IFIB-17-29_Standard_QA_7.pdf

PDF 156 KB Posted

Attached to
Education & Training Technologies e-Learning Course Development
Solicitation number
IFIB-ACT-SACT-17-29
Issued by

About this file

Q&A #6

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Request for Proposal Number:

Reference:

Date of Issue:

The following questions were raised with respect to subject IFIB/RFP. Responses are to provide clarification.

Question Response

From Q&A #3 (p. 3)

Q. Does this mean that payment for translation services would be made outside of or in addition to the basic awarded proposal only if the customer determines it is required? Or should translation services be included in the basic proposal?

Translation services will be outside of the standard Level 2-4 student hour creation rate.

If a NATO customer requires a course in another language then the translation rate would be added to the set cost for each student hour.

If an existing course requires a new language then all the asset files would be provided and the company would translate to the new language

In the government response to question #2 under

Q&A 4, could submission of a Key Personnel

Resume also be acceptable rather than just curriculum vitae (CV)?

Yes, that will be deemed acceptable.

Ref. Page 5 of solicitation amendment

#1. Solicitation states a required submission document as, “The bidder’s full name address, Point of Contacts, Telephone, Fax number and

Internet site, (See Enclosure #2)”. Enclosure #2 appears to be a mailing label format. Is there a separate prescribed format for required bidder information to be submitted along with the offeror’s proposal?

No, the information that is stated for contact information should be placed on the enclosure #2 label.

8 Nov 2017

IFIB 17-29

Q&A 7

Ref. Page 7 of solicitation amendment #1.

Solicitation states, “The following factors are considerations: Successful administrative submission of bid packages and requested

Enclosures 2-6, as listed in this RFP. (Pass/Fail)”.

We are unable to locate Enclosure 6. Please clarify.

That is an administrative typo. It should read, “Enclosures 2-5”.

Ref. Q&A #3. “Question: Is there a page limit for the Technical Volume? Answer: 20 page limit.”

Considering Enclosure 1, Proposal Content /

Checklist, includes the Technical Proposal as a separate item from bidder information, compliance statement, past performance and key personnel, are these required items excluded from the 20-page limit for the Technical

Proposal?

Yes, as previously stated in Q&A 6.

Ref. page 21 of solicitation amendment

#1, requirement states: “The company capability statement shall include the following information at a minimum…”. Is the required “company capability statement” the same requirement as the “Technical Proposal” / “Technical Volume” mentioned elsewhere in the solicitation?

Yes, it is one in the same.

Ref. Enclosure 3, Compliance Statement.

Please clarify what information is required in the field titled, “Company Bid Reference.”

This would be the previous contract(s) as reference that a bidder would request a deviation consideration.

Ref. Enclosure 4, Past Performance

Information. Requirement states, “Description of

Work Performance and Relevance to

Current Acquisition (Type of facility, capacity, estimated patronage, summary of staff used)”. In the context of training product development requirements, what is meant by “type of facility”, “capacity”, and “estimated patronage”?

This enclosure package is a standard template NATO uses for IFIBs. In this instance, “type of facility, capacity, and/or estimated patronage” is not applicable to this particular contract.

Bidders do not have to provide these types of examples as it is not relevant to the current acquisition.

Are the Past Performance citations counted towards the 20 page count limit?

No, please see Q&A 6.

Please provide a clarification/definition for capacity as used in the Past Performance, Enclosure 4, #5.

This enclosure package is a standard template NATO uses for IFIBs. In this instance, “type of facility, capacity, and/or estimated patronage” is not applicable to this particular contract.

Bidders do not have to provide these types of examples as it is not relevant to the current acquisition.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .