MCC-16-RFQ-0008_-_Solicitation_Questions_ _Answers.pdf

MCC-16-RFQ-0008

Legal Advisory Services

Questions and Answers

1. On what will MCC base its decision regarding the type of payment structure to be used for a specific Task Order (i.e. when does it anticipate using Time & Materials, Firm fixed Price or Hourly payments)?

MCC’s Response: The contract type will be determined at the Task Order level based on the nature of the requirement.

a. Would the Firm Fixed Price require a breakdown of costs included in the Firm

Fixed Price bid?

MCC’s Response: Again, contract type will be determined at the Task Order level and price proposal instructions will be provided in the Task Order solicitation. In the case of a firm-fixed price requirement, MCC reserves the right to request a cost breakdown to demonstrate how the firm-fixed price was derived.

b. Does MCC anticipate that the most likely type of payment structure will be the firm fixed hourly rate payment approach, with firm caps on legal services and disbursements by category?

MCC’s Response: Under the current vehicle, most Task Orders have been time-and-materials (T&M). However, MCC will specify the contract type at the Task Order level for each new task order.

2. Does the section on. P. 64 of the RFP which states: “Successful firms are advised that they would not be eligible for award of a contract (funded by a MCA out of the proceeds of a Compact) to implement a specific project for which they provided development, assessment, evaluation or monitoring services to MCC or the eligible country hereunder” only prevent a Quoter from being paid by MCC for any subsequent implementation work?

MCC’s Response: This prohibition relates to receiving a contract award from an Accountable Entity (a Millennium Challenge Account (MCA)) for which the contractor provided development, assessment, evaluation or monitoring services to the MCC. If a contractor advises MCC on a project, then that contractor may not receive a contract from an Accountable Entity (an MCA) for the same project if the Accountable Entity is funded by an MCC Compact.

In other words, a contractor that advises MCC with respect to a compact cannot then be engaged by an MCA to advise on or perform work on any project that is funded by MCC under that compact. The concern is that there may be a potential conflict of interest if, for example, MCC and the MCA disagree on some aspect of the project’s implementation. See Section 6 of the Policy on Engagement of Outside Legal Counsel found in J.3 Attachment 3.

a. In other words, can the Quoter work on a follow-on project if the work is paid for by another agency or international financial institution?

MCC’s Response: Yes. MCC does not have any authority over other agencies or financial institutions.

3. Section F.4 includes new standardized Reporting Requirements. It notes that the Task

Order will be submitted to the COR with a copy of the cover page only to the Contracting Officer.

a. Will a MCC Office of General Counsel attorney serve as COR?

MCC’s Response: The contract-level Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will be appointed upon contract award. At the task order level, MCC may assign a different COR and/or Project Manager (PM).

b. Will the same system apply to the Contract Level Reports?

MCC’s Response: Yes; however, the last sentence of Section F.4.2 will be revised to read as follows: “All reports will be provided to the COR, with a copy to the Contracting Officer.”

4. Section F.4.1 Contract Level Reporting requirements requires a yearly report on each Task Order awarded, to be used to track overall work by the Contractor and manage level of effort and ceiling.

a. Will this report treat only financial information on Task Order authorized expenditures and actual amounts invoiced and in process, or will it have a substantive component?

MCC’s Response: MCC will provide a template to the Contractor for the contract-level yearly report. Data fields may include:

Contract number Task Order number Period of performance Location/country of performance Total obligated amount Total expended/invoiced amount

Total remaining balance Task Order ceiling value Contractor POC information

MCC expects that most of the data for this annual report can be pulled from the most current invoice for each task order (see RFQ Section G.2 for invoice content requirements); we do not expect this to be a “substantive” task.

b. Will a template form be provided as part of the Task Order, applicable generally to all Task Orders, or will Contract Level Report components be customized by Task Order by the MCC Compact Team?

MCC’s Response: The contract-level report will be one consolidated report listing all task orders issued against the IDIQ contract. A template will be provided by MCC.

c. Will the Contractor be authorized to bill for time required to prepare the Contract

Level Reporting?

MCC’s Response: No.

5. Section F.4.2 Task Order Level Reporting provides for submission of Task Order Reports as defined in the Task Order.

a. Will a template report form be provided, or specific criteria in the Task Order?

MCC’s Response: As stated at Section F.4.2, reporting requirements for each task order will be specified at the task order level. Report templates may be provided by MCC.

b. Will the Contractor be authorized to bill for time required to prepare the Task Order Level Reporting?

MCC’s Response: Maybe. If permitted by the task order solicitation, the Contractor may propose associated costs for complying with task order level reporting requirements (as defined in the task order solicitation). If MCC accepts the Contractor’s cost proposal then they would be permitted to bill for this expense.

c. How will the estimated report preparation time be anticipated and included in the development of proposed Task Order expenditure levels annually by MCC?

MCC’s Response: Again, reporting requirements for each task order will be specified at the task order level. At that time, if applicable, the Contractor may estimate and propose report preparation costs in their quote.

i. Will the Contractor be asked to estimate time for preparation or assigned a standard cap on level of effort?

MCC’s Response: Task order reporting requirements will be specified at the task order level. Any associated level of effort will be addressed at the task order level.

6. Combined Synopsis/Solicitation page 1, item (viii) provides several Evaluation criteria, including Technical Capability, Past Performance and Price. Will each of the three factors be weighted equally?

MCC’s Response: In accordance with Section M.2 of the RFQ, the evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance.

7. Are the three incumbent contractors eligible to bid on this opportunity?

MCC’s Response: Yes.

8. What has been the CPARS evaluations of the three incumbent contractors?

MCC’s Response: Past Performance evaluations of contractors are not available to the general public.

9. Does citizenship of contractor personnel in a threshold or compact country constitute a conflict of interest for MCC?

10. Does the engagement of outside counsel listed in Attachment 4 preclude their replacement if the successful bidder wishes to recommend other counsel?

11. Are outside counsel customarily engaged for threshold countries as well as for compact countries?

MCC’s Response: MCC has not directly engaged outside counsel for countries in our threshold program; however, there may be opportunities to do so in the future.

12. Do all individuals proposed have to be full time lawyers supporting the contract or part time attorneys, possibly contracted out through subcontractors and independent contractors?

MCC’s Response: The Contractor may propose its preferred staffing approach. Ultimately, the contractor will be responsible for all work performed under the contract, whether by full-and/or part-time attorneys, subcontracted attorneys, etc.

13. How are you defining partners?

MCC’s Response: A partner is defined as a senior attorney recognized as having a level of expertise and authority within the company, and usually a person with an ownership stake in the firm.

a. Does the person have to be an owner in the firm or a senior individual capable of supporting the contract (such as a legal professor?)

MCC’s Response: Please refer to Questions 12 and 13.

14. We would like to request a three (3) week extension on the response date because of the holiday weekend and complexity of the work requirements in the solicitation.

MCC’s Response: At this time, MCC will not be extending the response date of this solicitation.

15. Do you anticipate awarding one or more contracts before the end of the year?

MCC’s Response: Yes, MCC anticipates awarding one or more contracts for this requirement before the end of the calendar year.

16. The current IDIQs expire in December, is there likely to be an extension to “fill the gap”?

MCC’s Response: If the new contracts are awarded before the current contracts expire which is the plan, per Question 15 – then MCC does not anticipate extending the current contracts.

17. Is this solicitation geared towards traditional law firms? Or is there room for an independent practitioner with ample international/transactional experience to consult for/serve the MCC?

MCC’s Response: This solicitation is not geared toward any one type of contractor, as long as the contractor can provide the breadth of services called for in the SOW.