posted in IT Solutions Shop (ITSS) as soon as practicable after the closing period for questions.” Further, “All offers shall be submitted in GSA’s electronic system, Information Technology Solution Shop (ITSS): http://itss.gsa.gov .” |
Our company has three (3) different logons for ITSS that we use to view opportunities, download documents (including Q&As), upload proposals and quotes, and upload task order status reports.
We are unable to see the opportunity order for order number ID04150090 CECOM Training Support using any of our ITSS logons.
Question a: Can the Government please ensure ITSS order number ID04150090 CECOM Training Support is accessible to prospective offerors?
Question b: Further, in the event ITSS is not functioning properly at time of proposal submission, will offerors be allowed to submit their proposals via email?
(Please know we already contacted the ITSS Help Desk and we were advised that this solicitation has not been officially released by their website. We can provide our trouble ticket number if needed.)
All Offerors shall provide the name of all individuals seeking access to ITSS in order to see the associated documents for the RFP. Please provide the name of the individual(s) to Jacqueline Milton via email (Jacqueline.Milton@gsa.gov) upon completion of their registration.
In the event ITSS is unavailable on the closing date of the RFP, email submissions will be permissible.
NOTE: Please contact the RBA Help Desk at 877-472-4877 prior to submitting via email.
ITO Sec. 8.c Past Performance 2;
| Question: If the past performance information is included in the page limit for the technical volume, would the Government please consider raising the current 25-page limit to 40 pages for this volume? |
| Please see response in Questions 2 and 3 (this section). |
| A. Question Number |
| B. RFP Paragraph Number |
| C. Specific RFP Language |
| D. Comment or Question |
Response
Section 8.0
c. Past Performance. Offerors shall submit documentation of three (3) past or recent contracts/task orders similar in size and scope to the solicited contract. (Recent is defined as similar work performed within the last five (5) years of the issuance date of this solicitation.). Past performance information shall include a point of contact (name, company name, phone number, fax number and email), contract number, contract type, dollar value, date of award, performance period, and a narrative describing the nature and complexity of the work as well as how well the offeror performed with respect to Quality of Services, Management Controls, Cost Control, Schedule Compliance, and Customer Satisfaction.. The Offeror shall also describe their role in the contract and its relevance to the solicited contract.
ITO Section 8.0 c. Past Performance (Page 4) requires a large amount of detailed information which requires at least 3 to 5 pages per reference. This severely limits the offeror’s ability to adequately address the PWS requirement.
Offeror respectfully requests that ITO Section 8.0 c. Past Performance (Page 4) be excluded from the “The total page count of the technical volume shall not exceed 25 pages.”
Please clarify?
The ITO paragraph 5. FORMAT. Has been revised as follows: Past Performance may be submitted as a separate volume and does not count against the previously mentioned page count.
Section 9.0 For evaluation purposes only, the total evaluated price/cost is the sum of the total price/cost submitted for (a) the base period, and (b) the six-month extension authorized by FAR clause 52.217-8.
| Can the Government please confirm that the total evaluated price/cost will only be the sum of the total price/cost for the (a) base period and the (b) six-month extension? |
| ITO Paragraph 9 has been revised. Please see highlighted revision. |
Section 9.0
PWS Section 5.5.2
| In determining the total price reasonableness, the Government will evaluate the labor mix, number of hours per labor category, travel, and ODCs proposed to perform the contract requirements. |
| Can the Government confirm that the total budgeted Travel amounts provided in PWS Section 5.5.2 are plug numbers that should be proposed by all offerors in Pricing responses? |
All offerors should use the travel amounts provided in PWS 5.5.2 as plug numbers.
Section 9.0
PWS Section 5.5.2
| In determining the total price reasonableness, the Government will evaluate the labor mix, number of hours per labor category, travel, and ODCs proposed to perform the contract requirements. |
| If the travel amounts listed in section 5.5.2 are not considered plug numbers, will the Government please provide the estimated travel schedule for the base year and option periods of the contract to include: Location, duration, and frequency of travel? |
All offerors should use the travel amounts provided in PWS 5.5.2 as plug numbers.
Section 9.0
PWS Section 5.5.4 Page 12-13
| In determining the total price reasonableness, the Government will evaluate the labor mix, number of hours per labor category, travel, and ODCs proposed to perform the contract requirements. |
| Can the Government confirm that the total budgeted Material amounts provided in PWS Section 5.5.4 are plug numbers that should be proposed by all offerors in Pricing responses? |
| All offerors should use the materials amounts provided in PWS 5.5.4 as plug numbers. |
Section 9.0
PWS Section 5.5.2
| In determining the total price reasonableness, the Government will evaluate the labor mix, number of hours per labor category, travel, and ODCs proposed to perform the contract requirements. |
| If the Material amounts listed in section 5.5.2 are not considered plug numbers, will the Government please provide an estimate Bill Of Materials (BOM) required to execute the requirements for the duration of the contract (base year and option years)? |
All offerors should use the materials amounts provided in PWS 5.5.4 as plug numbers.
Section 9.0
PWS Section 5.5.2
PWS Section 5.5.4 Page 12-13
| In determining the total price reasonableness, the Government will evaluate the labor mix, number of hours per labor category, travel, and ODCs proposed to perform the contract requirements. |
| Are the plug numbers provided in the PWS inclusive of the Offerors indirect rate application to Travel and ODC costs? |
The workload history provides hours only and does not include any Labor rates.
Offerors are provided the workload history for historical purposes only and should develop their response based on their established protocol.
Offerors should use the plug figures for Travel and Materials only.
Section 9.0
| The Offeror’s proposed pricing will be used in establishing the ceiling price for the contract. The price proposal shall include the proposed equipment, number of hours for labor category, and ODCs (travel and materials). |
| Can the Government please clarify how offerors shall include the proposed equipment in the final submitted price proposal? |
Should all offerors provide the budgeted plug number for Materials from PWS Section 5.5.4 for the proposed equipment?
Offerors should use the plug figures for Travel and Materials in preparing their proposal.
Section 5.0
| The pricing volume shall be formatted using the Government-provided pricing template. |
| Does the Government require the offeror to provide a Pricing Methodology Narrative to be submitted with the Government-provided pricing template? |
| All Offerors should provide a pricing methodology narrative along with their pricing template. |
Section 5.0
| The pricing volume shall be formatted using the Government-provided pricing template. |
| Does the Government require that the offeror provide the unsanitized rate buildup of the proposed T&M Rates? |
| Yes |
| 11 |
| ITO Section 8.0 c. Past Performance |
| Offerors shall provide the separately attached Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact for the referenced contracts. The point of contact for a referenced project shall submit a completed questionnaire no later than the proposal closing date/time via email to Jacqueline.Milton@gsa.gov. Offerors are solely responsible for assuring that their points of contact submit the completed questionnaire by the proposal closing date/time. The questionnaire shall come directly from the point of contact. The PPQs should correspond to the contracts submitted by the offeror in the narrative submission. The Government will evaluate only the three (3) PPQs received from the point of contacts referenced in the Past Performance volume. The failure to submit three (3) narrative contracts or PPQs associated with those contracts/task orders may lead the government to assign greater risk to successful performance with an Offeror’s quote. |
| With the wider acceptance of PPIRS for recording an offerors contract performance, many customers will no longer complete separate Past Performance Questionnaires. Will the procuring contracting office accept a printout of an offeror’s most recent signed PPIRS in place of the Past Performance Questionnaires? |
| Offerors have the option of submitting a CPARS in lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire. However, Offerors are cautioned to ensure the information is recent, relevant and adheres to the requirement defined in the ITO. |
| 12 |
| ITO Cover Page |
| CLOSING DATE/TIME: 4/29/2016, 4:00 PM EST |
| Due to the clarification questions effect upon the offeror’s proposal, we respectfully request a two week extension of the proposal due date. |
| The Government does not foresee the need to extend the proposal due date at this time. |
| Question # |
| ITO or PWS |
| Page |
| Section (PWS/Para) |
| Issue |
| Discussion |
| Recommendation |
| Responses |
| 1 |
| ITO |
| 4 |
| 8c. |
| Past Performance (Prime v. Sub) |
| It is our interpretation that Prime or Sub Past Performance is authorized with the submission of a formal Teaming agreement. Also that Sub PP is required if a sub will complete more than 50% of the effort |
| Please clarify that Prime AND Sub PP are allowed and that Sub PP required if more than 50% of the effort |
| Yes, this is correct. |
NOTE: However, the prime contractor shall be responsible for all work performed when utilizing subcontractors.
| 2 |
| PWS |
| 6 |
| 2.2 |
| TSP Development standards |
| Does the customer want the TSPs developed IAW TRADOC 350-70 standards |
| Recommend that the government clearly identify the standards for Training Support Package (TSP) development to include level of IMI support required |
| Each FMS case contains unique requirements. TRADOC 350-70 standards can be used as a guideline; however, they are not mandated and may require some tailoring to meet the FMS case requirements. |
| 3 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.6 |
| Simulations Development |
| The customer does not specify the type or level of simulations required |
| Please specify the type and level of simulations required, this could be a simple IMI 1 or as advanced as IMI 4. |
| The type and level of simulations is unknown until the FMS case is presented. At which time, more information will be provided. |
| 4 |
| PWS |
| 38 |
| 9.0 |
| Workload Estimate |
| No Labor category descriptions are given ie: education, years experience, key skills required. For example is SME 1 the senior SME or is SME 3? |
| Please clarify levels, years of experience and degree requirements. Also including job descriptions will allow the offeror to deliver the best value to the government in terms of price and worker qualification |
| Offerors shall refer to the sample LCAT descriptions in attachment E to assist them in developing their proposed pricing for Subject Matter Experts. It is the Offerors responsibility to independently develop and price labor based on the requirement as defined in Section 2.0 of PWS |
| 5A |
| ITO |
| 5 |
| 9.0 |
| GSA Schedule pricing |
| In early discussions the GSA KO indicated that this effort was not associated with any GSA schedule and therefore would be priced independent of existing schedules |
| Please confirm labor category pricing is not determined by existing rates negotiated with GSA |
| Yes, labor category pricing is not determined by existing rates negotiated with GSA. |
| 5B |
| ITO |
| 5 |
| 9.0 |
| GSA Schedule pricing |
| In early discussions the GSA KO indicated that this effort was not associated with any GSA schedule and therefore would be priced independent of existing schedules |
| If the pricing is not determined by existing rates negotiated with GSA with the Industrial Funding Fee (IFF) be applicable. |
| As stated above, pricing is not determined by existing rates negotiated by GSA, therefore the IFF is not applicable. |
| 6 |
| PWS |
| 5 & 37 |
| 2.0 & 9.0 |
| Labor Category experience & qualifications |
| Are the labor categories provided (9.0 Workload Estimate) consistent with the current contract performance? |
| Please confirm workload estimates are representative of the work to be performed |
| Labor categories are consistent with the current contract. Workload estimates are based on historical performance however they are subject to change based on each FMS case. |
| 7 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.6 |
| To the best of the Government’s knowledge at this time, no commercial software exists which would be adequate to meet the needs of Section 2.0 requirements. |
| The systems as listed in para 2.0 do not all work together with or w/o simulation. For example - power generation and Night Vision Devices. There is Simulation SW that supports the computing equipment and information systems listed. |
| Recommend clarifying which systems are to be supported by simulation software |
| Any system listed in Para 2.0 may require simulation. Identification of simulation software required will be provided upon receipt of individual cases. |
| 8 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.5 |
| Testing |
| The PWS states: "The contractor shall perform testing on equipment to include function tests, fault isolation and other troubleshooting on all equipment listed in section 2.0.” |
| Can the Government confirm that the equipment developers will provide any associated special or unique test equipment? |
| Yes, the FMS case will provide any special or unique test equipment. |
| 9 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.6 |
| Simulation Development |
| The paragraph title infers that an offeror will be required to develop (operate, and maintain) simulations for various training systems. The associated paragraph language only discusses potential software purchases and does not provide any specifics on simulations. |
| Can the Government provide additional clarifying language on the types of simulations required/desired. This will drive estimates for computer platforms, peripheral equipment, and potential simulation generation requirements. |
| Any system listed in Para 2.0 may require simulation. Identification of simulation software required will be provided upon receipt of individual cases. |
| 10 |
| PWS |
| 11 |
| 5.4 |
| Government Furnished Items and Information |
| The PWS states: "The Government will provide the contractor a dedicated work area for on-site if required." |
| Request clarity of the statement: Should the sentence have read “a dedicated on-site work area"? |
| No, the majority of work takes place on OCONUS on Non-US facilities. |
| 11 |
| ITO |
| 3 |
| 8b. |
| Key Personnel |
| ITO states: key personnel in the management of this contract (program manager, project manager, project lead, etc.) |
| Will the government designate all key personnel and their respective place(s) of performance. |
| No, each offeror should determine and advise the Government of Key Personnel in their proposal as stated in the ITO. |
| 12 |
| ITO, PWS |
| 3, 37 |
| 8b., 9.0 |
| Key Personnel |
| ITO states: key personnel in the management of this contract (program manager, project manager, project lead, etc.) |
| Request clarification in Workload estimate. Program manager and project lead are not indicated in the workload estimate |
| No, each offeror should determine and advise the Government of Key Personnel in their proposal as stated in the ITO. |
| Will the government please consider clarifying the place of performance (government or Contractor site) to provide further detail to offerors pricing and provide the best value to the government in evaluation? |
| Please refer to the PWS - 1.4 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE / PLACE OF PERFORMANCE and Attachment A |
| Question # |
| Document |
| Page |
| Paragraph |
| Industry Reference to Question |
| Industry Question |
| Government Answer |
| 1 |
| PWS |
| 1, 37 |
| 8.2 |
| Attachments A through D |
| Can the Government please provide Attachments A through D. |
| Please see FedBizOpps for attachments. |
| 2 |
| PWS |
| 5 |
| 2 |
| Performance Requirements |
| Section makes reference to SETA support; however, the PWS makes no mention of SETA support except for in this section. Does the scope of work include SETA support, and if so does it present a potential OCI? |
SETA stands for System & Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA) therefore there is no potential OCI risk.
| 3 |
| RFP |
| 2,3 |
| 7,8 |
| EVALUATION indicates that "price/cost is not expected to be the controlling factor in the selection of an Offeror, but the degree of importance of cost as a factor could become greater depending upon the equality of the proposals for other factors evaluated". |
| Section 8 (Factor of Evaluation) lists 3 factors: Capability to Perform, Management of Approach, and Past Performance. It excludes Price. Is Price included in the evaluation factors? |
| Please refer to the ITO 9.0. |
| 4 |
| PWS |
| 11 |
| 5.4 |
| Government Furnished Items and Information: "The Government will provide access to all necessary documentation and facilities required for this effort." |
| Will the Government provide as GFE/GFI any pre-existing training material used on prior contracts that was developed at Government expense? |
| Yes, the Government will provide any pre-existing training materials. |
| Are offerors to assume that T&M labor rates are inclusive of direct labor, contractor burdens and fee only and that uplifts (post hardship differential, danger) if applicable will be included in the travel and/or ODC plug amounts provided in the RFQ? |
| Yes that is correct. Labor rates should be fully burdened and hardship differential and danger pay should be included in ODC amounts. |
| 6 |
| PWS |
| 12 |
| 5.5 |
| The inclusion of reimbursable costs is a direct allocation of costs associated with support of this contract. Travel, Training, and Material (all referred to as Other Direct Costs (ODCs)) incurred shall be funded and approved in writing by the government prior to commencement/ acquisition. The government on the start day of contract will set ODC rates that will be used throughout the life of the contract. This is necessary due to life expectancy of funding. All costs should be billed based on actual expenditures |
| The statement, "The government on the start day of contract will set ODC rates that will be used throughout the life of the contract." Are the rates referred to the overhead, G&A, etc. rates traditionally applied to ODC costs? If so, rates established at the onset of a contract are forward pricing rates established with DCAA, which are adjusted throughout the life of the contract based on actual indirect expenditures. Can the Government explain the intention of this statement? |
| Workload Estimates provided in Section 9.0, Page 37-38 of the PWS may be used by the contractor as they prepare their Pricing Template to accompany their proposal. As each FMS case line of funding and pre-determined based on the needs of the host nation, there must be agreed to rates by which to form a basis of evaluation and reach an acceptable rate throughout the life of the contract. These are the labor rates that will be agreed to throughout the life of the contract. Next, offerors should use the Material estimates in Section 5.5.4, Pages 12-13 of the PWS as they prepare their Pricing Template. Lastly, offerors should use the Travel estimates in Section 5.5.2, Page 12 of the PWS as they prepare their Pricing Template. Offerors are reminded that actual costs must be based upon the principles outlined in FAR 16.601 (Time and Materials Contracts) and travel costs in line with FAR 31.205-46 (Travel Costs) and the PWS 5.5.1, Joint Travel Regulations. |
Section 5.5 of RFP will be revised to read "The government on the start day of the contract will agree to labor rates that will be used through the life of the contract."
52.217-9 Period of performance stated a 1-yr base and four 1-yr options (Total of 5 years).
(c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed three (3) years.
| Please confirm if the entire POP (to include options) is 5 years or 3 years. |
| 5 Years. The clause has been updated and highlighted in the PWS. |
| 8 |
| PWS |
| 4 |
| 1.4 |
| Performance shall take place at the following locations: All locations within the areas of responsibility (AOR) of US European Command (EUCOM), US Africa Command (AFRICOM), US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), US Pacific Command (PACOM), US Central Command (CENTCOM) and US Northern Command (NORTHCOM). Additional locations outside the continental United States (OCONUS) and within the continental United States (CONUS) may be requested by the government. |
| Will Contractor be required to train any non-U.S. entities either CONUS or OCONUS? Of specific concern is if training on controlled articles, licensing will be required from either U.S. State Department/DDTC or the U.S. Department of Commerce. If so, will there be provisions in the contract that exempt the Contractor from requiring export license, TAA, etc. Please advise if the nature of the training and terms of the contract will require the Contractor to obtain any sort of license, TAA, etc. |
| Yes, training will take place OCONUS. |
All specific licensing or training terms will be mentioned in the FMS case and the FMS case will state exemptions.
| 9 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.7 |
| The contractor shall purchase equipment in support of CECOM TSD foreign military support efforts... |
| Will there be any hardware exports of EAR or ITAR controlled items required in order to conduct training, or will this equipment be furnished by the USG at the training location? |
NOTE: Shipping a defense article and or technical data to the Government, at either an APO or FPO overseas, is considered to be an export and requires permission from the U.S. State Department/DDTC, unless there is a license exemption available.
Yes, there will be instances for shipping of EAR and ITAR requirement which are covered under the FMS case however, this is does not cover the requirement to obtain a business license if required. If a business license is required, it is the sole responsibility of the offeror to acquire it.
| 10 |
| PWS |
| 7 |
| 2.7 |
| The contractor shall purchase equipment in support of CECOM TSD foreign military support efforts... |
| Will material exports be subject to taxes/tariffs/fees, or will provisions of the contract exempt material exports from taxes/tariffs/fees? If taxes/tariffs/fees apply, please confirm these costs will be charged to the material CLIN. |
Fees will be charges under Materials.
| 11 |
| ITO |
| 4 |
| 8.C |
| Offerors shall submit documentation of three (3) past or recent contracts/task orders similar in size and scope to the solicited contract. (Recent is defined as similar work performed within the last five (5) years of the issuance date of this solicitation.). …“in the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.” Consequently, a Neutral rating will be given as applicable. |
| If Offerors do not have 3 relative PPs, would the USG rank the delivered PP and then provide a neutral rating for the other PP? |
| The Offeror will only be rated on Past Performance provided. A neutral rating is reserved for Offerors having NO Past Performance. |
| 13 |
| ITO |
| 6 |
| 9 |
| Price/cost will not be rated, but will be evaluated in determining best value (trade-off) to the Government. In addition, this factor will also assess the realism of the Offeror’s price/cost. |
| Can the USG please explain the price evaluation methodology in light of the statement that states price/cost will not be rated? |
| Please refer to ITO Section 9.0 for detailed explanation of the method of evaluation. |
| 14 |
| ITO |
| 6 |
| 10 |
| Rating Guidelines/Standards. Each evaluation factor will be rated in accordance with the following guidelines. The guidelines include the following rankings for each evaluation factor including Past Performance, High Confidence, Significant Confidence, Medium Confidence, Little Confidence, No Confidence. |
| Earlier, the USG states that “Per FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv) “in the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.” Consequently, a Neutral rating will be given as applicable. ”, however “Neutral” is not in the rankings list, where would “Neutral” fall in these rankings? |
| As the neutral rating is defined in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), it is therefore not included in any listing in the ranks list. |
| 15 |
| ITO |
| 6 |
| 10 |
| 10. Rating Guidelines/Standards. Each evaluation factor will be rated in accordance with the following guidelines. The guidelines include the following rankings for each evaluation factor including Past Performance, High Confidence, Significant Confidence, Medium Confidence, Little Confidence, No Confidence. The distributed Past Performance Questionnaire has the following has the following ratings, Exceptional, Very Good, Satisfactory, Neutral, Marginal, and Unacceptable. |
| Can the Government please explain how the rankings map to the ratings? Different words appear to be used to meet the same objective, i.e. determining a contractor’s past performance |
| The ratings in the Past Performance Questionnaire are used to obtain an individual’s, (COR or other Government personnel) assessment of a contractor’s performance. The evaluation factors ratings are used by the Source Selection Board to determine the merit of a contractor’s proposal. |
Can the Government please explain how the Past Performance Questionnaire is going to be used in the evaluation of Past Performance?
Please refer to the answer in question 15 (this section).
Are all non-labor costs presumed to be in the travel and material budgets regardless of what they are (travel, material, training, H&H, DBA, ODCs, etc.)
Offerors should provide their fully burdened cost and utilize the plug figures for travel and materials.
| 20 |
| PWS |
| 11 |
| 5.4 |
| Government Furnished Items and Information: |
| It is unclear as to whether the USG is stating that personnel will be on-site (working on USG site) or off-site (working on Contractor site), or both. Can the USG provide guidance as to the breakdown by labor category of how much of the effort is on-site vs. off-site? |
| All work will be performed in host nation. |
| 21 |
| PWS |
| 37 |
| 9 |
| Workload Estimate: Offerors are advised to conduct their own analysis of these requirements, and propose amounts based on their own independent assessments. |
| Given the high level of the requirements, there is not enough information to provide a sound basis of estimate. In order to promote a level playing field, will the government simply mandate that these are the exact positions and hours that the government wishes to procure, without deviation, as there is no sound basis to deviate because the requirements are at too high of a level and training can be on any product in the PWS, for an indeterminate amount of time, and any location throughout the world? |
Yes, the workload estimate is a true representation of work currently being performed. It is the offeror’s responsibility to develop their proposal independently.
| 23 |
| PWS |
| 37 |
| 9 |
| Workload Estimate: The USG cites historical hours in performance of the contract in the PWS. |
| Will the USG please confirm that this is the number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) working on the program currently, and if not, please provide the current FTE count. |
Please refer to Section 9.0 of the PWS.
| 25 |
| PWS |
| 37 |
| 9 |
| Workload Estimate: The USG cites historical hours in performance of the contract in the PWS. |
| Will the USG please provide the PWS paragraphs that each of these personnel perform? There is no way to provide a Basis of Estimate for the number of personnel required for each of the PWS paragraphs in the case of deviation. |
Please refer to Section 9.0 of the PWS.
| Question # |
| Question |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Please clarify/provide the four (4) attachments in the PWS, Section 8.2 titled: Attachments. |
Please see Amendment 1 to the FBO solicitation.
| 2 |
| In Section 8.b of the RFP, the Management Approach, requests the Key Management Personnel credentials be provided. Will the United States Government specify exactly what key management personnel billets need to be submitted with the proposal? |
Please refer to Section 8.b of the ITO for examples of key personnel; however each offeror should identify their proposed personnel in their submission.
| 3 |
| Will the United States Government accept foreign owned companies to join the Prime contractor’s team if there is a significant cost savings to the United States Government? |
Yes, provided that the prime understands they are still responsible for performing the requirement.
| 4 |
| With respect to section 8.c of the RFP, can the offerors’ past performance submittals come from the Prime as well as the Subcontractors (operating under an executed teaming agreement)? |
| Past Performance should be submitted for all prime contractors. Past performance for subcontractors is only required if the subcontractor will be performing more than 50% of the work. Teaming arrangements require Past Performance from each team member. |
| 5 |
| In section 5.5 of the PWS, Reimbursable Costs, what is meant by the following: “The government on the start day of contract will set ODC rates that will be used throughout the life of the contract.”? |
| Offerors shall refer to the sample LCAT descriptions in Attachment E to assist them in developing their proposed pricing for Subject Matter Experts. It is the Offerors responsibility to independently develop and price labor based on the requirement as defined in Section 2.0 of PWS. |
| 6 |
| How does the Government plan to order discrete work packages (i.e. task orders)? Can further details / information on this process be provided? |
Individual task orders will NOT be issued. Work comes in the form of individual case and provided to the contractor as required.