RFPN0018918RZ028AMENDMENT02.docx

N0018918RZ028

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 09-Apr-2018 05:00 PM to 12-Apr-2018 05:00 PM.

The following have been added by full text:

Q&A Section A AQ1. Can the Government kindly verify that the address provided in the RFP to which offerors shall submit proposals is able to accept packages from the U.S. Postal Service, Federal Express and other overnight carriers?

AA1. Confirmed, but see section L regarding hand-carried proposals.

AQ2. RFP Section A, Proposal Due Date: Due to the need for hard copy delivery and to avoid excessive costs for overnight/weekend delivery rates and ensure that responders have access to the full solicitation period, will the Government please consider extending the submission deadline to April 12th?

AA2. Yes, the solicitation is updated to extend the closing date to April 12, 2018.

AQ3. Sentence indicates proposals are due 5:00 PM EST, please confirm this time should read local time.

AA3. The solicitation is clear. EST is local time.

Section B BQ1. In RFP Section B, Local Clauses, the RFP states, “If substantially fewer (hours) than the estimated hours established in any task order are employed in the performance of that task order, then the fixed fee amount for the task order shall be equitably reduced to reflect the reduction of work.” Will the Government please define “substantially”?

BA1. Substantial performance is defined as demonstrating best efforts to provide all of the tasks and deliverables found in the PWS.

BQ2. Reference RFP B, Local Clauses, ““If substantially fewer (hours) than the estimated hours established in any task order are employed in the performance of that task order, then the fixed fee amount for the task order shall be equitably reduced to reflect the reduction of work.” Since delivering fewer hours is sometimes indicative of high productivity and proper staffing, instead of less productivity and reduced work, does this clause apply only if fewer hours were deployed in performance and performance standards were not met?

BA2. See BA1.

BQ3. A contract requests the removal of the Payment of Fixed Fee clause.

BA3. Denied. See BA1.

Section C CQ1. Section C, Section 5.5 Minimum Qualifications, p 20 has two listings for Administrative Assistant I with different years of experience (YoEs). Would the Government please clarify whether these labor categories should be Administrative Assistant I with five YoE and Administrative Assistant II with three YoE?

CA1. Correct. This was a typo and is corrected herein.

CQ2. In Reference to RFP Section C.5.8 and C.5.9, the RFP states, “The estimated ODCs per ordering period is not-to-exceed (NTE) $75,000.00 (not including applicable indirect costs).” Since indirect costs are typically included within the NTE numbers, please confirm that under this solicitation, offerors should propose the Travel and ODC amounts given plus applicable indirect costs for the NTEs.

CA2. The solicitation is clear.

CQ3. In Section C.6.0 of the RFP, the requirement states, “In addition to the overall cost proposal, an offeror shall include a FFP quote for the following deliverables.” The provided Section B does not include a CLIN for these costs and the provided CDRLs CLIN is NSP. Since these are task order defined deliverables, please confirm that Offerors are not required to price these deliverables as part of the MAIQ proposal.

CA3. The solicitation is clear. See section L. The offeror can assume the same CLIN numbers for the task order as the base ordering period of the IDIQ contract.

CQ4. Section C, p 18. Would the Government please provide the geographical location that offerors shall use to price the Level of Effort for proposal purposes? If not, would the Government please describe how it will evaluate offerors that have priced the Level of Effort based on different geographical locations?

CA4. The Government anticipates that ~30% of the work will be performed in the Washington DC Metropolitan area. ~50% of the work will be performed in Millington, TN. ~10% of the work will be performed in Pensacola, FL. The remaining ~10% of the work will be performed at all of the other locations found in the PWS. An offeror may propose direct labor in accordance with their forward pricing methodology. This can include a blending of labor rates based on the estimates above so long that the blending methodology is explained in the narrative.

CQ5. This offeror does not believe that the skill set for the Graphic Designer is sufficient to cover the PWS needs for the visual communications and social media support, and does not believe the other labor categories sufficiently cover this need. Would the Government consider adding another labor category pertaining to copywriting, scriptwriting, performance reporting dashboards, and social media administration to the solicitation?

CA5. No. The work can be performed by the Analyst positions as well as the Graphic Designer position.

CQ6. Can the Government clarify if the split places of performance at Government site and Contractor site for categories at 100 are 100/0 or 0/100 meaning is 100% of the work is Government site or 100% of the work is Contractor Site?

CA6. Government site is correct. The table is corrected herein.

CQ7. RFP Section C, Page 16, Paragraph 4.3, POM Analysis: The last sub-bullet states, “Provide senior level assessments of one-of-a-kind issues,” This sub-bullet appears to be truncated. Will the Government please provide a complete description of the sub-task?

CA7. The comma is a typo. It is corrected herein.

CQ8. Are all offerors required to propose the exact number and mix of labor hours included in sec. 5.4? Or can offerors propose innovative approaches with a different number and mix of labor hours to perform the PWS?

AQ8. The solicitation is clear.

CQ9. In the pricing table, hours are listed per three year period. Please confirm for pricing purposes the offeror divides the total hours by three and prices those hours per year. For example, the solicitation lists Program Manager I as having 11,520 hours for the first period. Is it assumed to be priced at 3,840 hours per each year of the three year contract period?

CA9. Correct.

CQ10. Please confirm that the FFP quote will not be included in the offerors’ total evaluated price for purposes of determining the IDIQ awardees.

CA10. Confirmed.

CQ11. This paragraph indicates the ceiling for travel per ordering period is $255,000. For pricing purposes, should this travel be evenly distributed to each of the three performance years in the ordering period.

CA11. Yes.

CQ12. This paragraph indicates the ceiling for other direct costs per ordering period is $75,000. For pricing purposes, should this travel be evenly distributed to each of the three performance years in the ordering period.

CA12. Yes.

Section H HQ1. RFP Section H, Page 45, Personnel Qualifications: Paragraph (a) under clause 5252.237-9401 states, “Personnel assigned to or utilized by the Contractor in the performance of this contract shall, as a minimum, meet the experience, educational, or other background requirements set forth below and shall be fully capable of performing in an efficient, reliable, and professional manner. If the offeror does not identify the labor categories listed below by the same specific difference.” The last sentence appears is incomplete. Will the Government correct or clarify the last sentence of this paragraph?

HA1. The clause is corrected herein.

HQ2. RFP Section H, Page 45, Personnel Qualifications clause: Paragraph (b) states that the Government will review resumes of contractor personnel. Will this review be for Key Personnel resumes and, as required, non-key personnel resumes, to verify staff possess the requisite education and experience at the task order (TO) level?

HA2. There is no requirement for key personnel. The solicitation is clear.

HQ3. Does the statement “…and a period of 24 months thereafter” include any follow on contract that may be released?

HA3. No. See updated language herein.

HQ4. In order to ensure contractors are clear of any OCI concerns, can the government provide a full list of the contract numbers and/or solicitation numbers being referred to that are “related to Navy MPTE and the MPTE IT Transformation Initiative”?

HA4. See LA18.

HQ5. The OCI Clause seems too restrictive. Can it be reworded?

HA5. Yes. See updated language herein.

HQ6. Section H, Page 41, BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND SECURITY APPROVAL PROCESS FOR CONTRACTORS ASSIGNED TO OR PERFORMING NON-SENSITIVE DUTIES: Question: Will any positions under the IDIQ require IT-I level access? If so, will the highest level of security clearance required be changed from Secret to Top Secret, given the T5/SSBI background investigation requirement?

HA6. No, none of the positions under this contract will require IT-I level access.

HQ7. Section H, Page 43, BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND SECURITY APPROVAL PROCESS FOR CONTRACTORS ASSIGNED TO OR PERFORMING NON-SENSITIVE DUTIES: Question: Will there be non-sensitive (IT-III) positions under this IDIQ? If so, which tasks will require the performance of non-sensitive duties only? If there are not any non-sensitive positions, is it confirmed that all positions will require a Secret clearance (NACLC/T3/T3R investigation)?

HA7. The solicitation is clear.

Section J JQ1. DD-254 Section 1.b: The DD-254 indicates a Secret safeguarding requirement. Question: Given the answer "yes" to 11a and "no" to 11b, 11c and 11d, is Secret Safeguarding required? If so, in what capacity? Will Secret safeguarding capabilities also be required for our proposed subcontractors?

JA1. The indication in Block 1b on the DD-254 of a SECRET level of safeguarding was marked in error. The corrected DD-254 will be provided at award.

Section L LQ1. Will the Government reconsider the maximum number of awards stated in FAR 52.216-27?

LA1. No.

LQ2. Section L-II (5) Page Limitations, p 68 states, “The one exception to the font size requirement shown above is that the "corporate experience and past performance information forms," including any continuation sheets, may be completed with a point size of 10 or greater.” Would the Government please confirm that an offeror may modify the form to reflect this exception?

LA2. Confirmed.

LQ3. Section L-II (5) Page Limitations, p 68 states, “Volume I, “Non-cost Proposal,” is limited to a maximum of 30 pages in length inclusive of any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics. Each “page” is defined as one sheet, 8 ½ “ x 11”, with at least one inch margins on all sides, using a font with a point size of 12 or greater (e.g., "Times New Roman" style with 12 point font).” Would the Government please confirm that an offeror may use a smaller, legible font size for text in tables and graphics?

LA3. The minimum font size also applies to charts, tables, and graphics.

LQ4. Section L-II (5) Page Limitations, p 68 states, “The cover sheet, table of contents (not to exceed one page per volume), tabs, and dividers will not count toward the page limit.” Would the Government please confirm that a list of acronyms will not be counted toward the 30-page limit for the Non-Cost Proposal volume?

LA4. Confirmed.

LQ5. Section L-III (a) Performance/Management Approach, p 69 states, “The offeror shall provide in detail a performance/management approach that will successfully accomplish the requirements of the solicitation, including the PWS. To that end, the performance /management approach shall address each of the four major functional areas of the PWS: (1) MPTE Program Management, (2) Financial Management, (3) Program Objective Memorandum (POM) Analysis and Support, and (4) Administrative Support.” Section M (1), p 74 states, “Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the instructions set forth in Section L as well as the evaluation criteria contained in this section.” Would the Government please clarify whether an offeror should include in its proposal an overall management approach? Would the Government also please clarify how such a section would be evaluated?

LA5. Both Performance and Management will be evaluated in the first factor found in section L and M. See MA1.

LQ6. Section L-III (d), Socio-Economic Plan, p 70 states, “The offeror shall provide targets, expressed as percentages of total contract value, for small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, veteran-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses in any of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Major Groups as determined by the Department of Commerce… If the offeror fails to provide targets for the contract and/or any of the seven socio-economic factors, the offeror's proposal will be evaluated at zero percent for the contract and/or any socio-economic factor for which a target is not provided.” Would the Government please confirm that an offeror only needs to propose targets against the six business classifications listed in the solicitation?

LA6. Confirmed.

LQ7. Section L, (2) Volume II –Cost, p 71 states, “The offeror’s cost proposal shall not deviate from the level of effort set forth in Section B of the solicitation.” Section B does not contain a Level of Effort. Would the Government please confirm that it intends for offerors to propose the Level of Effort provided in Section C 5.4 on p 18?

LA7. The clause in Section B references the table found in Section C.

LQ8. In reference to page 73 of 77, the Total Compensation Plan, the RFP states, “Offerors shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the Contract, including first-tier subcontractor employees.” Since primes do not have access to a subcontractor’s proprietary salary and benefit data, will the Government remove the requirement for first-tier subcontractor employees from the compensation plan?

LA8. Subcontractors shall submit this information via sealed packages.

LQ9. In reference to requirement (h) on page 74 of 77, “Subcontractor cost breakdowns may be submitted in separate sealed envelopes”, will the Government accept sealed packages sent directly from our subcontractors?

LA9. Yes.

LQ10. In RFP Section L, Volume II Cost, the RFP states, “To the extent that an Offeror is proposing a subcontractor on a cost-reimbursement basis, the documentation substantiating the accuracy of the subcontractor’s proposed direct labor rates is also requested.” If subcontractors are being subcontracted on a Labor Hour basis due to their lack of an approved accounting system, does the subcontractor need to submit the documentation listed in this paragraph (Payroll records, pricing methodology, etc.)?

LA10. Yes. See LA8.

LQ11. In reference to the requirements for the Small Business Subcontracting plan in RFP Section L, III (1), the Small Business Subcontracting Plan appears to be missing the socioeconomic set aside for Veteran Owned Small Business (VOSB). Please confirm that Offerors are required to propose 3% for that specific socio-economic category.

LA11. Confirmed. The update is contained herein. Additionally, there is a typo in section L that states that there are seven (7) factors. Via the update, there are now six (6) factors that are found in section L. The typo was also corrected.

LQ12. How does the Government intend to avoid conflicting requirements between the Small Business Subcontracting Plan goals and Socio-Economic Plan goals, as there are disparate socio-economic classifications requested?

LA12. See LA11.

LQ13. How does the Government intend to avoid conflicting requirements between the Small Business Subcontracting Plan goals and Socio-Economic Plan goals considering the Socio-Economic Plan goals are based against total contract dollars and the Small Business Subcontracting Plan goals are based against total subcontracted dollars and the two may not be consistent?

LA13. One is an evaluation factor measured at the time of award and the other is measured during performance based on annual submissions to eSRS via interim and final CPARS evaluations.

LQ14. In reference to the requirements for the Socio-Economic plan in RFP section L, III (1) (d), we believe the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) can satisfy the requirement intended of the Socio-Economic Plan for evaluation purposes. Would the Government consider eliminating the Socio-Economic Plan submission requirement to resolve the noted discrepancies and inconsistencies and streamline contract management and project execution?

LA14. No. See LA15.

LQ15. In reference to the Socio-Economic Plan requirements, we have the following question: Because this is a multi-award IDIQ it is difficult to gauge participation from our SB partners until we have a task order. Would the Government consider removing the Socio-Economic Plan requirement since there is no evaluation criteria at the IDIQ level?

LA15. No. DFARs 215.304(c)(i) requires the Socio-Economic Plan.

LQ16. In bullet 4 of the item (a) instructions on page 70 of 77, the Government requests that we respond to the administrative task. However, there are no associated evaluation criteria. Will the Government consider removing the Administrative Support response requirement?

LA16. No. The solicitation is clear.

LQ17. Under Section L, SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS (CPFF BEST-VALUE TRADE-OFF), I. GENERAL, it states that for Volume II Cost Proposal, “Submission of proposal on a DVD or CD shall be in Microsoft Excel format. In the event of a discrepancy between the hard copy and the electronic copy, the hard copy will govern. The offeror shall ensure that electronic submissions are virus-free.” Please confirm that just the Excel file should be submitted in Excel format, and that it would be acceptable to submit the supporting documents and narrative in PDF.

LA17. Confirmed.

LQ18. Section L, Local Clauses, NOTICE OF INCLUSION OF AN ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST CLAUSE, p 66 states, “Prospective offerors are requested to furnish with their proposals, information pertaining to any existing contract between the offeror and the companies engaged in furnishing to the United States Government any services or supplies pertaining to the support identified in the PWS of this solicitation or listed below, if any, which may have a bearing on any existing or potential conflict of interest within the meaning of the clause in the Schedule.” Would the Government please clarify whether offerors need to list their current OPNAV N1 MAC IDIQ contracts to comply with this requirement? In addition, would the Government please specify where in an offeror’s proposal this information should be included?

LA18. The solicitation is clear. The information shall be included in Volume II of the proposal. Information relevant to specific task areas will be requested at the task order level.

LQ19. The RFP states, “The offeror should describe any risks associated with the solicitation, including the PWS and any risks associated with implementation of the offeror’s performance/management approach….” Given the broad range of scope and the unknown details of any potential task order, it is unlikely any offeror can identify anything other than notional risks that will be of little value to the Government in evaluating the responses. Will the Government consider removing this requirement in the IDIQ RFP and deferring the specific risk approaches to the Task Order RFPs?

LA19. No.

LQ20. This section of the RFP notes that offerors “shall address the extent of participation of in performance of any resultant contract. This solicitation, however, does not require participation by such entities.” The RFP then goes on to state: “an offeror that provides no socio-economic plan in response to this factor may be considered ineligible for award.” These two elements of the same section appear to conflict. Can the Government kindly clarify its intent with respect to the Socio-economic Plan? If the solicitation does not require participation by such entities, then why is a Socio-economic Plan required as part of the solicitation?

LA20. The solicitation is clear. See LA15.

LQ21. The RFP states that offerors shall submit separate cost and pricing information for each time period specified in the Solicitation B – Supplies or Services and Prices. The RFP has a Performance Period of a 3-year Base Period with two 3-year options Period. Is the Government expecting the same proposed rate by labor category for the entire 3-year period escalating at each option or may offeror escalate rates in accordance with their accounting procedures?

LA21. Escalation is expected if it is in accordance with an offeror’s forward pricing methodology.

LQ22. The RFP states that the offeror shall provide a detailed breakdown of the offeror’s cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) with all supporting documentation. Does the Government have a pricing template they would like offerors to use or should offerors use their own format?

LA22. There is no required format (but see other requirements found in section L).

LQ23. The government requires an Original and 1 electronic copy for volume I and volume II. However, the solicitation states that faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through NECO or any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable. Could the government please verify that the required electronic copy is referring to a DVD or CD?

LA23. Confirmed.

LQ24. Would the government provided clarification on the Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBSP). Is the submittal of the SBSP of total subcontracted dollars?

LA24. The solicitation is clear.

LQ25. Would the government consider allowing for a second round of questions if the answers provided to the first set of Q&A require further exploration?

LA25. Yes, provided that the follow-up questions are in response to answers provided to questions within the amendment. The Government reserves the right to provide responses to some, all, or none of the follow-up questions due to time constraints.

LQ26. A contractor requests the removal of FAR 52.237-10, “Identification of Uncompensated Overtime” (UCOT).

LA26. Denied. It is required by FAR 37.115-3.

LQ27. Will the government increase the page limit for Volume I, Non-cost Proposal to 40 pages to allow offerors to adequately address the multitude of bulleted requirements in the PWS?

LA27. No. The page limitation is consistent with other procurements of similar technical complexities.

LQ28. Will the government allow offerors to submit a compliance matrix, as an appendix outside of page count, to assist evaluators with mapping the offerors proposal response to the PWS requirements?

LA28. The solicitation is clear.

LQ29. Specifies separate cost and pricing information shall be submitted for each time period specified in Solicitation Section B. Each of the CLINs identified in section B is for a three-year ordering period. Is there any requirement to provide a breakdown by year?

LA29. Yes.

LQ30. As numerous contractors (current incumbents / prospective vendors) are already involved in varying aspects of Navy MILPAY (i.e. strategy, transformation, program evaluation, operational support, technical support, etc.), how will the government plan to manage existing and potential OCIs related to this requirement?

LA30. See LA18.

LQ31. Section L, III. (1) (b), Page 69 of 76, Corporate Experience: The RFP states: The offeror should complete a “Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form” for each reference submitted". The "Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form" requests the following: “Total dollar amount for this effort during the past five (5) years: (For ordering vehicles, show both the annual estimated contract amount and the amount of orders actually performed):” and states to “Show calendar year and dollars”. Additionally, the last section of the PPIF also requests the annual dollar value of all subcontracts. Question: Can the annual estimated contract and subcontract amounts and the amounts of orders actually performed be shown in contract years (base and any options years) instead of calendar years?

LA31. The solicitation is clear.

LQ32. On page 68, II (3), Cover – it lists identification of original signature copies. Could the Government please clarify what it means by “identification of original signature copies.” How should vendors reflect “original signature copies” for Volume I – Non-Cost Proposal?

LA32. We are not asking for any paper copies of the proposal (other than the original), so this requirement null and void. The solicitation has been updated herein.

LQ33. On page 68, Non Bona Fide Employee, could the Government please direct vendors where to include non bona fide employee certificates? We suggest providing these certificates in Volume II Cost since there is no page limit.

LA33. The suggestion is correct.

LQ34. The paragraph indicates that relevant past performance is performance under contracts or efforts with last five years of similar scope, magnitude, and complexity. As a multiple award RFP, what level of magnitude or range will be used to determine magnitude?

LA34. The language in section L was updated to answer this question.

LQ35. Would the Government consider amending the solicitation to provide all offerors with a common set of direct labor rate targets based on published Bureau of Labor Statistics that would establish realistic direct labor rates acceptable to the Navy for this program?

LA35. The Government estimated the following average base salaries for each labor category. An offeror can choose to deviate from these numbers if that is in accordance with their approved forward pricing methodology and is thoroughly explained in the cost narrative. Please note the requirement for a cost realism analysis.

Section M MQ1. Section M (2), p 75 states, “For all non-cost factors (other than Past Performance), an offeror’s proposal must be determined to be Acceptable or better in order to be eligible for award. A rating that is less than “Acceptable” in any non-cost evaluation factor and/or less than a “Satisfactory Confidence” rating in the Past Performance evaluation factor will render a proposal ineligible for award consideration as submitted.” However, the solicitation does not contain ratings tables or any other criteria describing how a proposal will be rated “Acceptable” or better or receive “Satisfactory Confidence” or better rating. Would the Government please provide a guide to how proposals may be rated?

MA1. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the DoD Source Selection Procedures.

MQ2. The RFP outlines non-cost evaluation factors in descending order of importance on Page 75. Performance/Management Approach is listed first, as the most important non-cost evaluation factor. This is defined in Section L on page 70 as “a performance/management approach that will successfully accomplish the requirements of the solicitation, including the PWS.” However, Section M does not specify how the performance/ management approach factor will be evaluated. Can the Government kindly explain how this factor will be evaluated and what measures the Government intends to use?

MA2. See MA1.

MQ3. The RFP outlines non-cost evaluation factors in descending order of importance on Page 75. The Socio-economic Plan is listed last, signifying that it is the least important non-cost evaluation factor. However, Section M does not specify how Socio-economic Plan will be evaluated. Can the Government kindly explain how this factor will be evaluated and what measures the Government intends to use? For instance, if an offeror proposes a Socio-economic Plan to matches the Small Business and Socio-economic percentages outlined on page 68 of RFP, will that plan be rated more highly than a plan that does not meet those percentages? How will the Government rate plans that exceed these percentages?

MA3. See MA1.

MQ4. Section M (2), p 74 states for both corporate experience and past performance relevance, “If subcontractor past performance is provided as part of the 5 of its most relevant contracts or efforts, the subcontractor past performance will be given weight proportional to the scope, magnitude and complexity of the aspects of the work under the solicitation for which the subcontractor is proposed.” Would the Government please confirm that this does not mean that a subcontractor’s past performance counts less toward determining the rating for the Past Performance evaluation factor, but rather that a subcontractor’s past performance relevance will be determined according to the areas and magnitude at which it is expected to participate, i.e. a subcontractor’s past performance does not need to match the scope, magnitude, and complexity of the entire contemplated N1 BMSS effort to be evaluated as relevant?

MA4. Confirmed.

MQ5. Section M (2), p 74 states, “In determining the rating for the Corporate Experience evaluation factor, the Government will give greater weight to the contracts or efforts which the Government determines to have greater relevance to the RFP” and “In determining the rating for the Past Performance evaluation factor, the Government will give greater weight to the contracts or efforts which are determined to have greater relevance to the solicitation.” Would the Government please confirm that the phrase “greater relevance to the RFP” means that OPNAV N1 Echelon 1 direct support is more relevant to the RFP requirements than other non – N1 OPNAV Echelon 1 support?

MA5. The solicitation is clear.

MQ6. In reference to Section M, evaluation criteria and the corresponding criteria in RFP L, III (1)(a), the RFP lists four significant functional areas for the Performance/Management approach: MPTE Program Management, Financial Management, POM Analysis, and Administrative Support. Will these four areas be evaluated in descending order of significance?

MA6. The solicitation is clear.

MQ7. The RFP states, “In considering the relevance of an offeror’s past performance, the past performance references provided by the offeror will be evaluated individually and in the aggregate.” How will this aggregation be done across up to 5 past performances? Given the broad and unrelated PWS task areas, it is highly likely multiple past performances will be relevant in scope, magnitude, and complexity for a single task area yet not apply to the other 3 task areas. It is important for offerors to understand how the evaluation will be done specifically to the experience and past performance aggregation.

MA7. The solicitation is clear.

MQ8. The RFP states, “The Government reserves the right to award the contracts to other than the offeror with the lowest evaluated CPFF.” Since this is a multiple award contract, how will the Government evaluate the tradeoff of price and non-price? Will a competitive range be established?

MA8. The solicitation is clear.

MQ9. RFP Section M, Page 74, Price Reasonableness: Paragraph (1) of Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award of the RFP states: “(1) Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the instructions set forth in Section L as well as the evaluation criteria contained in this section. The Government intends to award (a) contract(s) resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror(s), in accordance with FAR 52.216-27, who are determined to be the most highly qualified sources in accordance with the factors (and subfactors, if any) in the solicitation (to include price reasonableness).” Will the Government please define its evaluation criteria for assessing “price reasonableness”?

MA9. The Government anticipates that price reasonableness will be established through adequate price competition.

Miscellaneous MiscQ1. Will the Government provide escalation rates to be utilized in the Cost Proposal?

MiscA1. No. An offeror is reminded that this is a competitive procurement and that a cost realism analysis will be performed in accordance with sections L and M.

MiscQ2. Can the government confirm that IDIQ holders will have the ability to add additional teammates post IDIQ award?

MiscA2. The solicitation is clear.

MiscQ3. Is this a small business set-aside?

MiscA3. The solicitation is clear.

MiscQ4. Who is the incumbent?

MiscA4. None. This is a new requirement.

MiscQ5. Does the prime for the contract require a Facility Clearance? If so, what level clearance?

MiscA5. The solicitation is clear.

MiscQ6. Can a SB subcontract without a Facility Clearance?

MiscA6. The solicitation is clear.

MiscQ7. Do all labor categories require Secret Clearances for the positions?

MiscA7. The solicitation is clear.

MiscQ8. Regarding the facility security requirements, is there a requirement for classified storage?

MiscA8. No.

The following have been modified:

SOLICITATION FORM

A.) Proposals are due on or before close of business (5:00 PM EST) on 12 April 2018.

B.) Proposals shall be sent to the Fleet Logistics Center (FLC) Norfolk, Contracting Department, Philadelphia Office as follows:

FLC Norfolk, Contracting Dept., Philadelphia Office

RFP#N00189-18-R-Z028

Attn: Stephen Ciliberto, Code 260A 700 Robbins Ave, Bldg. 2B Philadelphia, PA 19111-5083

C.) The point of contact for this solicitation is:

Stephen Ciliberto

(215) 697-5028 Stephen.a.ciliberto@navy.mil

D.) All questions about this requirement should be submitted to Stephen Ciliberto in writing to the email address listed above.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

PWS

Performance-Based Work Statement for Business Management Support Services (BMSS) for Navy Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education (MPTE) 9 January 2018

1. Introduction

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (Manpower, Personnel, Training & Education – MPTE) (DCNO, MPTE) (N1) is responsible for the overall manpower readiness for the United States Navy. The DCNO, MPTE also serves as Chief of Naval Personnel (CNP) (BUPERS). The role of DCNO (MPTE) and CNP go hand-in-hand. The DCNO performs strategy and resource functions, and develops applicable policies. The DCNO also performs all Capitol Hill related duties to include all Congressional testimony for matters pertaining to the Manpower, Personnel, Training, & Education in the Navy. The DCNO's office also acts as the lead organization to interface with the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of the Navy (DON) officials, other U.S. military and foreign departments, other Navy commands, other Federal agencies, and private organizations on MPTE matters.

The MPTE domain is comprised of the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (N1), the Bureau of Naval Personnel (BUPERS), Navy Personnel Command (NPC), the Navy Manpower Analysis Center (NAVMAC), Commander Naval Education and Training (NETC), and Commander Navy Recruiting Command (CNRC). The mission of the MPTE domain is to recruit, develop and distribute America’s best and brightest talent to bring our Navy a competitive edge.

2. Background

As an enterprise, MPTE provides all planning, programming, policy and execution of recruiting, manpower, personnel, training and education activities in order to provide Navy operating forces with trained personnel to execute the missions assigned by the National Command Authority.

3. Scope The objective of this PWS is to obtain business management services to support MPTE program/policy development/execution, budgeting, analysis and justification. The scope of this effort will encompass strategic assessment and planning; manpower assessment; planning and programming analysis support; financial program management; manpower, personnel, training and education program and policy assessment and management; quantitative analysis; forecasting; performance assessment; and research, development, test and evaluation program management support. The support is for strategic and operational level issue support regarding current and future initiatives across the MPTE domain.

The support will require direct liaison with action officers and program managers across the MPTE domain as well as all other Navy Enterprises and Enablers to support the development and refinement of MPTE programs and policies. The contractors will provide a continuum of business management support to MPTE leadership, managers, action officers, program managers and analysts.

Contractor support will be required in the following areas:

· MPTE Program Management—Provide technical, and business planning services to include program strategic planning, internal and external communications and media planning, facilitation of process reviews and analyses, process re-engineering, and evaluation of commercial-off-the-shelf products in support of MPTE domain initiatives. Review major organizational programs that may include development of key issues, evaluation of the current programs, statistical analysis, socialization of concepts and programs internal and external to the MPTE domain, comparison of the program to other similar programs and evaluation of the effect of any proposed changes to current policies/practices. Provide program and project management support. Provide support to programming and oversight of organization and force structure to include management, and workforce mix. Provide analysis support for a variety of research projects, studies and ad hoc assignments utilizing the principles of Operations Research, process analysis, statistical analysis, and mathematical analysis.

· Financial Management—Support all aspects of financial program management, audit readiness and compliance for MPTE. Provide support and assistance to components of the organization in establishing and sustaining a Managers’ Internal Control Program (MICP).

· Program Objective Memorandum (POM) Analysis and Support—Provide support in assessment and development of documentation for POM cycles.

· Administrative Support—Provide administrative support including maintaining calendars, setting appointments, and making travel arrangement for principals. Analyze and track action items for the staff. Create/draft correspondence. Organize and maintain secure filing system.

4. Tasks

4.1 MPTE Program Management Support

4.1.1 Program and Project Management (to include MPTE public affairs and survey programs)

· Provide day-to-day project management support for MPTE projects including coordination of initiatives, schedule management, and reporting

· Ensure that the project management tasks are performed in accordance with the principles established by the Project Management Institute (PMI).

· Provide integrated master plans, integrated master schedules, Gantt charts, critical path analysis, plans of action and milestones (POAMs), timelines, work breakdown schedules, user reports, and communications plans

· Provide management reports to include required information from applicable management systems/databases, format data for reports/presentations, and present reports.

· Identify and promulgate project metrics standards.

· Support the preparation of independent cost estimates (for life cycle costs or other activities).

· Support the preparation of estimates at completion (EAC) for work conducted by a government activity

· Support Business Process Re-engineering/Business Process Simulation

· Support the implementation and maintenance of a supply chain management process/architecture to oversee the flow of sailors through the MPTE production components.

· Prepare and analyze Total Ownership Cost (TOC), Cost as an Independent Variable (CAIV) and Life Cycle Cost (LCC) evaluations

· Conduct analysis for MPTE marketing, advertising program, and the public affairs program

· Analyze survey results

· Assist in the development of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Government activities.

· Provide ad hoc briefings and information papers

4.1.2 Program and Policy Analysis

· Provide manpower and personnel program and policy analysis support

· Conduct discrete analytical efforts that support the MPTE demand supply spectrum including emergent requirements

· Conduct continuous analysis of the Navy’s Enlisted end-strength

· Assist in refining Enlisted Accession Plans and Goaling Policies

· Perform cost/benefit analysis of advancement/promotion and other personnel policies.

· Apply operations research, numerical and statistical analysis techniques to the analysis of MPTE programs and initiatives

· Conduct ongoing analysis of Navy officer and enlisted policies and programs to ensure the MPTE domain provides the required manpower to the fleet

· Perform economic analysis of advancement/promotion, special pays, bonuses, Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP) or other incentives, basic pay, retirement, and benefits and their impact on accessions and retention

· Analyze and report on optimal mix and allocation of enlisted and officer compensation elements

· Estimate the costs and benefits of training officer and enlisted personnel

· Analyze the optimal path for enlisted or officer personnel planning policies

· Conduct econometric analysis of factors impacting reenlistment and retention behavior

· Analyze the accession quality requirements for enlisted and officer personnel

· Analyze civilian earnings data to assess the earnings alternatives for military officer and enlisted personnel

· Assist in developing concepts and methodologies for models

· Generate inventory forecasts and what-if analyses to support recruiting and accession, promotion

· Provide quick reaction enlisted manpower policy analysis in response to CNO, CNP and Division Director tasking

· Analyze sustainable, cost-effective manpower requirements by pay grade, length of service, and sea and shore duty; analyze Total Force manpower trade-offs, including active duty, reserve, and civilians

· Assist in developing manpower costing rates to accommodate POM analyses

· Perform analysis of the Individuals Account - able to be disaggregated to the Enterprise level of detail, suitable for POM analyses

· Conduct workload analysis to determine the adequacy of activity manning and conformity of manpower statement throughout similar activities Navy-wide

· Conduct Business Case Analysis

· Analyze and evaluate business processes, conduct gap analysis and identify potential efficiency improvements/cost saving initiatives

· Support the business process mapping of current “As-Is” and future “To-Be” business processes, costs, required human capital, and data flows

· Compare and contrast organizational practices within the scope of each initiative and to current industry standards and practices

· Support Program Requirements Reviews (PRR)

· Analyze and assess manpower and personnel changes using Total Force Manpower Management System (TFMMS), Intelligent Workbook (IW) and other databases

· Provide TFMMS/PMAS/ /Intelligent Workbook/UIC Management and general manpower database support

· Provide supporting Excel, Access and/or other manpower data spreadsheets used to identify manpower/personnel trends and impacts

· Provide electronic and one hard copy of each completed analysis in support of various issues in both text and briefing slide formats

· Analyze and assess Joint Manpower Requirements related issues and impact of various proposed program management changes

· Assist in the development and implementation of Joint Development and Management Strategic Roadmaps

· Analyze and conduct academic literature reviews in the areas of human behavior, economic decision making, and organizational psychology.

4.1.3 Analysis and assessment of the Navy’s recruiting, manpower, personnel, training, and education strategic initiatives

· Provide support for organizational strategy development including vision, mission, strategic objectives and goals

· Provide support to Flag Officer/SES level on strategic issues

· Gather information, identify issues and draft documentation to achieve overall goals for MPTE strategic planning

· Develop, support, facilitate and accelerate change management approach to include stakeholder analysis, communications strategies, education throughout various levels of management and assessment of change readiness

· Assess existing organizational initiatives and projects to determine possible synergies with new initiatives

· Support MPTE in generating innovative approaches to build a comprehensive program to support real and lasting change and ensure knowledge transfer of relevant subject matter

· Lead efforts to obtain and analyze large, complex data sets in support of strategic planning

· Identify potential conflicting themes and objectives.

· Prepare and present executive level briefings (Power Point, etc.) that communicate the core results of the research and supporting documentation/files (Excel, Access, etc.). Provide a report summarizing the findings.

· Provide analyses on opportunities for modernizing the Navy’s MILPAY systems to take advantage of emerging commercially available system capabilities and business practices

· Provide strategic communications support focusing on key issues and delivering appropriate messages to internal and external audiences

· Provide analysis of current organizational alignment and structure and support organizational restructuring to include the development of organizational change roadmaps, identification of major change elements, risk areas, potential roadblock, organizational capabilities, and appropriate workforce mix.

· Conduct analysis of strategic initiatives based on effectiveness towards meeting targets and prepare documentation based on analytical and mathematical techniques

· Assist the enterprise in developing and implementing a Continuous Performance Improvement (CPI) methodology, such as Lean Six Sigma. Provide training to enterprise personnel in the selected CIP methodology

· Conduct strategic analysis of Navy Recruiting methods, processes, and resources

· Conduct economic/cost analysis of future planning and policy options for recruiting and accession

· Develop/implement metrics to measure impacts/ROI of recruiting policy implementation

· Assist in the development of workforce predictive analytics to include workforce supply and demand analysis, forecasting, and trend analysis

· Conduct analysis to define current and future manpower issues, needs and requirements and to inform targeted human capital strategies around recruiting, training and development, succession planning and retention

· Perform tradeoff studies and risk assessments

4.1.4 Strategic Management –support and maintain a single strategy for all echelons of the MPTE domain

· Assist in coordinating developing Navy plans and strategies that effect MPTE domain.

· Assist in maintaining an effective, efficient and productive relationship with MPTE research entities.

· Liaise between key working level members of the OPNAV staff and other Department of Navy organizations

· Establish a Technical Interchange Meeting schedule with OPNAV staff members to provide a means of sharing MPTE domain strategies as well as collecting information regarding developing Navy strategies affecting the MPTE domain

· Provide feedback on the results of meetings, including initial analysis and/or assessment of the impact of new initiatives.

4.1.5 Visual Communications and Social Media

· Prepare formal technical drawings, graphics, and illustrations in support of development, operations, and support functions

· Provide formal format and layout functions for MPTE Domain-wide publications

· Provide creative copywriting support including creating, editing, layout, and proofreading.

· Provide scriptwriting support, producing original creative concepts and developing storylines from concept to completed product.

· Provide creative support for web-based design of interactive media/training and multimedia projects, using a variety of web design and graphic design software programs

· Assist in the development, deployment and maintenance of performance reporting dashboards and automated dashboards to support the monitoring of key operational metrics

· Provide website and social media administration to include social media communication, social media site administration, and information cataloguing with the ability to apply knowledge of social media platforms to advance MPTE initiatives

4.2 Financial Administration and Compliance

4.2.1 Financial Management

· Develop Impact Statements

· Prepare issue/point papers, white papers, and ad hoc reports

· Develop/prepare and review future year financial program plans

· Develop financial aspects of POA&Ms

· Develop background information to justify financial program requirement

· Provide program analysis and evaluation reports in support of the Navy programming and budget process

· Analyze financial information in program planning documents and processes

· Conduct financial analysis and financial risk analysis, identifying and evaluating financial risks and identify management techniques to mitigate risk exposure

· Coordinate, advise and draft budget formulation documentation in support of the Navy, OSD and Congressional program and Budget processes

· Draft budget exhibits

· Draft spreadsheets, reports, and conduct analysis for short- and long-range budget requirements

· Prepare analyses of budgets during all required annual and periodic budget submissions.

· Draft responses to Congressional inquiries, Navy, DoD and other government agency questions or requests for financial information

· Prepare funding documents to provide funding to other government activities and contractors

· Prepare ledger reports, ledger tracking, maintenance and support of specified financial management information systems and Standard Accounting Reporting System (STARS) or any other official accounting program tracking systems

· Collect, monitor and analyze obligation/expenditure information from the…