ATT J21_QA Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- MCSC PDSS Support Services
- Solicitation number
- M6785424R7603
- Issued by
-
United States Marine Corps
About this file
This document is a Q&A matrix related to a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Post Deployment System Support (PDSS) services for the U.S. Marine Corps. The RFP is seeking services for the operation, sustainment, maintenance, interface, system integration, connectivity, and updates of the Marine Corps' Logistics capabilities and systems portfolio.
The Q&A addresses various aspects of the RFP, including requirements around NIST 800-172, IPv6 implementation, proposal submission instructions, small business participation, staffing, pricing, and attachments. Key details include: the RFP specifies that NIST 800-172 must be implemented on contractor networks, offerors are required to use IPv6 connections for systems connecting to government networks, the Small Business Participation Plan should be submitted as part of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and the government will not provide current incumbent staffing details. The RFP has a total ceiling value of $997,520,000 and the first task order (TO-01) is priced separately.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| ATT J21_QA Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Conformed_24R760303 _070824.pdf | ||
| ATT J02 Price Workbook.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| ATT J16 GCSS-MC ECP DD1692-1.pdf | ||
| ATT J01 TO 01 PWS.pdf | ||
| ATT J07 PPQ 060724.docx | DOCX document | |
| ATT J19 GCSS-MC RCA.pdf | ||
| ATT J20_P24 Technical Debt.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| ATT J05 QASP.pdf | ||
| ATT J14 GCSS-MC CM Plan FY24.pdf | ||
| AMD 02_24R7603_120724.pdf | ||
| Conformed_24R7603_120724.pdf | ||
| PDSS RFP AMEND 01 CONFORM 24R7603 20240515.pdf | ||
| PDSS RFP AMEND 01 24R7603 20240515.pdf |
Show all 14
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
Sheet1
| Q No. | RFP Document | RFP Doc Section | RFP Doc Page | Question | Response: |
| 1 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220502 | 5.2 Appendix B: Mandatory Documents | 37 | Please clarify why the NIST 800-172 is added as a reference. Is the offeror expected to implement the requirements of the NIST 800-172 on their contractor network? Can this reference be removed? | Naval Instruction (NIST) 800-172 must be implemented on contractor networks that transmit or store Government information because portfolios within the PM LI2S-MC Family of Systems are identified as financially critical systems. |
| 2 | ATT_J01_TO_01_PWS_20240501 | 4.4.3.2 Internal Networking and Ancillary | 38 | Please clarify if offerors and their subcontractors are required to implement IPv6 connections only if the contractor network is connecting to a government network? Or is there a requirement for offerors and subcontractors to implement IPv6 across connections regardless of any direct connection to government sites? | The offeror, and its subcontractors working on this effort, are required to use IPv6 network connections for all systems that connect to IPv6 Government networks. FAR 11.002(g) requires the IPv6 connection, as noted in the TO 01 PWS. |
| 3 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220502 | L.2.2 Table L.1 & L.2.4.1 | 68 - 69 | Table L.1 states that Part One must be submitted via PIEE; however, L.2.4.1 states submission via email to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist. Please confirm submission should be via PIEE and amend the RFP as appropriate. | RFP Amendment 03 specifies submission by PIEE and removes the requirement to submit via email. |
| 4 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220502 | L.3.3.2.3 Staffing & M.2.2.3 Staffing | 74 & 81 | The RFP states "g) NOTE: None of the staffing information should identify specific individuals proposed to perform on the contract." and "g) NOTE: An offeror’s identification of specific individuals proposed to perform on the contract (having been directed not to do so) will be a basis for the Government to reject the proposal." Will the government amend the RFP to clarify that the offeror's oral presentation participants are permitted to introduce themselves and describe their current role? | The statement has been revised in RFP Amendment 03 to state the following: The solicitation does not prohibit oral presenters from identifying themselves or the role they play on the current PDSS (or any other) contract. It does, however, prohibit the identification of anyone--presenter or not--as someone the offeror proposes or intends to perform under the contract that would be awarded under this solicitation. An offeror's identification, directly or through inference, of any individual as proposed or intended to work on the resulting contract will be a basis to reject the proposal. |
| 5 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220502 | L.3.5 Factor 4 – Small Business (SB) Participation Plan & M.2.2 Step Two Factor 4 | 77 & 83 | Section L.3.5 refers to a Small Business Participation Plan while Table 4 in Section M.2.2 Factor 4 refers to a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Will the government confirm that the Table 4 heading should be "Table 4. Small Business Participation Plan Ratings" and amend the RFP as appropriate? | Table 4 heading has been updated in RFP Amendment 03. |
| 6 | Att_J09_Master_Rates_Staffing_Matrix_Priced_12MAR24.xlsx | Tab - Master Rates Ordering Period | Attachment J_09 | Attachment J_09 2nd tab "Master Rates - Ordering Period" Column B is titled "TIER". Will the goverment please clarify the definition of "TIER" with respect to this attachment? | Tier refers to the offeror's differentiation in professional levels. For example, some companies use job classification to assign junior level, journey level, subject matter expert, and senior levels to labor categories such as Software Developers, Applications, Engineers, IT Systems Administrators, Database Analysts, etc. based on their experience, credentials, and education. (Source-Buy.GSA.Gov). |
The offeror should complete the 'Key' portion of the Master LCATS & Quals in ATT J02 to clearly identify, define, describe, the descriptors associated with their poposed Tier levels. A SAMPLE LCATS & Quals tab has been included in ATT 02 as an example.
| 7 | Att_J09_Master Rates_Staffing_Matrix_Priced 12MAR24 | L.3.4.3.1 Part One: Contract Pricing | 75 | Will the government allow Offerors to insert columns to provide required information (i.e., site location - onsite/offsite) to enable the TO1 proposal to be easily traced back to the Attachment 09 master worksheets? | The discussion of onsite and offsite rates has been removed in RFP Amendment 03, so that additional columns are not required. |
| 8 | ATT_J07_Past_Performance_Questionnaire | 1. Past Performance Assessment | 1 | Will the government correct the date from 19 June 2024 to 15 July 2024 to align with the due date in the RFP? | Your response is needed no later than the closing time for receipt of offers on Page 1 of the SF1449, Block 8. |
The date has been updated in RFP Amendment 03.
| 9 | PDSS_RFP_AMEND_01_CONFORM_24R7603_20240515 | Section I 52.219-9 and 252.219-7003 | 51 and 52 | Because FAR 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontracting Plan is included in the flow downs, will the Government clarify if the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be submitted in Factor 4 in addition to the Small Business Participation Plan? | Yes. The Small Business Participation Plan should be submitted as a part of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan under Factor 4. The RFP has been updated. |
| 10 | PDSS_RFP_AMEND_01_CONFORM_24R7603_20240515 | L.2.1.a | 71 | Will the government exclude PowerPoint slides from the requirement to be "Printable on letter-sized (8-1/2” X 11”) pages, single-spaced, with one-inch (1”) margins on all edges." PowerPoint does not have margin settings and shrinks slides to fit page size when printing. We recommend allowing standard PowerPoint widescreen format for slides. | An exception to the margin and font size requirements has been udpated in RFP Amendment 03. |
| 11 | PDSS_RFP_AMEND_01_CONFORM_24R7603_20240515 | L.3.5 Factor 4 – Small Business (SB) Participation Plan | 81 | Will the government please revise L.3.5 to clarify that the required calculations are based on the total value of TO_01 and not the $997,520,000 IDIQ ceiling. | L.3.5 is revised via RFP Amendment 03 to clarify that the required calculations are based on the value of TO 01, as proposed, rather than the $997,520,000 IDIQ ceiling. |
| 12 | PDSS_RFP_AMEND_01_CONFORM_24R7603_20240515 | L.3.5 Factor 4 – Small Business (SB) Participation Plan | 81 | Please provide a revised template for 'Table L.4 - Small Business Participation Plan' so that offerors can comply with requirement "e) The estimated total dollar value provided to each SB including the prime if they are a SB." | Section L, Factor 4, has been revised to provide a Format for submission. This format can also be found at: https://www.acquisition.gov/node/41718/printable/pdf |
| 13 | PDSS_RFP_AMEND_01_CONFORM_24R7603_20240515 | L.3.4.3.2 Part Two: Task Order Pricing | 81 | RFP states that "The offeror shall not propose any price or cost for the ODC CLINs as this amount will be provided by the Government." The RFP and price attachments do not include the amount of ODCs. To ensure a fair price evaluation, will the government provide the ODC values for material and travel that offerors shall use in their pricing? | The Government's Not to Exceed ODC amounts are the same for each offeror, and so are not required for price evaluation or price comparisons, and will not be used for those purposes. However, Atch J02 is revised through Amendment 03 to include those NTE estimates for ODCs. |
| 14 | Att_J02_PTO_Price Workbook 25MAR24 | TO 01 BASE PERIOD | N/A | In Attachment J02, the period of performance in Column D does not agree consistently with the number of months in column E on every row. Will the Government please review and revise as needed for consistency? For example, see rows 26 through 30. | SEE updated ATT J02 TO 01 Price Workbook and Master Rates. |
| 15 | Att_J02_PTO_Price Workbook 25MAR24 | TO 01 BASE PERIOD | N/A | In Attachment J02, should all offerors propose pricing for TO 01 Base Period Option 0003 (rows 17 - 21) for the 12-month period of performance? | SEE updated ATT J02 TO 01 Price Workbook and Master Rates. |
| 16 | Att_J02_PTO_Price Workbook 25MAR24 | TO 01 BASE PERIOD | N/A | In Attachment J02, row 15, column C, please revise instructions to be consistent with the other TO 01 Base Period Option 0002 rows: "If Contract Awarded to Non-incumbent". | SEE updated ATT J02 TO 01 Price Workbook and Master Rates. |
| 17 | Att_J02_PTO_Price Workbook 25MAR24 | TO 01 BASE PERIOD | N/A | In Attachment J02, rows 12 - 16, column D, the period of performance should be the same in all rows: "10/25/2025-4/24/2026." Please correct the errors in rows 13 - 16. | SEE updated ATT J02 TO 01 Price Workbook and Master Rates. |
| 18 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220502 | GENERAL | N/A | Can the Government please provide information related to the current incumbent staff structure and the number of staff supporting Task Order-1 to help with proper sizing estimates? | The Government will not provide the current staffing structure, in part, because the scope of the solicited effort differs from the current contract so that the information would be, at best, misleading. Additionally, the staff structure chosen by the incumbent is their current solution to meeting the Government's requirement and, as a result, will not be divulged. |
| 19 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220503 | L.2.1 | 67 | For the performance of onsite duties under Task Orders, could the Government clarify the number of seats available at the government sites? Are there specific government facilities designated for certain activities or teams? | Contractors will work in Government facilities only on an occasional basis, and so will not be assigned government seating. Instead, they will use "hotel" desk units on a temporary basis as required in Government spaces. |
20 PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220504 1.5.5 9 What are the Government facilities available to contractor staff at government sites? How does this compare to the resources provided at contractor-owned facilities? 1) The Government is not aware of the resources provided at contractor-owned facilities.
2) The ATT J01 PWS, Section 2.3, has been updated to state: In the Government spaces, Contractors will be provided a port on a first come first served basis to connect to the MCEN. While the majority of the Government spaces have been outfitted with monitors, there is no guarantee that a monitor will be available at the selected space or that the monitors will connect to the Contractor owned laptop, due to the variance of monitor cables to docking stations and to laptops. The Government does not provide ethernet cables, power cords, mice, keyboards, or other peripherals. There may or may not be a desk phone at the Government space. If there is one, the Contractors may utilize it only for phone calls related to work in performance of the contract. The Government provides Government WiFi onsite for MCEN approved devices. The Government will not provide office supplies.
| 21 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220505 | L.2.1 | 67 | This section states “The contractor’s proposal, including submissions for Step One and Step Two, shall be prepared in accordance with these instructions:… f) Separate pages for tables of contents, definitions sections, and acronyms listings are allowed. The number of pages for these sections do not count toward the page limitations imposed herein.” Will the Government also allow a title/cover page in each volume that is excluded from page count? | The Government will allow 1 title only page for each volume and not count it against the page limitations. See the revised RFP Amendment 03. There are separate instructions for a single cover letter, not to be combined or confused with a title only page. |
| 22 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220505 | L.2.1 | 67 | This section states “The contractor’s proposal, including submissions for Step One and Step Two, shall be prepared in accordance with these instructions:… b) Use a 12-point font size in either Times New Roman or Arial… e) Any section header/footer material shall not be larger than 14-point font.” Question a. Will the Government allow greater than 12-point font for title/cover pages? | There will be no change to the font limitation except as clarified in RFP Amendment 03 at L.2.1(b). Therefore, font size greater than 12 point is allowed for title pages and cover pages (not the cover letter). |
| 23 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220505 | L.2.1 | 67 | This section states “The contractor’s proposal, including submissions for Step One and Step Two, shall be prepared in accordance with these instructions:… b) Use a 12-point font size in either Times New Roman or Arial… e) Any section header/footer material shall not be larger than 14-point font.” Question a. Will the Government allow greater than 12-point font for title/cover pages? Question b. Will the Government allow greater than 12-point font in Volumes I, III and IV for headings and subheadings? Question c. Will the Government allow 10-point font for header/footer material? Question d. Will the Government allow 10-point font for header/footer material? | A- Refering to the answer for Question 22, the answer is yes. RFP Amendment 03 has changed the requirement for font sizes. All content text, i.e., all text that is not a header, footer, title page, etc., shall be 12 point. Since title and cover pages are not content text, their font size has no specified limit. |
B- Headings and subheadings are considered part of the content text; therefore, they are subject to the 12-point font requirement.
C - Refer to A.
D - Refer to A.
| 24 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J07 | RFP L.2.2 Step One and ATT_J07_Section 1 | 68 and J07 Section 1 | Section 1 of ATT_J07 Past Performance Questionnaire states “Your response is needed no later than the closing time for receipt of offers, 1400 Eastern Time, 19 June 2024.” However, PDSS RFP-PD2 L.2.2 Step One, Table L.1 lists July 3, 2024 as the due date for the Past Performance Questionnaires. Will the Government please clarify the date and time for which Past Performance Questionnaires are due? | Dates have been updated in Amendment 03 & ATT_J07 to align. |
| 25 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220505 | L.2.4.2 | 69 | Can the Government confirm that the Past Performance section is separate from the 18-page Work Experience section page limitations? | There is necessarily overlap in the content of these documents because the experience was likely gained via work performed; however, the Past Performance References submission (no more than 5 pages per reference) is a separate document from the Work Experience submission (no more than 18 pages total). The Work Experience should demonstrate the offeror has the experience required in this solicitation, and the associated Past Performance Reference should identify the specific work performed for a customer that provided, or demonstrated, that experience. The customer feedback (via PPQ, CPARS, customer contacts, or any other chosen means) will provide an additional perspective by commenting both on the type of work performed and the quality of its performance. |
| 26 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J09 | L.3.4.3.1, L.3.4.3.2, & ATT J09 | 75 | On the “MASTER RATES – ORDERING PERIODS” tab within the Attachment 09 Master Rates Staffing Matrix spreadsheet, a column is included for “Hours per Month.” The instructions in L.3.4.3.2 indicate that, with respect to Attachment 09 MASTER RATES, “offerors must fill in these spreadsheets with their proposed LCATs, indicating the proposed labor rates for each LCAT across the period of performance for the contract.” We believe the intent of the Master Rates worksheet is to establish a rate card to be utilized for pricing not only Task Order 01, but also future task orders that may be awarded, and that level of effort is not applicable to the Master Rates worksheet. Will the Government please remove the Hours per Month column? | ATT J09 has been removed and replaced with the updated ATT J02 in Amendment 03. |
| 27 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J09 | L.3.4.3.1, L.3.4.3.2, & ATT J09 | 75 | Given that the future Task Orders of the IDIQ are unknown, can the Government remove column C “FTE (for pricing basis)” on the “MASTER LCATS AND QUALS” tab within the Attachment 09 Master Rates Staffing Matrix spreadsheet, or provide supporting details to develop the basis for estimate? | ATT J09 has been removed and replaced with the updated ATT J02 in Amendment 03. |
| 28 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J02 | L.3.4.3.1, L.3.4.3.2, & ATT J02 | 75 | Can Offerors assume that the information for CLIN 0003 under “TO 01 BASE PERIOD” of Attachment J02 does not need to be completed by non-incumbents? | Duplicative; See Q14. |
| 29 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J02 | L.3.4.3.1, L.3.4.3.2, & ATT J02 | 75 | The number of months in column E “MONTHS” under “TO 01 OPTION PERIOD 1” is marked as 6 (rows 26 through 30). Should this be 12 months? | SEE ATT J02 TO 01 Price Workbook and Master Rates. |
| 30 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 Section 4.4.10 ESD | 49 | To facilitate the development of staffing plans and price proposals, will the Government provide historical or projected monthly/annual workload for the number of ESD tickets broken out by Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3? | ATT J01: Table 43 has been added. |
| 31 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 Section 4.4.10 ESD | 49 | Could the Government please provide the current number of Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) allocated to Help Desk operations under Task Order 1? How are these FTEs distributed across Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 support levels? | Duplicative; See question 32 for categories. |
| 32 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 Section 4.4.10 ESD | 49 | Can the Government specify the locations where Help Desk support staff are currently based? Are there multiple locations for different tiers of support, or is support centralized in a single location? | The Government will not provide that information, but notes that the contractor can plan to perform the work from whatever locations it chooses, with a view towards providing the best solution and performance for the Government. |
| 33 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 Section 4.4.10 ESD | 49 | Can the Government disclose the proportion of Help Desk staff working onsite versus remotely for each tier of support? How does this distribution impact response times and issue resolution rates? | There are no requirements for Help Desk personnel to work on site. Help Desk services are performed within the parameters of the PWS. |
| 34 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01_ Section 4.7.1 | 68 | The solicitation refers to DoD 8570.1-M, IA Workforce Improvement Program, which has been replaced with DoD 8140.03-M. Is the intent to move forward under the old DoD 8570.1-M, IA Workforce Improvement Program and modify the contract at a later date to be compliant with the new DoD 8140.03-M? | ATT J01 has been updated to remove the reference to DoD 8570.1-M. |
| 35 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS and Various Attachments | N/A | In addition to the OV1s already included in the RFP, can the Government share additional architecture views (e.g., SVs, DVs) to describe the current technical environment? | The Government does have other OV1s; however, they are CUI and therefore cannot be released to the public. |
| 36 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS and Various Attachments | N/A | Can the Government share the details such as technical debt, strategies, and plans related to cloud migration, the current status of cloud migration, and future task orders? | Contractor involvement in the PROD Cloud Migration will be executed through a future task order and/or via Change Requests (CRs) via Product Lanes. The specific requirements are in development as we are currently in planning for the PROD migration. Identification of all of those CRs is not possible at this time, but the general tasks will involve optimization for the cloud, migration support, and pre-migration activities. |
ATT J20_P24 Technical Debt has been added to address Technical Debt.
| 37 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS and Various Attachments | N/A | Can the government provide current architecture and design details of the LI2S system of systems to include GCSS-MC, DE&I, and TLS services? | We acknowlege that The Government has an LI2S system of systems current architecture. That information is CUI and cannot be released to the public. |
| 38 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS | N/A | Are there established policies or flexibility depending on operational needs? Is the contractor allowed to have a remote workforce? | The contractor is required to meet the performance requirements of the contract. There are no established policies restricting contractor flexibilities to accomplish operational needs as long as the flexibilities do not violate security procedures or any terms of the contract, or negatively affect accomplishment of tasks or successful completion of work. The contractor facility requirement at PWS 1.5.5, Place of Performance, is one such contract requirement. How the resulting contractor chooses to accomplish these tasks and meet the needs of the PMO are business decisions for the offering contractor to determine. |
| 39 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS | N/A | Could the Government elaborate on the impact of hybrid work models on operational effectiveness and employee productivity within the GCSS-MC project? | Duplicative; see Q38, which is entry 39. |
| 40 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS | N/A | Can the Government provide the current staffing (organization and number of FTEs by PWS tasks) model used by the incumbent for managing Task Order 1 and other related Task Orders? Are there any identified areas for improvement (RICE Components, Integration, Cloud, etc.)? | Duplicative; see Q18, which is entry 19. |
| 41 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 and ATT J01 | ATT J01 PWS | N/A | Can the Government also elaborate if there is an existing framework or policy that allows for the inclusion of the Naval Enterprise Service Desk (NESD) as a help desk service provider? | There is not an existing framework for inclusion of the NESD. |
| 42 | PDSS_RFP_PD2_Final_Released_20220506 | Attachment J02, J05, J14, J16 and J19 | 63, Section J | xs | The descriptions and file names for the identified attachments have been edited in RFP Amendment 03. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .