MASTER SS_Contractor Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 81 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W81K0421R0002Amendment0004
- Issued by
-
Department of the Army Medical Command
About this file
This is an amendment to a solicitation for athletic trainer services. The amendment removes several overseas locations and reduces requirements for future years due to budget constraints. It changes the clinical line item unit structure, performance work statement, clauses, and exhibits. Volume III of proposals is now due separately by email on May 5 while the remaining volumes are due May 14 through the DoD Safe system. The agency requests pricing for removed locations to enable future additions with additional funding. The amendment provides further details on locations for each future year.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment 0004.pdf | ||
| AT Exhibit O Future H2F Implementation BDEs and Locations- 89 BDEs.1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_5_52.212-1_Comp_Plan updated 26Mar2021 Composite Rates.docx | DOCX document | |
| Amendment 0004 - Conformed.pdf | ||
| AT Exhibit L Pricing Spreadsheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| AT Exhibit B Places of Performance Updated.ATs 6-Years_23APR21.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
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
Questions_Answers
| Document | Pg # | Para # | Questions (Due from Ktr NLT 16Apr2021) | Answers | Change to RFP | ||
| 1 | RFP | The solicitation sometimes refers to major subcontractors as those performing “at least 25% of the work” and at other times states that the threshold is “more than 25%”. For example, the Addendum to 52.212-1(B)(2)(a)(2)-(4), (B)(2)(c), as well as Addendum to 52.212-2(A)(5) have different variations. Since the RFP understands that a potential prime may “one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors”, we suggest that each of these references should read, “at least 25%” to clarify the ambiguity. | Agreed. The RFP will be amended to read "at least 25%" in all areas identified for consistency. Answered in RFP Amendment #1. | Yes | |||
| 2 | RFP | 165 | (b) | In section 1b paragraph (b), the Government states that "Offerors shall submit present and past performance information for up to three Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past three years, from the issue date of this RFP..." Can the Government please clarify the total number of references allowed for each member (prime and major subcontractor)? Does the Government mean 3 references total or 3 references each for the Prime and Major Subcontractor? | Up to 3 each for the Prime offeror and up to 3 references for each of the major subcontractors. The total number of references could exceed 6 references. Answered in RFP Amendment #1. | Yes | |
| 3 | RFP | 165 | (b) | In paragraph (b) of Factor 1, the Government states that " Performance is defined as at least 24 months of performance within the last three years." Can the Government please clarify whether they are looking for references to have 24 months of performance within the last three years or for the work to have been active within the last three years and have had at least 24 months of total performance? In consideration of this question, please note that requiring 24 months of performance in the most recent 3 year period would mean that any contract ending in FY19 or even as recent as the majority of FY20 would be deemed not relevant. While we can agree with the 3-year recency time period and understand the importance to review a PoP length of 24 months to determine performance success level, the combination of the two, pending interpretation, can greatly impede the ability of small businesses to pursue this opportunity since they only have a limited number of contracts to reference. We kindly request that the Government allow references where the contracts have ended within the past three years, but have had at least a 24 month total period of performance across the contract. | |||
| For the work to have been active within the last three years and have had at least 24 months of total performance. Answered in RFP Amendment #1. | Yes | ||||||
| 4 | RFP | 165 | (b) | 52.212-2 Addendum - Reference: "The word “contract,” as defined herein, for the purpose of present and past performance submissions under this solicitation, does not include individual delivery orders, task orders, or blanket purchase agreements or basic ordering agreements." | |||
| Question: Will the Government please confirm that offerors may submit an IDIQ, consisting of the awarded task orders under that IDIQ, as a single contract? | Since the current requirement will not be awarded as an IDIQ, but rather a FFP, C-type contract, these are the types of contracts that would be most relevant. However, if you are going to submit an IDIQ as a reference, the applicable task orders issued off that IDIQ must be submitted as well. Answered in RFP Amendment #1. | Yes | |||||
| 5 | RFP | 165 | (b) | 52.212-2 Addendum - Reference: “Offerors shall submit present and past performance information for up to three Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor…” | |||
| Question: Will the Government please clarify if this means up to 3 total references per offeror or if this means up to 3 for the Prime and up to 3 for each Major Subcontractor. For example, could a Prime with one Major Subcontractor submit up to 6 total references? | Up to 3 each for the Prime offeror and up to 3 references for each of the major subcontractors. The total number of references could exceed 6 references. Answered in RFP Amendment #1. | Yes | |||||
| 6 | RFP | 143 | (b) | 52.212-1 Addendum - Reference: “Completed Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaires (PRAQs) must be received 10 calendar days prior to the time and date established for receipt of proposals.” | |||
| Question: Will the Government please confirm that the answers to industry’s questions will be provided at least 7 to 10 days prior to the due date for PRAQs? This is necessary because the Government’s answers may influence which references are the most relevant and/or compliant with the terms and conditions of this RFP. | Yes, past performance questions will be posted as soon as possible. | ||||||
| 7 | RFP | 139 | v. | 52.212-1 Addendum - Will the Government please provide the minimum value for a line of credit that will meet the Government’s threshold for financial responsibility? We understand there are additional measurements for determining contractor responsibility IAW FAR 9.104-1. For this question, we just want to know the dollar threshold for a line of credit to meet the requirement of FAR 9.104-1 (a), as it pertains to this RFP. | Lines of credit should cover at least 3 months of the total value of one years performance on this contract. For example: If the contract was worth $12,000 over one year of service, then the line of credit should be $3,000. | ||
| 8 | RFP | 141 & 163 | Subfactor 1B, Key Point #3 | 52.212-1 Addendum and 52.212-2 Addendum - Should the “(retention/recruiting plan)” at the end of Key Point #3 instead be applicable to Key Point #2? If not, will the Government please elaborate on what this “(retention/recruiting plan)” should include. Section L provides no instructions on what this item should address and Section M provides no details on how this item will be evaluated. | A. Yes, offers’ responses are to address items in section 5 of the PWS and all aspects of PWS, a detailed description of actual methods, processes, procedures, etc. to demonstrate compliance and clear communication |
B. Include other areas as deemed important by the vendor as appropriate to provide insight into their specific methods, processes, procedures, etc. to demonstrate compliance and clear communication for this requirement.
| 9 | RFP | 137 | 1.f | 52.212-1 Addendum - Responsibility Documentation is included as a requirement in the Administrative Volume; however, it is not identified in the Proposal Organization table on page 137. Accordingly, will the government please clarify, within the Administrative Volume, where offerors should include responsibility documentation? Should we provide this as “Section G”? | There is no Section G. Place your responsibility documention within Section A of the Administrative Volume. |
| 10 | RFP | 138 | 2. c. (i) | 52.212-1 Addendum - The Beta.SAM printout of an offeror’s representations and certifications is not identified in the Proposal Organization table on page 137. Should the Beta.SAM printout be provided as part of Volume I, Section C? | Yes, place BetaSam as part of Volume I, Section C |
| 11 | RFP | 161 | SF1449 - Given the size and complexity of this requirement, why did the Government elect to pursue a 100% Small Business Set-Aside rather than soliciting this requirement unrestricted? | Generally speaking, this was based on market research. | |
| 12 | RFP | 161 | SF1449 - Why did the Government decide to solicit this requirement using the NAICS Code 621999 ($16.5M Size Standard) rather than the NAICS Code used for similar positions solicited through the DHA MQS contract – NAICS Code 622110 ($41.5M Size Standard)? | Based on the Contracting Officer's research and determination | |
| 13 | RFP | 161 | 52.212-2 Addendum - Was the Defense Health Agency’s MQS IDIQ contract considered as part of the Government’s acquisition strategy? If so, was there a particular reason that it was not chosen as the contracting vehicle to support this H2F requirement? | Based on market research and the Contracting Officer's Determination, the decision was made that for this requirement, it was a better choice to solicit on BetaSam as a new requirement. | |
| 14 | RFP | 161 | 52.212-2 Addendum - Given the size and complexity of the H2F requirement (more than 600 ATs across 34 Installations), the Government’s acquisition strategy of issuing a single award, using a total Small Business Set-Aside and a $16.5M size standard appears to introduce a significant amount of performance risk into this procurement. Will the Government please consider issuing Multiple IDIQ Awards rather than a single award for the H2F requirement? | No. | |
| 15 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a. | Over the last several years there have been several significant Human performance contracts awarded to small businesses. Based on the fact that the size standard has been changed several times from $41.5M to indications of full and open solicitation to $16.5M, would the government consider lowering the 24-month performance requirement to 6 months to ensure the highest quality competition by allowing companies with recent awards in Human Performance to compete? In an effort to increase small business participation and ensure the highest quality competition would the government consider allowing recent past performance solely from the significant subcontractor? | First question: No. Second question: No. |
| 16 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a. | Based on all of the COVID 19 impacts to employment market it would seem that government would be interested in companies with experience in starting new contracts during the Pandemic. By requiring 24 months of performance in the last three years is the government not considering all the factors required to stand up new contracts in the current COVID-19 constrained environment. It would seem that new start contracts with 6 – 12 months of performance would provide the government with companies that fully understand the environment and could provide a high level of confidence to ensure that a contract of this magnitude gets started efficiently and on time. Would the government consider reducing the stringent Past Performance requirements to 6-12 months in the last 3 years? | No. |
| 17 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a. | In the evaluation criteria under the performance risk section there is no mention of a requirement for months of performance to be considered recent or relevant. Is this factor considered in the performance risk evaluation? Would more or less months change how the rating would be established? Would the government consider removing the 24 months performance requirement in the last three years? | First question: Reference posted Amendment 1, Page 14, Para 1.b. which states "Performance is defined as work to have been active within the last three years and have had at least 24 months of |
total performance." Second question: No. Third question question: No.
| 18 | AT Exhibit D Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) | 3 | PWS, 1.12.3., 5.1.2.7 | How many peer reviews will ATs be responsible for? What is the timeframe for completion? While the draft RFP mentions peer reviews, it does not specify numbers or time frames so contractor can adequately understand the requirement. | TBD. Based on peer review and other staff requirements as required in accordance with local level procedures. Typically this is done on a monthly or quarterly basis determined by the local credentialing requirements and may inlude review of up to 5 notes per specified time period of review. | ||
| 19 | AT Exhibit D Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) | 1, 2,3, 4 | Incentives/disincentives column | The Incentives/Disincentives column refers repeatedly to penalties: Performance below the standard may result in financial penalties to the contractor. • How much are the financial penalties? • Are the penalties per installation or across the contract? • Is the decision to assess penalties a pass-fail determination? For example, for a 95% compliance target, does a 94% compliance evaluation trigger a 100% penalty? • If we have less than 90% compliance by an AT at one location, is the penalty applicable to the entire contract or just to the portion of the contract executed at that location? • Will the government provide an evaluation that segments the deliverables and percentages that would be enforced on financial In other words, what is the weight of each key requirement in Exhibit D? | edited PRS to remove verbiage related to financial penalties | 52.212-1 and 52.212-2 | |
| 20 | AT Exhibit D Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) | 3 | 1.12.12, 5.1.2.1 - 5.1.2.5 | What is the size of the target population? We would recommend 14 days with the additional 7-day extension for brigades. | Size of target population will vary as BDE sizes vary. Per OTSG MEDCOM AT Policy 18-019. ATs can only write 7 day profiles with a 7 day extension. | ||
| 21 | AT Exhibit E Deliverables Schedule | 1 | 1 | The deliverables schedule says the QCP should be submitted to the COR and ACOR, but 1.6.1 in the RFP says the QCP should be submitted to the KO. Which one is correct? | QCP should be submitted to the COR, ACOR and KO. | ||
| 22 | AT Exhibit E Deliverables Schedule | 1 | 2 | The deliverables schedule says the Contractor’s Representative and Alternate Contractor’s Representative should be submitted to the COR and Installation ACORs, but 1.8.1 in the RFP says the CR and ACR should be submitted to the KO. Which one is correct? | Contractor's Representative and Alternate Contractor's Representative should be submitted to the COR, ACOR, installation ACORs and KO. | ||
| 23 | AT Exhibit D Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) | Incentives - /disincentives column | This column repeatedly refers to financial penalties (Performance below the standard may result in financial penalties to the contractor) Please, describe the process for assessing penalties? Will there be a process to contest or appeal penalties? | These financial penalties have been removed from Exhibit D. There will be no financial penalties. | Exhibit D | ||
| 24 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 243 | 1.5.11 | Do we also notify the COR and Installation ACOR? | 1.5.11 The installation ACOR should be notified as well. | ||
| 25 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 114 | 1.12.6.2 | "During the period between the removal and the final decision of the KO, the Contractor shall agree to provide a substitute/replacement AT IAW the terms and conditions of the contract." | |||
| Is the replacement required within 30 days? | Reference 1.5.11.1 Replacement Time Frame. The Contractor shall replace permanent ATs such that vacancies will not exceed 30 consecutive calendar days. The consecutive calendar days start once the incumbent AT leaves the position. | ||||||
| 26 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 114 | 1.12.7 | "The Contractor shall provide a substitute AT until the investigation is concluded or within 30 calendar days, whichever comes first?" If a subsitute AT is required until the investigation is concluded, does the Contractor have 30 days to find the substitute? | Reference the PWS which states "vacancies will not exceed 30 consecutive calendar days". | ||
| 27 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 114 | 1.12.7 | This is a Firm Fixed Price contract. How does the government intend to penalize the contractor for unilateral decisions made by the government's prerogative before a final determination is made on the conduct of the AT? What happens if the AT in question is reinstated? | This is a case-by-case situation to be handled in accordance with terms of the contract based on the facts of the situation. If they are reinstated, the contractor will abide by the terms and conditions of the contract. | ||
| 28 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 104 | 1.5.13 | How does this affect telework capability? During 2020 COVID base lock downs, this type of role was considered mission essential and were granted access to work in office and telework capabilities. | Mission essentual or non-mission essentual has no bering on telework. (See PWS 1.5.8.3 ; and 1.5.8.3.1) | ||
| 29 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 124 | 4.1 | Is the Government expecting the Contractor to provide the supplies to perform the work (e.g. tape, gloves, elastic bandages, first aid kits, cleaning supplies, etc.) and paper supplies (e.g. notepads, pens, etc.)? Are there any locations where the Contractor will have to buildout the area, including providing equipment, for the AT to provide services? | No.See Section 3 of PWS (3.1-3.5) | ||
| 30 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 123 | 3 | Will the Government provide the supplies to perform the work (e.g. tape, gloves, elastic bandages, first aid kits, cleaning supplies, etc.) and paper supplies (e.g. notepads, pens, etc.)? | Yes.See Section 3 of PWS (3.1-3.5) | ||
| 31 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 124 | 5.1.1.1. | Under some circumstances, ATCs on base are able to order radiology/laboratory via AHLTA under the guidance of a Medical Officer. Will the same capabilities be in place for this contract? | No. See PWS 5.1.1.1 | ||
| 32 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 124 | 5.1.2.1. | Is there currently a screen that is being utilized at the BDE / Physical Therapy Level? If so, will the contractor have access to this screen? If no, does the contractor need to supply a screening tool? | No. See PWS 5.1.1.1 | ||
| 33 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 125 | 5.1.2.4. | Is there currently a physical profile document that is being utilized at the BDE / Physical Therapy Level? If so, will the contractor have access to this? If no, does the contractor need to supply this? | Yes. There is an electronic profile system and hardcopy profiling documents that the contractor would have access to. No need for the contractor to supply this. | ||
| 34 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 106 | 6.1.9. | In order to provide recommendations, the Contractor will need to perform some level of research using the AT data. Section 1.5.19 appears to restrict the ATs ability to conduct research. Could you, please, confirm that the ATs will be able to access and mine the data in order to provide recommendations to the Government as part of the monthly reports? | ATs cannot conduct research or use data for any other purpose that doesn't relate to this contract. ATs will be able to provide recommendations and general information in the monthly status reports. | ||
| 35 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 137 | paragraph f | Will the government allow offerors to submit proposals electronically instead of providing CDs or a hard-copy? | The contractor shall follow the guidelines as set forth in the RFP. | ||
| 36 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 137 | paragraph f | Can the government confirm that it wants the table of contents for each volume to be in a file separate from the volume? (Each CD shall contain 1 Table of Contents for the volume and one file containing all elements of the volume.) For the complete response, can the Government confirm that we need to submit a total of 7 CD-Rs and 4 hard copies (one for each volume)? | The Government wants a table of contents for each volume. A total of four CD-Rs should be submitted along with one hard copy for each volume. | ||
| 37 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 110 | 1.8.3.1.3. | Are we able to bill for expenses related to OCONUS locations 120 days ahead of the start date? OCONUS locations, specially Pacific and Europe, typically require a much longer lead time and cost for deploying personnel. | No longer applicable. Overseas locations have been removed. | ||
| 38 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 105 | 1.5.9.2 | Will the Government penalize COVID-19 absences? | see sections of PWS 1.5.9.2 and 1.5.10 re: Unplanned Absences for greater than 3 days and Substitue ATs. No need for specific COVID-19 related situations. | ||
| 39 | AT Exhibit D PRS | 3 | 1.12.3 | ||||
| 5.1.2.7 | Are the AT's allowed to conduct peer review within their own Brigades? | based on local level procedures | |||||
| 40 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | For OCONUS locations will the Government require DBA insurance? | No longer applicable. OCONUS locations have been removed from the requirement. | ||||
| 41 | Overall | Will dependents of contractors serving in OCONUS locations be eligible to use DoDea schools? | No longer applicable. Overseas Locations removed. | ||||
| 42 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | Due to the dynamic nature of the current pandemic, travel regulations for overseas locations are dynamic in nature. Respectfully request that the Government include a clause taking into account that contractor delays in overseas staffing due to host country travel restrictions, will not impact the contractor's performance. | No longer applicable. Overseas Locations removed. | ||||
| 43 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | Contract W81K04-16-C-0001 is scheduled to end 31MAR21, but according to Exhibit B, these performing sites do not come onboard until after FY22. Does this contract requirement plan to transition ATs currently performing on contract number W81K04-16-C-0001 for performing sites FBGA, FJSC, FSOK, FLWMO? | that is a separate requirement | ||||
| 44 | AT Exhibit I CAF | Is there a required provider for the BLS AED certification? | See PWS 1.14.4.1 and Per BOCATC.org; AT BOC CPR/AED for the Professional Rescuer through the |
American Red Cross, BLS Healthcare Provider through the American Red Cross, BLS Healthcare Provider through the American Heart Association
| 45 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 105 | 1.5.11.1 | How/where are CACs processed (i.e. at installation level or a different organization such as MEDCOM Intel) and what is the timeline for CAC processing? What CAC application forms are required and are they uniform across all installations? | See PWS section 1.16 |
| 46 | Exhibit F | Who administers/evaluates the CCAT? | See PWS 5.1.2.8 Injury Control Director Contractor shall ensure contracted ATs can successfully demonstrate the skills in Exhibit F. The designated privileged provider with physician oversight will verify and document competency assessment on Exhibit F. The contracted AT will then place the competency assessment in their Competency Assessment Folder. | ||
| 47 | AT Exhibit D Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) | What are excused absences that are outside of the 95% compliance requirement? | Planned absences requested at least 14-days prior. see sections of PWS 1.5.9.2 and 1.5.10 re: Unplanned Absences for greater than 3 days and Substitue ATs. | ||
| 48 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 101 | Section 1.1.3 | How much weekly local travel is anticipated? | Local travel to various cantonment training areas will vary by unit, mission, and installation. |
| 49 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 101 | Section 1.2 | Will our lead personnel receive operational and contractual direction from the ACOR or the COR, from both, or from whom? | day-to-day supervision and control See PWS 1.5.2; Contract administration would be either the COR or ACOR See PWS 1.5.4 |
| 50 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 102 | Section 1.4.4 | How much variation in POI among BDEs are there? Will there be “swapping” of contract among BDEs? | Goal is to maintain the integrity of the H2F Performance Teams to maximize continuity, however situations may require the swapping of contractors between BDEs. |
| 51 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 103 | Section 1.5.2 | "Individual contract ATs under a personal services contract are subject to day-to-day supervision and control (direct, line of sight, virtually, or telephonically) by healthcare facility personnel. " Who are the healthcare facility personnel and are they also assigned to the Medical Treatment Facility (MTF) or to the supported BDE/BN/CO? | The BDE PT (Injury Control Director) will provide day-to-day supervision with physician oversight from the MTF. |
| 52 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 103 | Section 1.5.4 | The ACOR(plural) and COR (singular) have overlapping responsibilities and duties which creates the possibility of conflicting guidance. How can the contractor serve two masters? | As stated in PWS 1.5.4. the KO will send a letter of designation to the COR and installation ACORs and the Contractor, which states the specific responsibilities and limitations of the COR and installation ACORs. |
| 53 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 104 | Section 1.5.6 | How is unit block leave handled? When will we be notified of block leave? Will it be considered the same as training holiday? | See 1.5.6 Block leave will be handled the same as Training Holidays and does not apply to contractors. |
| 54 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 243 of 323 | Section 1.5.8 | How are closures counted for timekeeping/pay purposes? | see PWS 1.9.8 Hours of Operation and 1.5.8.3.1 |
| 55 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 106 | Section 1.5.16.1 | Does this section prevent contract employees from posting their duty title on “LinkedIn”? | Can mention that the employee is an AT working for the contractor, but not the US Army's H2F AT |
| 56 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 106 | Section 1.5.17 | Your definition of fraternization precludes employment by military spouses and dependents; is that the intent? Hiring military spouses and dependents is not only good business, good for the military family, but greatly expands the talent base especially in remote installations | The fraternization policy does not preclude employment of military spouses or dependents. ATs are not permitted to fraternize with Soldiers in their assigned BDE. If a military spouse or dependent was hired, he/she should have to be assigned to a different BDE than their spouse/sponsor. |
| 57 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 106 | Section 1.5.20 | Can the ATs share information with garrison AWC personnel? | Only as it relates to providing care to Soldiers |
| 58 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 107 | Section 1.6.1.2 | Is the written Emergency Management Plan to be installation specific? | In general they would be similar with minor changes to account for local requirements. |
| 59 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 107 | Section 1.7.2 | Will all personnel be provided with .mil email addresses? | Yes. See PWS 1.16.6. |
| 60 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 109 | Section 1.7.7.2 | Security: What items are to be included in background check due diligence? What constitutes an unfavorable information? | contractor FSO will coordinate with security offices at each installation to adhere to local policy |
| 61 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 3 through 64 | There are many pages for the pricing CLINs. Will the Government consider requesting the detail CLIN pricing information through a Pricing spreadsheet instead? The CLIN containing the total contract value could still be in the solicitation, but the detail CLINS will be in the spreadsheet to reduce errors and make it easier for the Government to review. | Refer to Exhibit L which is the pricing spreadsheet. | |
| 62 | W81K0421R0002-0001 | 167 | (4) CLIN X009 | We are unable to find CLIN X009 in the based period tab of the pricing spreadsheet. | The pricing spreadsheet is only for priced CLINs. CLIN X009 is not a priced CLIN. |
| 63 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a | Based on the definition of performance “Performance is defined as at least 24 months of performance within the last three years.” Can the government confirm that only current contracts or recently completed contracts (within the last year) are considered relevant? Or stated differently confirm that any past performance submitted requires 24 months of performance in the last three years? |
| Reference posted Amendment 1, Page 14, Para 1.b. which states "Performance is defined as work to have been active within the last three years and have had at least 24 months of | |||||
| total performance." | 52.212-2 | ||||
| 64 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a | Considering the fact that this is a small business set aside and that there has been frequent NAICS code and size standard changes, it appears as if the recent changes have significantly restricted small business participation. Additionally, the past performance criteria further restricts SB participation. Was this the intent of the government? Would a small business using only subcontractor past performance be disqualified from competition? |
| First Question: The NAICS code given on the solicitation will remain, Second question: No, the small business will not be disqualified from competition | ||||
| 65 | RFP | 165 | 2.1.a | Given the reduction in the NAICS code from 41.5m to 16.5M and the reductions from Full and Open to Small Business, would the government consider easing the onerous past performance requirements? |
| No. | ||||||
| 66 | RFP | 1 | 1. Is there a specific place to designate my company is a certified Woman Owned Business? I see a box on the first page of the RFP, is that where I can inform the evaluating committee? | Your business size status will be verified through your CAGE and DUNS number listed in Volume I of your proposal | ||
| 67 | RFP | 137 | 2. Please confirm we are to provide the outline of items on page 137 of the RFP and the Completed Performance Risk Questions. Are the CPRQ’s required? Is there anything else that needs to be provided? | 2. Yes paragraph f of page 137 says that “the following volumes of materials shall be submitted.” You must read through the entire RFP to find out what needs to be contained in those specific volumes. Yes the completed PRAQs are definitely required as explained at the bottom of page 137. Please read through the entire RFP for specific details on what all needs to be provided. | ||
| 68 | RFP | 1. How are the following overhead items paid in this RFP? Are the overhead items rolled into the cost per ATC or reimbursed? A. Pre-employment testing, b. Background Check, c. Disposable supplies needed to perform job duties, d. Uniform, e. TB screening, f. Clinical competency testing, g. Corporate travel expenses, h. Supervisory management of the lead ATC's and ATC's | 3. Overhead items are rolled into the cost per AT. Reminder: This is a personal services contract, not a nonpersonal services contract. Contractor is responsible for the initial background check submitted IAW 1.7.7.2. The tier 1 background check is provided by the Government at no charge to the contractor. | |||
| 69 | Amendment #1 | 8 | iii | Regarding past performance relevant efforts, which are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to NAICS code 621999 required by the RFP. Question. Will with the Government consider expanding this to also include service contracts in Sector 54, Professional, Scientific and Technical Services such as 541990-All Other Professional, Scientific and Technical Services? ? Management of personnel assigned to multiple locations in support of Army requirements is an important aspect of this mission. Including 541990 in the Past Performance will allow the government to increase offerings. | The NAICS code in the solicitation will remain. | |
| 70 | W81K04-21-R-0002-0001-Conformed | 165 | b | We have a military training IDIQ with task orders for various locations, awarded within the last three years; however, it has 20 months of performance and is ongoing. Will the government consider at least 18 months of performance within the last three years relevant? | No, see answer to question number 63 listed above. | |
| 71 | RFP | 140 & 163 | 2.c(ii) D.2 | 52.212-1 Addendum and 52.212-2 Addendum - Given this will be a personal services contract (PWS 1.5.2), creating an employer-employee relationship between the Government and the individual contract ATs for providing the healthcare services (i.e., contractor personnel will be directed, evaluated, and managed by the Government with day-to-day supervision and control and follow government methods, processes, procedures), then the primary role of the contractor is Staffing (recruit, supply, retain and replace qualified personnel; maintain personnel credentials) manage general contract activities, and transition new capabilities. It appears that Subfactor 1A - Technical Approach was written to address contractor activities associated with a non-personal services contract since the essence of the key points are associated with Goverenment oversight of the ATs and Government processes and procedures. Will the Government please consider removing or substantially revising Subfactor 1A? | The Government will not remove or substantially revise subfactor 1A | |
| 72 | RFP | 140 | 2. c. (ii) | 52.212-1 Addendum - Given this will be a personal services contract (PWS 1.5.2), creating an employer-employee relationship between the Government and the individual contract ATs for providing the healthcare services (i.e., contractor personnel will be directed, evaluated, and managed by the Government with day-to-day supervision and control and follow government methods, processes, procedures), then the primary role of the contractor is Staffing (recruit, supply, retain and replace qualified personnel; maintain personnel credentials) manage general contract activities, and transition new capabilities. Will the Government please clarify what is required under Subfactor 1A - Key Point #1 since the actual methods, processes, procedures used by the ATs are dictated by the Government? | The Government is asking the offeror to provide the information. Also, note PWS paragraph 1.5.2: "Personal Services. This is a personal services contract. Services provided by ATs are personal and intended to create an employer-employee relationship between the Government and the individual contract ATs only to the extent necessary for providing the healthcare services required under this contract." | |
| 73 | RFP | 140 | 2. c. (ii) | 52.212-1 Addendum - Given this will be a personal services contract (PWS 1.5.2) and the ATs will be required to follow government methods, processes, procedures, will the Government please provide the Standard Operating Procedures and/or additional documentation to enable offerors to accurately describe the Government’s “actual methods, processes, procedures etc.” requested under Subfactor 1A - Key Point #1? | The Government is only providing supervision of professional employees. The Ats should be able to perform the tasks as stated in the PWS. The proposal needs to demonstrate this. | |
| 74 | RFP | 140 | 2. c. (ii) | 52.212-1 Addendum, PWS 1.5.2 - Under Subfactor 1A - Key Point #1, is the Government expecting a technical narrative of the methods, processes, procedures, etc. that AT’s will use to perform their day-to-day activities? If not, then please clarify what methods, processes, procedures should be explained since staffing and contract management are covered in other subfactors. | See response to question 73. | |
| 75 | RFP | 137 | 1. f. | 52.212-1 Addendum - The table on Page 137 identifies a 10 Page Limit for the requirements of the Administrative volume. Since the length of the documentation requested in this Volume far exceeds 10 Pages, will the Government please remove the page limitations associated with the Administrative Volume? | The page restriction for the Administrative Volume will be removed in a forthcoming amendment. | 52.212-1 |
| 76 | RFP | 138 | 2. (i) | 52.212-1 Addendum - Reference: Volume I, Section C. Will the Government please confirm that offerors are to provide BOTH the FAR Report from Beta.SAM (i.e. Beta.SAM representations and certifications) AND the completed provisions (from the RFP) in Volume I, Section C? Please note that there may be some Provisions in the RFP that are not in an offeror’s Beta.SAM profile and therefore those may need to be provided separately from/in addition to the Beta.SAM FAR Report. | You may provide only the BetaSam along with the provisions/representations not included in the BetaSam. | |
| 77 | RFP | 139 | 2. (i) a. vi. (3) | (52.212-1 Addendum) - 52.212-1 Addendum 2. (i) a. vi. (3) states: “Offerors proposing a contractor team arrangement shall include a statement that fully discloses the contractor team arrangement and company relationships pursuant to FAR Subpart 9.603, Policy”. Will the Government please clarify if the Government only wants a brief narrative describing the nature of the offeror's Teaming approach pursuant to FAR 9.603 OR if Offerors should provide copies of Joint Venture Operating Agreements and/or Subcontractor Teaming Agreements in Volume 1 - Section E? If Subcontractor Teaming Agreements are required should it be limited to major subcontractors or all subcontractors? | First question: Yes, the Government requires a description as well as the Operating Agreement. Second question: The Subcontractor Teaming agreements should be submitted for all subcontractors. | |
| 78 | RFP | 137 | 1. f. | 52.212-1 Addendum - Since Volume 1 is strictly Administrative and not used as an evaluation factor, will the Government please remove the requirement to provide a Sanitized Version of Volume I? This Volume will become useless without company identifying information. | A sanitized and unsanitized version is applicable to all volumes. | |
| 79 | RFP | 138 | 2. b. | 52.212-1 Addendum - Page 138, paragraph (b). "File packaging" states: "All proposals shall submit Volumes I through V in electronic format using". Will the Government please identify if this is a clerical error or if there is supposed to be a 5th Volume? If there is a Volume V, will the Government please provide instructions on what content it should include? | There is no Volume V; this is a clerical error and will be corrected in a forthcoming amendment. | 52.212-1 |
| 80 | RFP | 137 | 1. f. | 52.212-1 Addendum - Will the Government please identify how Volume III should be organized? Should it be: |
Section 1 - Past Performance References Section 2 - Written consent from major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror Section 3 - Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaires
| Section 4 - Letters of commitment for all major subcontractors? | The organization of Volume III is left to the discretion of the offeror. | ||||||
| 81 | RFP | 137 | |||||
| 141 | 1.f.III | ||||||
| c.iii | 52.212-1 Addendum - Volume III is limited to 25 pages plus 5 pages for each major subcontractor excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Are contractors to provide the Performance Risk Assessment Questionnaires that are sent to customers or the customer completed forms? | The offeror needs to provide the PRAQs as described in the RFP. | |||||
| 82 | RFP | 165 | 1.c.2 | 52.212-2 Addendum - Table 2 states that Past Performance relevancy is based on scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities this solicitation requires. Will the Government please define what they consider to be the scope (e.g., only ATs, Ancillary medical services, any medical services), magnitude of effort (e.g., FTEs, dollar value, number of locations) and complexities (e.g., types of positions/labor categories, number of locations supported, number of subcontractors) needed to meet the minimum thresholds of 'Somewhat Relevant', 'Relevant', and 'Very Relevant' respectively? This is needed so contractors can determine which past performance references to submit with their proposals. Additionally, will the Government please answer this question as soon as possible to enable contractors to submit PRAQs in a timely manner to meet the submission requirement of 10 days before proposal due date. Offerors need a lead time of approximately 7-10 days to determine which Past Performance references to use, get the PRAQs to their customers, and get the PRAQs completed and back to the Government. | The PWS sets forth the scope of magnitude and complexity that is required, therefore, the offeror shall submit projects similar to those required by the PWS. | ||
| 83 | RFP | 165 | 1.c.2 | 52.212-2 Addendum - Will relevancy be evaluated on each Past Performance reference or as a group of Past Performance references? | Relevancy will be evaluated on each Past Performance reference. | ||
| 84 | RFP | 137 | 1. f. | 52.212-1 Addendum - Will the Government please clarify if PRAQs are to be included in offerors’ proposals? Please note attachments 3 and 4 do not instruct customers completing PRAQs to also provide a copy to the contractor for inclusion in offerors’ proposals. | PRAQs should not be included in the offeror's proposal. | ||
| 85 | PWS | 116 | 1.14.2.1 | RFP page 116, PWS para 1.14.2.1 states the Lead ATs shall possess a bachelor's degree from a college or university accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education (CAATE). Many universities are converting or have converted their Bachelor's degree AT programs into Master's degree programs. Does the Bachelor's degree have to be in Athletic Training if the Master's degree is in Athletic Training from a CAATE accredited program? In other words, can personnel with a Master's degree in Athletic Training have a Bachelor's degree in other areas (e.g., kinesiology)? | A degree from a CAATE accredited program that is a Bachelor's degree or higher is acceptable. | ||
| 86 | W81K0421R0002- Conformed RFP | 141 | (iii) | In the Conformed RFP the Government states "This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms." Can the Government confirm that major subcontractor past performance descriptions are not limited to 5 pages and that major subcontractor responses are expected to be within the 30 page combined limit? | The past performance volume can be 25 pages. In addition to that, 5 pages are allowed for each major subcontractor. | ||
| 87 | W81K0421R0002 RFP | 108 | 3 | Please confirm that all Government-mandated training will be performed during normal duty hours and will be billable to the Government. | Government-mandated training will be performed during normal duty hours and will be billable to the Government. See 1.11.5 | ||
| 88 | W81K0421R0002 RFP | 110 | 2 | The RFP states "…the Contractor shall have personnel on board, at no additional cost to the Government, during the 60-day phase-in/phase-out periods…" The pricing worksheet calculates the base period as 10 months - does this mean that offerors need to factor in an additional 2 months into the base year pricing? If this is the case, how do should we calculate the "phase-out period" if Option Year 5 already calculates at 12 months? | Offerors need to include the transition period in their total firm fixed price for the priced CLINs in the solicitaion. There is no phase-out period. | ||
| 89 | Attachment_5_52.212-1_Comp_Plan updated 26Mar2021 Composite Rates | 1 | 2 | Will the Government please explain what needs to be submitted on the Compensation Plan? It appears that you would like for us to submit one "average composite" rate across all locations for both the Lead ATs and ATs; however, the positions listed in the table shows "Ft. Bliss TX". Shouldn't those line items read "Lead Athletic Trainers" and "Athletic Trainers" with no specific location/site since it's a composite rate across locations? | Correct, submit a composite rate across all locations. Attachment 5 has been modified to remove Ft. Bliss and replace it with "All CLINs (avg)" | ||
| 90 | W81K0421R0002 RFP | N/A | N/A | Will the Government please provide a Microsoft Word file/version of the RFP? If that is not available, will the Government please include a file which includes all provisions/clauses/representations that need to be submitted with the proposal? | The Government is unable to provide an MS Word version of the RFP. The Government has provided all provisions, clauses, and representations in the RFP. | ||
| 91 | W81K0421R0002 RFP | 136 | 1.b | Can tables, charts, graphs and figures be 10pt Times New Roman? | Yes | ||
| 92 | PWS | 1 | 1.1.3 | Can the government provide additional guidance as to when OCONUS travel can be anticipated? | No longer applicable. OCONUS locations have been removed from the requirement. | ||
| 93 | PWS | 5 | 1.5.9.2 | Being that substitute ATs will be required for 3-day absences of full-time employees, PRN employees will need to be utilized to back-fill such occurances. Will the government limit the number of candidate credentialing packets submitted per location? | contractor will have to coordinate with local MTF credentialing office | ||
| 94 | PWS | 4 | 1.5.8.2 | The DOL in most states mandates overtime be paid for hours in excess of 40 hours per week. In the event that an AT must work greater than 8 hours in a day, will the government adjust the AT's work schedule to prevent the need to pay overtime hours? | Yes, as needed; see PWS section 1.5.8.2. No overtime is authorized | ||
| 95 | AT Exhibit L Pricing Spreadsheet | Option Year 2 Tab | N/A | Cell K18 on the Option Year 2 tab does not sum the total cost correctly. Please correct/advise. | This has been corrected a revised Exhibit L will be provided. | Exhibit L | |
| 96 | PWS | N/A | N/A | SOFA/DOCPER Status. The PWS does not provide information if the individuals under this contract will be provided SOFA status and logistical support. This is especially important for those individuals employed outside the Continental U.S. (OCONUS). If an individual does not have SOFA status through an Active Duty or GS civilian sponsor assigned to the location, they will then be required to obtain a Host Nation Work Visa and be subject to the appropriate labor and tax laws of the country they are working in. This will also require the contracting company to employ and pay their salary via the Host Nation system. Will the government provide SOFA/DOCPER status for OCONUS personnel? | No longer applicable. Overseas Locations removed. | ||
| 97 | PWS | 242 | 1.5.8.2. | Scheduling. The PWS states no overtime pay is authorized but it is possible for an individual to work more than an 8-hour day. Will the employee be provided compensatory time if they work more than an 8-hour day? | Yes as long as the State in which the AT is working allows longer than an 8-hour work day without overtime. If more than an 8-hour workday is worked compensatory time would be provided. | ||
| 98 | PWS | 244 | 1.5.18. | Fraternization. The PWS states that Athletic Trainers are not allowed to socialize with Soldiers and, "...includes fraternization via social media, meeting outside of official duties, and undue familiarity…". There may be individuals hired for the position that are active duty dependents and already have established prior relationships/friendships with other Soldiers. Will the government allow for a review of the situation on a case-by-case basis? | The correct reference appears to be to 1.5.17.1 and not 1.5.18. Yes, certain situations may be reviweable on a case-by-case basis. | ||
| 99 | PWS | 248 | 1.7.7.2. | Background Checks. The PWS states that Athletic Trainers will not begin work until their complete packet is submitted and not considered permanent for the position until a T1 clearance is received. Currently the average time to receive a T1 clearance is 4 - 6 months due to the COVID-19 situation and backlog of packets. Please confirm that the employee can begin work with only a packet submitted to the appropriate security office. | As long as the packet is submitted IAW PWS 1.7.7.2 they can start performance. There is a slow down for security clearances, however this process is improving as COVID has been improving. | ||
| 100 | PWS | 248 | 1.7.7.2 | Please clarify that the government will provide the ability to obtain Tier 1 clearance for all employees of this contract with no additional cost to the contractor. | There would be no additional cost for the Tier 1 as Tier 1 clearance is provided for by the Government. | ||
| 101 | PWS | 250 | 1.8.3 | Please confirm that the cost of the Phase-In activities are to be included in the Firm Fixed Price amount of the proposal and will not be billed separately. | Confirmed. | ||
| 102 | PWS | 252 | 1.9.10. | Relocation Costs. The PWS states that no relocation costs are authorized. Does this also apply to individuals hired to fill positions OCONUS? Typically, if an individual is provided SOFA/DOCPER status and logistical support, then relocation, DODDS dependent tuition, etc., are provided. Will the government amend the PWS to allow for relocation (both to and from) as well as other typical benefits for those individuals employed OCONUS and assign an apporpriate Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) for this? | No longer applicable. Ocverseas locations removed | ||
| 103 | Exhibit D | 2 | 1.14. - 1.15. | The standard for credentialing packets states, "95% of submissions are on time and free of errors. No more than 2 packets returned for Contractor-related errors in a contract year." The first year requires 180 individuals and credentialing packets submitted. A 5% error rate is 9 packets however the statement regarding no more than 2 packets per contract year contradicts this. Please clarify the number of packets that can be returned due to errors and if this is by location or as a whole for the contract. | The number of packets that can be returned is per location and not as a whole for this contract. | ||
| 104 | Exhibit D | 2-3 | 5.1.2.8. | The document states, "Contractor to replace AT within 30 calendar days of AT not successfully passing retest." If a contractor is required to replace an individual assigned overseas, this will take more than 30 calendar days due to the current situation and relocation requirements. Will the government allow for a 2nd retest on a case-by-case basis? | tbd as needed inaccordance with 5.1.2.8 | ||
| 105 | PWS | N/A | N/A | The PWS makes no reference to the Base Defense Act regarding workman's compensation insurance. Will the contractor require DBA insurance for civilian personnel working at U.S. military installations outside the United States? | No longer applicable. Overseas locations removed. | Remove FAR Clause 52.228-3 | |
| 106 | PWS | 4 | N/A | The CLINs specify full-time work hours as 1871. Can the government explain how this number was derived? | There is no specification in the CLINs. Ensure you are referring to the correct RFP, not the draft RFP issued on 18 Dec 2020. | ||
| 107 | PWS | 176 | N/A | Can the government please clarify what the intention is for option CLIN 5026AA and 5026AB? Do these indicate a potential additional optional period or are they intended for additional support as needed? | CLINs 5026AA and 5026AB are not in the solicitation. Ensure you are referring to the correct RFP, not the draft RFP issued on 18 Dec 2020. | ||
| 108 | PWS | 237 | xviii | Please confirm that Executive Order 13706, Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors is required for this contract. This E.O. requires 7 days of paid sick leave for all federal contractors. Also, please confirm that this would also apply to individuals employed in Europe/Pacific. | The executive order is for CONUS. Overseas is no longer applicable. | ||
| 109 | Exhibit B | OCONUS contractors requiring SOFA will need to be approved and these requirements take at least a 30 day timeline which is out of the contractor's hands and lies with local governments. Some contractors may need a longer timeline to be approved by some local governments. Would the government consider an exemption from the 30 day AT replacement requirement for OCONUS locations? | No longer applicable. Overseas Locations removed. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .