N0018920RZ012-0005.docx

N0018920RZ012

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

This amendment contains the a list of questions that were received to date (16 April 2020) in response to this RFP and their respective answers. The two (2) additional questions that were answered in this Amendment are #s 62 and 63.

1. Is there an Award Ceiling (minus the $3M for Travel + ODC’s already specified) for RFP N0018920RZ012?

Answer: There is not an award ceiling established for the resultant contract(s).

2. Our research suggests that only one TO for approximately $487,000 was awarded on the original IDIQ (to SAIS). Is this correct?

Answer: No, it is not correct.

3. If not, are you able to specify any other amounts?

Answer: That information can be provided through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

4. Can the contracting team share the reasons that the Customer would like to put this effort up for a re-compete, given the paucity of TOs leading up to this point?

Answer: See answer to question 2.

5. Is there an estimated or hoped-for number of TO’s predicted for the upcoming IDIQ?

Answer: There is not an estimated/preferred number of task orders predicted for the resultant contract(s).

6. What are the evaluation criteria for the competition to win a seat on this upcoming IDIQ?

Answer: See evaluation criteria in Sections L and M.

7. Will site visits to competitors or demonstrations at the Customer’s site be part of the selection process?

Answer: No, site visits or demonstrations will not be part of the source selection criteria.

8. Will a comprehensive list of questions/answers be shared publicly?

Answer: Yes, questions and answers will be shared via amendments.

9. Upon reading through the documentation provided on NECO it would seem that we are required to provide an estimate that is slightly more accurate than a ROM. Is this determination correct or is a ROM sufficient?

Answer: Offerors are to provide an accurate cost estimate, that if the Non-price/cost and price/cost are determined to be the best value and accepted by the Government, is legally binding.

10. Will there be any requirements for which terrain database to use?

Answer: When wargaming exercises are done over land, a terrain database is used. However, the Navy does not usually need this type since they will done over water.

11. Reference Section A, Para. E.) states "The deadline for submitting questions regarding this RFP is 12:00 PM EST on 23 March 2020." Section L states "...should submit one consolidated list of questions concerning the solicitation via email to the solicitation point of contact, NO LATER THAN 2:00 pm, Philadelphia time, on 20 Feb 2020." Please confirm the deadline for submitting questions is 12:00 PM EST on 23 March 2020.

Answer: Prior to Amendment 0001, the deadline for submitting questions was 23 March 2020. As a result of Amendment 0001, the deadline for submitting questions has been moved to 30 March 2020.

12. Reference SF33 Item 12 - The RFP does not request a specific validity period for bids so the standard 60 days applies. Will the government define the the desired minimum bid acceptance period of bids or should the Offeror use 60 days?

Answer: The validity period for proposals should be 120 days.

13. Section B clause LOE(g) states ""For any resultant fixed-price task orders, the hours proposed shall be considered against the MAC program’s Estimated Total Hours."" The CLIN Table in Section B is limited to CPFF labor CLINs applicable to labor (0001 and 0002).

Section H Task Order Procedures state ""At the discretion of the Ordering Officer, Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders may be issued under this contract.""

Section L 52.216-1 Type of Contract states ""The Government contemplates award of a multiple cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) type contract resulting from this solicitation.""

While the clauses in Section B and H define the allowability and process for issuing FFP Task Orders under the IDIQ contract, the CLIN Table in Section B does not list FFP CLINs and Section L does not state the IDIQ contract resulting from this solicitation will be a hybrid contract allowing the issuance of both FFP and CPFF Task Orders.

Will the contract resulting from this solicitation be a hybrid allowing issuance of FFP or CPFF Task Orders? If yes, please update the language at 52.216-1 and provide an updated CLIN Table.

Answer: CLIN 0002 has been revised to be an unpriced placeholder CLIN for the issuance of FFP task orders. In addition, Section L, FAR clause 52.216-1 “Type of Contract” has been revised to reflect the issuance of both CPFF and FFP orders.

14. Substitution Criteria: For all the experience levels required, one year of full time formal education may be considered the equivalent of two years of work experience. However, education may only be used to substitute one-half of the total required minimum experience.

Substitution criteria is provided to equate years of formal education for work experience. Will the Government provide substitution criteria to equate years of work experience to education? For example, 4 years of work experience may be considered the equivalent of a Bachelor's degree and 6 years of work experience may be considered the equivalent of a Master's degree.

Answer: Substitution criteria shall only be used to substitute education in lieu of experience for ½ of the total requirement for each individual labor category’s minimum qualification. The Government does not allow substitutions of experience in lieu of education for this requirement.

15. Section J states a list of the following attachments:

I. QASP

II. CAP – Cost Type, Indefinite Delivery III. Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form IV. Contract Security Classification Specification, DD 254 (DRAFT) V. Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs), DD 1423

Section J notes Attachments I-QASP and II-CAP, but these attachments were not provided in the posted Solicitation. Please provide copies of Attachments I and II.

Answer: The QASP and CAP were attached in Amendment 0002.

16. Reference Section L - "** Submission of proposal on a DVD or CD shall be in Microsoft Excel Format. In addition, offers consist of and shall include the following items as part of Volume II: Solicitation Cover Sheet… Solicitation pricing pages...

Acknowledgement of solicitation amendments… Representations and Certifications...

Small Business Subcontracting Plan..."

While the note in Section L limits documentation applicable to Vol II to Microsoft Excel Format. To support the additional submission requirements for Vol II, will the Government update the reference noted to read "... shall be in Microsoft Excel Format for detailed pricing information and in searchable PDF format for other required information?"

Answer: The Government has amended that portion of Section L to provide the additional submission requirements for Volume II, which includes a PDF document for the aforementioned items.

17. Reference Section L - Table of Contents: The table of contents should provide detail sufficient to allow the important elements to be easily located. The use of tabs and dividers is encouraged."

"The cover sheet, table of contents (not to exceed one page per volume), tabs, and dividers will not count toward the page limit."

Will the Government allow submission of a Compliance Matrix to map RFP task/evaluation factors to further support the Government's desire for "detail sufficient to allow the important elements to be easily located" as part of the items excluded from the page count defined in L.II?

Answer: Yes, a Compliance Matrix to map RFP task/evaluation factors can be excluded from the page count.

18. Reference Section L - Volume I, “Non-price Proposal,” is limited to a maximum of 15 (fifteen) pages in length inclusive of any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics. ... The cover sheet, table of contents (not to exceed one page per volume), tabs, and dividers will not count toward the page limit. The one exception to the font size requirement shown above is that the "corporate experience and past performance information forms" may be completed with a point size of 10 or greater.

Section L.III(c) Socio-Economic Plan.

While the specific format for submitting Corporate Experience and Past Performance is provided by Section J, Attachment III, Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form, a desired format is not provided for the Socio-Economic Plan. Also, the Socio-Economic Plan is clearly segregated from the consolidated response for Corporate Experience and Past Performance dictated by Attachment III.

(a) Will the Government provide a form or format for the Socio-Economic Plan to ensure consistency of this proposal content requirement across all Offerors?

(b) Will the Government stipulate the pages associated with submission of the Socio-Economic Plan are outside the 15 page limit and allow the Plan to be submitted as an attachment to Vol I with additional page count assigned?

Answer: The Government will not specify a required format for the Socio-Economic Plan. The Socio-Economic Plan must be included in the Volume I page limit.

19. Reference Section L - Paragraph two of the Corporate Experience section states "… the offeror shall identify up to 5 of its most relevant contracts…" Paragraph four instructs the submission of the "Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form" for each reference but then states "Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted." Further, the NOTE in this section states "Accordingly, offerors shall submit a single set of corporate experience and past performance information (maximum of 5 of its most relevant contracts) to satisfy the submission requirements for both factors."

Per the Section L instructions, the references an Offeror uses in its Corporate Experience and Past Performance response are provided via the Attachment III Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form. As such, it appears that up to five Attachment III's may be provided to satisfy the requirement for Corporate Experience and Past Performance. Therefore, should the language in Paragraph four "Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted." be updated to "five references"?

Answer: The Government has corrected the solicitation to reflect a maximum of five (5) references.

20. Reference Sections L and M - "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 required."

"... 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."

"If the offeror is proposing subcontracts on other than a CPFF basis, the offeror should submit information as to whether the rates for the subcontractors are fixed based on a firm bilateral agreement with the subcontractor or merely proposed. In addition, the offeror shall explain why it believes the subcontractor can perform at those rates."

"The Government will evaluate the offeror’s total compensation plan for professional employees employed under the contract, including first-tier subcontractor employees, to ensure that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements."

Based on the preponderance of the language in Section L pertaining to subcontractor information, it appears that if subcontractors are performing on other than a CPFF basis the Offeror is to provide a price analysis for each subcontractor which must provide adequate justification for the subcontract type proposed and data to support assertions that each proposed subcontractors' rates are realistic and reasonable for the work to be performed. Please confirm.

If the above is true, please confirm that subcontractors performing on other than a CPFF basis may provide non-proprietary labor rate submissions to the Offeror for inclusion in the Offeror's Vol II, and are not required to provide sealed packages containing direct labor rate substantiation, total compensation plan, nor other company proprietary data directly to the Government.

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

21. Reference Section M – “A rating that is less than a “Satisfactory Confidence” rating in the Past Performance evaluation factor will render a proposal ineligible for award consideration as submitted.""

"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."

In order to ensure all Offerors have a common understanding of the rating system the Government is using for Corporate Experience, Past Performance, and Socio-Economic Plan, will the Government please provide the following:

(a) Definition of "Satisfactory Confidence" as it relates to Past Performance and any other levels of Confidence that may be associated with this evaluation criteria.

(b) Definition of "Acceptable" as it relates to Corporate Experience and Socio-Economic Plan.

Answer: Please reference the publicly available DOD Source Selection Guide.

22. Reference Section A – “ D. Although the awardee(s) of this requirement must be cleared at the Top Secret/SCI level of security clearance"

Reference Section J – DD254 Block 10. Contractor Will Require Access to:

While Section A references "cleared at the TS/SCI level" the DD245 block 10 Item e.(1) Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) is not checked. Will the Government be updating the DD254 to check black 10.e(1) to allow SCI access?

Answer: Section A, Paragraph D. referenced “Top Secret/SCI” in error. It has been corrected to read “Top Secret”.

23. Reference Section A. - B.) "Proposals shall be sent to…" Reference Section G.) METHOD OF PROPOSAL SUBMISSION "Faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through NECO or any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable."

In order to support national emergency measures due to the COVID-19 pandemic such as the directive to telework and isolate where possible, will the Government consider amending instructions for deliver to allow Offerors to submit proposals via electronic methods vs. delivering a hard copy?

Answer: Yes, Section A and Section L, METHOD OF PROPOSAL SUBMISSION has been changed to direct submission of proposals to be done via email.

24. Please provide clarification on how subcontractors shall submit their fully disclosed pricing files to the Government? Top of Page 65 of the solicitation, second asterisk, states that subcontractors may email their unsanitized Excel pricing files to Erin Kilrain. Page 75 of the solicitation states “Subcontractor cost breakdowns maybe be submitted in separate sealed envelopes”. Are subcontractors to submit only an Excel pricing file via e-mail and then to provide their cost narrative and supporting information in a sealed envelope with the prime submission?

Answer: The RFP has been amended to instruct all prime contractors and subcontractors to email their proposals to the POC identified in Section A.

25. The 10c SCI checkbox on the DD254 is not marked, further cell 2b lists only secret level physical safeguarding at contractor sites. However, page 2 of the solicitation section A-D states “awardee … must be cleared at the Top Secret/SCI” Which is correct- will tasks on this IDIQ be up to the TS/SCI level?

Answer: See the answer to Question 22.

26. Most of the solicitation states up to 5 “Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information” forms should be submitted. An example is the first paragraph of III (1) b on page 68 states, “Only a single set of up to 5 references shall be submitted.” But on the same page, the 4th paragraph of section III (1)(a) states “Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted”. Is the correct number of contracts to submit up to 5 or is it 3?

Answer: The correct number of references is five (5).

27. Reference - Section L II. (5) and Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information form, p. 67 of 74; The instructions state that "at least one inch margins on all sides" are required. The government-supplied Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information form is 7” wide instead of 6.5”. To be compliant with the RFP, should the offeror reduce the size of the margin to 6.5?

Answer: Offerors may leave the Government-supplied Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form at 7” margins.

28. Reference - "**Submission of proposal on a DVD or CD”, Submission of Proposals, I General; Due to concerns around COVID -19 and evolving guidance regarding self-quarantine and remote working/telecommuting, will the Government consider receiving electronic submission of proposals via email/virus free? If yes, what is the max. file size limitation?

Answer: See the answer to Question 23. The Government does not have a max file size limitation. However, zip.files are not allowed.

29. Reference - Volume II Pricing Instructions and Section B Tables; Can the Goverment provide a breakdown of the Level of Effort between CLINs 0001 (O&M, N) and 0002(R&D) in order for the Section B tables to be adequately completed?

Answer: The language “(O&M,N FUNDED ORDERS WILL BE PLACED UNDER THIS CLIN)” has been deleted from CLIN 0001 and the language “(R&D FUNDED ORDERS WILL BE PLACED UNDER THIS CLIN)” has been deleted from CLIN 0002. In addition, CLIN 0002 has been revised to be an unpriced FFP placeholder CLIN for the purpose of issuing FFP task orders, should the requirement occur.

Offerors are not to provide a price for labor in CLIN 0002 and should only provide a CPFF price for labor in CLIN 0001.

30. Reference Section G; CPFF Quotations call for "any subcontracted effort, the contractor shall ensure that similar cost breakdown information is provided." Please confirm that this requirement applies only to cost type subcontractors and other than cost type subcontractors do not need to provide all of the build up data of their labor rates.

Answer: Yes, cost breakdown information only needs to be provided by subcontractors whose contracts with their prime are on a CPFF basis.

31. Reference Section L; Please confirm that small business subcontracting goal percentages are based upon total dollars subcontracted.

Answer: Yes, the Small Business Subcontracting goal percentages represent the percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars.

32. Can the Goverment confirm that the Not to Exceed values of $2,000,000 (Travel) and $1,000,000 (ODCs) cover the entire term of the contract ordering period and should not be repeated on an annual basis (Years 1 through 5)?

Answer:The Not to Exceed values of $2,000,000 (Travel) and $1,000,000 (ODCs) cover the entire five year ordering period and not annual amounts.

33. Can the Government confirm if the values for CLIN's 0003 and 0004 should be increased by the contractor to include any applicable Indirect costs?

Answer: No, CLINs 0003 and 0004 are Not-to-Exceed amounts and any applicable indirect costs should be included in the CLIN amount.

34. Reference - Section L III (1) (a) Corporate Experience; Instructions for the Non-price Proposal, state that if a relevent subcontractor past performance is submitted, "the offeror’s proposal shall detail clearly the aspects of the work in the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform." Where in the proposal should the offeror include this information and what detail is required by the Government? If the information is required in Vol. I, will the Government increase the page limit by one (1) page so that the required information can be documented?

Answer: If a subcontractor’s reference is provided as one or more of the five allowed references, the offeror should include their information in the same manner/detail as the prime’s references are submitted: through the Corporate Experience and Past Performance Information Form. Additional pages can be added to the Form, however they will count as part of the total page count for Volume I. The number of pages in Volume I remains at 15 pages.

35. Reference Section L.I and L.III (c); Since there is no SBA or DoD statutory goal for historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions (HBCU/MI), would the Government consider amending the requirement by removing HBCU/MI?

Answer: While there are no statutory goals for Historically Black College or University and Minority Institution for the DOD, the Socio-Economic still requires that offerors address the extent of their participation. The solicitation states that it “does not require participation by such entities.”

36. The Government’s instructions in Section L.III(2) (Volume II – Price/Cost) on p. 69-74 state: “The offeror’s cost proposal shall not deviate from the level of effort set forth in Section B of the solicitation.” Will the Government please confirm that if offerors’ need to account for the cost of Task Order management and administration, they will be able to do so at the task order level?

Answer: The offeror’s cost proposal shall not deviate from the level of effort set forth in Section B of the solicitation. However, if a particular offeror’s accounting system/practices require it to direct charge ADDITIONAL effort for things such as program administration costs, the offeror shall clearly and separately identify those direct costs in its proposal. The level of effort set forth in the solicitation may not be reduced or changed to accommodate such additional direct costs or for any other reason.

37. Reference - Section L, Page 65 (Volume II), Page 69 (2) Volume II; Please clarify what the Government is referring to in the request for "Solicition Pricing Pages"

Answer: Solicitation Pricing Pages are in “Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices”. Offerors need to fill in CLINs 0001, 0003 and 0004 cost/pricing amounts.

38. Will the government consider extending the proposal submission deadline due to the disruption caused by the pandemic National Emergency?

Answer: Proposal submission deadline was extended to 13 April 2020 via Amendment 0001.

39. Reference – PWS Para. 4.2.4 Campaign and Mission Analysis; “The contractor shall perform these analyses by drawing upon a number of models and simulations including, but not limited to the following: Naval Simulation System (NSS), Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model (STORM), and Shipboard and Aviation Force Effectiveness for General Air and Raid Defense (SAFEGARD).”

Are all of the models required for performance on the contract 100% government owned and government furnished? How will the contractor be given access to use these models in order to conduct analysis?

Answer: Most of the models are government owned and will be provided as Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information; for those that are contractor owned, licenses should be available for purchase.

40. Reference – PWS Para. 4.2.5 Campaign and Mission Analytic Support; “The contractor shall revise system descriptions, characteristics and performance parameters for threat, Naval, Joint and Allied forces in databases for appropriate models and simulations including, but not limited to the following: GCAM, NSS and the STORM or mission level models in the area of AAW, ASW, ASUW, MIW/MCM, Strike, IAMD, Expeditionary Warfare, and C4ISR, Logistics, Amphibious Assault, support and sustainment from Seabase, Cyber Operations, Electronic Warfare, and Small Boat Defense. The contractor shall run appropriate models to reassess warfighter capability based on revisions.”

Are all of the models required for performance on the contract 100% government owned and government furnished? How will the contractor be given access to use these models in order to conduct analysis?

Answer: Most of the models are government owned; for those that are contractor owned, licenses should be available for purchase.

41. Reference – PWS Para. 4.2.5 Campaign and Mission Analytic Support; “The contractor shall revise system descriptions, characteristics and performance parameters for threat, Naval, Joint and Allied forces in databases for appropriate models and simulations including, but not limited to the following: GCAM …”

N66001-18-D-0199 - Notice of Sole Source Award to Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc. states that “There are two parts to the GCAM tool - the GCAM Core Tool Suite (CTS), and the applications. The applications are cases developed using the GCAM CTS to simulate specific scenarios for use in the analysis process. Therefore, for all of the models built using GCAM under a Government contract; the Government has unlimited data rights to the data used, the applications built, and the resulting data outputs. The source code associated with the GCAM CTS is solely owned and proprietary to SPA. It is SPA's position that the GCAM CTS software development was funded exclusively with SPA funds and, as such, SPA both owns and retains all rights associated with the GCAM CTS software itself, the source code, and any associated documentation.

Was GCAM CTS used in any way to support task orders on the predecessor MAC IDIQ and is there any requirement to have access to GCAM CTS to successfully perform on this requirement?

Answer: Yes, GCAM has been used on previous task orders and may be required in future task orders.

42. Reference - Section L, I; “Initial proposals and any modifications thereto are to be submitted…” “Initial proposals” suggest follow-on proposals, which are not identified in the solicitation. Will the government clarify the intent of “Initial proposals…”

Answer: Initial proposals are the offeror’s original proposal. Should the Government ask for proposal revisions during the acquisition process, the offeror will be asked to submit a revision to their initial propopsal or a revised proposal .

43. Reference - Section L, I; “Initial proposals and any modifications thereto are to be submitted to the Contracting Officer on or before the closing date and time cited elsewhere in this Request for Proposals. Faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through NECO or any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable.”

Given the coronavirus pandemic National Emergency, will the government please eliminate the hard copy requirement and allow contractors to submit the response via email?

Answer: Yes, see answer to Question 23.

44. Reference - Section L, Requirements for Proposal Content; “…using a font with a point size of 12 or greater …”

Will the government allow point size of 10 in tables other than the corporate experience and past performance information form?

Answer: Yes, a font size of 10 may be used in tables and graphics in addition to the Corporate Experience and Past Performance Form.

45. Reference the LEVEL OF EFFORT Clause; The LOE table includes estimated total hours that are not in FTE increments. Does the government intend to issue RFQs on this MAC similar to the predecessor MAC in which most RFQs contain government estimates of partial FTEs across many LCATs with typical POP duration of one year or less?

Answer: Yes, there is a possibility that some RFQs and resultant task orders will have partial FTEs.

46. Page 2, Section A states, “B.) Proposals shall be sent to Fleet Logistics Center (FLC) Norfolk Philadelphia Office as follows.” Pages 64-65, Section L, I. General provides instructions for hard copy delivery, noting that “Faxes, e-mails, and/or responses through NECO or any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable.” Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which has necessitated changes in daily operations for industry, would the Government please revise this requirement to allow offerors to electronically submit their proposal packages (Volume I and Volume II with all enclosures)?

Answer: See the answer to Question 23.

47. Page 3, Section B contains two CLINs for Analytic Studies Support Services, one for O&MN funded orders and one for R&D funded orders. Would the Government please provide the number of hours that should be proposed against each CLIN?

Answer: See answer to Question 29. The “LEVEL OF EFFORT” Clause in Section B provides the total hours that offerors shall use in developing their proposals. Offerors shall only propose a CPFF amount for the level of effort in CLIN 0001.

48. Page 19, Section C.5.10.1, Data Rights states, “As such, no analysis, tools, methods, algorithms, code or data developed, used, or integrated under this contract shall constitute or be construed as company proprietary or owned by the contractor.” This clause would seem to discourage contractors from using proprietary tools that may provide benefit to the Government. Would the Government please clarify that it is not the intent of the Government to take ownership of a contractor-owned, previously developed, proprietary tool that is used for analysis support under this contract?

Answer: The Government does not intend to take ownership of any contractor-funded developed tool, however the Government will own all data and output associated with any task order that uses a contractor tool.

49. Page 67, Section L, II. (5) Page Limitations states, “Volume I, “Non-price Proposal,” is limited to a maximum of 15 (fifteen) pages in length inclusive of any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics.” Per Section L, III. Volume I includes the Socio-Economic Plan. To allow offerors the maximum opportunity to establish the recency, relevancy, and quality of the Corporate Experience and Past Performance projects, would the Government please remove the Socio-Economic Plan from the Volume I page count?

Answer: The Socio-Economic Plan will not be removed from the Volume I page count.

50. Page 67, Section L, II. (5) Page Limitations states, “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 revise the solicitation to permit tables and graphics to use a font with a point size of 10 or greater?

Answer: See answer to Question 44.

51. Page 68, Section L, III. Proposal Content, a) Corporate Experience states, “Only a single set of up to three references shall be submitted.” However, page 68, b) Past Performance states, “Only a single set of up to 5 references shall be submitted.” Further, page 72, Section M, Evaluation Criteria (2) states, “If subcontractor experience is provided as part of the 5 of its most relevant contracts or efforts, the subcontractor experience will be given weight proportional to the scope and magnitude of the aspects of the work under the solicitation for which the subcontractor is proposed.” Would the Government please confirm that offerors may submit up to five Corporate Experience and Past Performance projects and revise the solicitation?

Answer: See answer to Question 19.

52. Pages 68-69, Section L, III Proposal Content, c) Socio-Economic Plan states, “The offeror shall address the extent of participation of small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions, veteran-owned small businesses, service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses, and HUBZone small businesses in performance of any resultant contract. The solicitation, however, does not require participation by such entities.”

This section also states, “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 and/or zero dollars for the contract and/or any socio-economic factor for which a target is not provided. However, an offeror that provides no socio-economic plan in response to this factor may be considered ineligible for award.”

Would the Government please clarify how the Socio-Economic Plan will be evaluated? Section L indicates a numerical evaluation for the Socio-Economic Plan goals; however, Section M states that “For all non-cost factors (other than Past Performance), an offeror’s proposal must be determined to be Acceptable or better to be eligible for award.” How will Acceptability for the Socio-Economic Plan be determined?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

53. Pages 72-73, Section M, Evaluation Criteria (2) 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.” Would the Government please provide the evaluation ratings that will be used to score Corporate Experience, Past Performance, and the Socio-Economic Plan?

Answer: See the answer to Question 21.

54. Will selected contractors be receiving or accessing any export control information other than that classified as EAR99 during an engagement?

Answer: No.

55. Will the services provided by selected contractors be listed/identified on the Commerce Control List (other than as EAR99) or the United States Munitions List?

56. Will selected contractors be directly or indirectly providing services to any non-U.S. persons in any engagement?

57. How many awards does the Government anticipate making for this effort?

Answer: The Government cannot provide an exact number of awards. Awards will be based on proposals that represent the best value to the Government.

58. Would the government allow the addition of a glossary to define acronyms in volume I that does not count against the page limit?

Answer: Yes, a glossary defining acronyms will not count against the page limit.

59. Section B of the solicitation states that the proposal may be emailed to the cognizant point of contact, but Section L of the solicitation states: “any method other than Hard Copy format are not acceptable.”

Please confirm that digital submittals via email are acceptable.

Answer: See the answer to Question 23.

60. With respect to the requirements below, 1) please specify all the content creation and simulation software that contractors will be required to utilize (e.g, VBS or MACE). 2) Please also specify any types of software needs that will be required to fill any gaps (e.g., scenario editor) that are keeping the customer from accomplishing below requirements. 3) Lastly, please identify which of the below requirements below will provide opportunities for contractors to recommend new software solutions.

· The contractor shall consult OPNAV N81 for Campaign scenario development and shall consult OPNAV 95, 96, 97, 98 & N2/N6 for respective Mission scenario development

· The contractor shall support continued use of existing scenarios and operational concepts, modifying them as required to meet revised Government objectives and to provide sufficient detail for use in naval and joint campaign analyses.

· The contractor shall perform these analyses by drawing upon a number of models and simulations including, but not limited to the following: Naval Simulation System (NSS), Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model (STORM), and Shipboard and Aviation Force Effectiveness for General Air….

· The contractor shall provide essential software design, development and integration support toward accomplishment of the above objectives

Answer:

1) Software requirements will be on a case by case basis. At this time, the Government cannot indicate if there will be specific software for the entire range of studies required. If there is a specific software tool necessary to complete the work, it will be specified in individual task order PWSs. Contractors having experience with a broad range of Verification and Validation Modeling & Stimulation tools will be useful.

2) The software needs will be on a case by case basis. Future requirements are largely unknown at this time, however some examples of specific types of software and models to be used are included in the PWS (i.e. GCAM, NSS, STORM, SAFEGARD)

3) When the requirement is established in the PWS of a Request for Quote at the task order level, contractors will have the opportunity to explain, in their quote, how they will conduct the work, what software they propose, and how it will be utilized.

61. Would the Government please clarify that offerors may submit a glossary of abbreviations that does not count against page count?

Answer: See the answer to Question 58.

62. The DD254 for the Navy Analytics Studies Program MAC N0018920RZ012 has a statement in it that reads “DD254 attachment New NASP MAC Program.docx. “ but there is no document that I can find on the Govt’s website. Can you please tell us where we can find this attachment?

Answer: The form was supposed to auto-populate the attachment as extension pages when the file is opened, but it is malfunctioning. See DD254 attachmen extension pages provided with this amendment.

63. Regarding Amendment 0004, we have identified a discrepancy between the answer to Question 33 and the conformed solicitation PWS Section 5.8 and Section L.III(2)(g), Volume II – Price/Cost instructions.

Question 33.Can the Government confirm if the values for CLIN's 0003 and 0004 should be increased by the contractor to include any applicable Indirect costs?

Answer: No, CLINs 0003 and 0004 are Not-to-Exceed amounts and any applicable indirect costs should be included in the CLIN amount.

Section L

“III(2)

(g) The offeror shall use the following estimated costs for travel and material amounts in preparing its cost proposal. These estimated amounts will be used as common evaluation amounts in all offerors’ proposals; the amounts specified below include no associated indirect costs. The offeror shall include the estimated travel and ODC costs specified below in its cost proposal, and load the costs appropriately with indirect costs. The estimated amounts below, plus indirect costs, as determined cost realistic by the Government, will be used in the evaluation of proposals, and will be included in resultant contracts as “not-to exceed” amounts under which the offeror will be permitted to invoice its actual costs.

Travel ODCs

**See PWS**”

PWS

“5.8. Travel

The estimated travel requirements are as follows. The estimated travel costs per contract period are not-to-exceed $2,000,000.00 (not including applicable indirect costs).”

The answer to Question 33 seems to contradict the solicitation instructions of the conformed solicitation.

Since the questions/answers are incorporated into the Conformed Solicitation, are the answers considered solicitation instructions and carry the same weight as the rest of the solicitation? If not, can you please confirm that we should only include the provided Travel/ODC amount in our price proposal and NOT add our indirect cost on top of the solicitation provided value?

Answer: Section L and paragraph 5.8 of the PWS have been revised to reflect the answer provided to Question 33, in that the Not-to-Exceed amounts for CLIN 0003 (Travel) and CLIN 0004 (ODCs) shall be inclusive of the offeror’s applicable indirect costs.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

Performance Work Statement (PWS) for Navy Analytic Studies Program OPNAV N8 and Navy Analytic Office (NAO) Revised 15 July 2019

1. Introduction

The Navy Analytic Office (NAO) aligns the analytic agenda to Chief of Naval Operations (CNO)’s strategic priorities while meeting the analytical requirements of the Fleet and Navy writ large. The intended outcome is synchronized modeling, simulation, wargames, experiments and exercises providing rich, shared data to support/refine warfighting concepts and to inform budget priorities/decisions. NAO’s responsibilities include creating and establishing the common analytic environment that supports the vision while collaborating across the Navy to ensure alignment with the Navy strategy, Design, and priorities.

The Deputy Chief of Naval Operations (DCNO) for Integration of Capabilities and Resources (N8) exercises centralized supervision and coordination of Navy’s capability analysis and assessments, allocation and integration of the Navy’s resources in the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) System, and determination of technical requirements. Within N8, the Navy Programming Division (N80) directs the Programming Phase of the PPBE process. N80 is responsible for final development and balancing of the Navy portion of the DoN Program Objectives Memorandum (POM) and for defending it through the annual Defense department program review process, which leads to the final Department of Defense (DoD) budget presented annually to Congress. The staff develops and implements procedures to collect, evaluate, and devise funding strategies to meet the programmatic priorities of the DoD, Secretary of the Navy, CNO, Fleet and Fleet Combatant Commanders.

2. Background

In the current maritime environment, characterized by an accelerating rate of technological evolution, and the challenges to win in the Great Power Competition described in the National Defense Strategy (NDS), the Navy requires a strategy-aligned analytic environment and process to rapidly and cumulatively build relevant knowledge. This approach enhances our Navy’s ability to learn and adapt faster than our adversaries. The analytic environment will derive from priorities in the Navy’s strategic and concept documents, and enable continuous learning from fleet exercises, experiments and war games to inform the decisions necessary to develop our architecture, design, plans and program portfolio.

Today’s Navy remains vital to our strategic goals, national security, and economic prosperity. The emerging strategic environment is defined by a combination of recognizable trends and consequential uncertainties. These recognizable trends and consequential uncertainties point toward an increased demand for maritime presence, power and influence achieved through both credible combat capabilities and collaborative approaches to security challenges. As the evolving security environment tests our ability to meet this demand, it is critical that the Navy closely align its investments with national strategy. In this environment, it is more important than ever that we identify and deliver the right capabilities for our future force.

In the wake of recent budget guidance, we must pursue our priorities effectively and efficiently; innovate to maximize our forward presence, evolve our warfighting capability and remain ready for today’s challenges even as we prepare for the future.

3. Scope

This Performance Work Statement (PWS) covers the use of modeling, simulation and analysis tools and techniques to support Navy’s performance of its analytic portfolio, as described in paragraphs 1 and 2. The contractor shall provide warfare and warfare support analyses and assessments, campaign analyses, mission level analyses, data analytics, modeling and simulation (M&S), and management and documentation support. The analytic support shall encompass all aspects of joint campaign, mission and engagement level modeling as well as manpower and personnel, training and education, infrastructure, long-term planning, policy, medical logistics planning, and both afloat and ashore readiness. The analytic capabilities will include experimentation, demonstrations, and wargaming elements that enable exploration of operational options and identification of operator objectives and considerations.

The contractor shall be required to provide coordination across the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) staff, the Fleet, Systems Commands (SYSCOMs), Combatant Commanders (COCOMs), Marine Corps and other Service Staffs, Joint Staff, and Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) staff.

4. Tasks

4.1 PROGRAM OBJECTIVE MEMORANDUM (POM) ASSESSMENT

4.1.1 Planning, Programming, Budgeting Execution (PPBE) Process Development

· Objective: The contractor shall provide overarching analyses and guidance to inform decision making across the Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) process. The objective of the PPBE process is to allocate resources within the Department of Defense (DOD). The results will be utilized to assess program priorities within the selected investment strategy and to support Navy programming. Documentation of this effort by the contractor will provide traceability for these results.

· Description: The contractor shall evaluate and integrate results from warfighting and warfighting support analyses and other sources as appropriate to develop analytical inputs for use in all phases of the PPBE process and shall conduct additional analyses functions. The contractor shall develop clear and concise formats for presenting system and cost effectiveness, warfighting and warfighting support (including, but not limited to Manpower, Personnel, Training & Education (MPT&E), Readiness, Infrastructure, and Operations) capability and program affordability that will facilitate comparison of alternative investment strategies. The presentation format for this integration effort must illustrate the priority of programs (including research and development activities) within each strategy such that vertical and horizontal budget adjustments can be made with known impact on Naval/Joint force capability. Technology assessment will include defining and documenting methods for transition of technology options into future architectures for Naval, Joint and Allied forces as well as performing and documenting technology assessments and forecasts that could include modeling and simulation of technology and systems.

· Deliverables: The contractor shall deliver a considerable number of products such as Plan of Action and Milestones (POA&M) reports, technical progress reports, final reports, technical briefs and meeting minutes on the schedule agreed to with the Government as specified in each task order.

4.1.2 Navy’s Analytic Agenda

· Objective: The contractor shall support Navy’s analytic efforts to: determine and evaluate shortfalls and redundancies in planned operational or support capabilities; evaluate key issues including deficiencies in warfighting capability; analyze priorities for needed capabilities; assess affordability of high payoff systems and technologies; assess effectiveness and affordability of alternative force structures; develop new analytic techniques for informing resource allocation decisions; conduct all campaign and warfare mission level analyses; and develop investment strategies.

· Description: The contractor shall provide technical, scientific and engineering support to OSD, Joint, and Navy corporate analytic agenda in defense planning scenarios (DPS), DPS Summary and Macro Views, Enhanced Planning Process (EPP), Strategic Planning Guidance (SPG) and participate in Capability Sponsors’ Integrated Processing Teams (IPTs). The contractor shall conduct technical and engineering studies, research and analyze various naval warfare mission areas and programs, war game results, and other sources as appropriate, including other relevant projects in which the contractor has participated. The contractor shall integrate the results of various analyses to determine the impact of variations in warfare systems and architectures on threat, U.S. and combined forces and strategies. Studies will vary in length from several months to one year.

· Deliverables: The contractor shall deliver a considerable number of products such as POA&M reports, technical progress reports, recommendations regarding priority of war-fighting gaps and programs, final reports, technical briefs and meeting minutes on the schedule agreed to with the Government as specified in each task order.

4.1.3 POM Improvement

· Objective: The contractor shall provide the development, testing, training and demonstration to support management decisions and investments that must show returns for investors to support POM development efforts. The contractor shall identify ways of improving the Navy’s ability to make more value-oriented recommendations on the allocation of resources to achieve given objectives.

· Description: The contractor shall analyze historical POM decision data and analyze improvements to portfolio management to inform data structures for future POM decisions. The contractor shall analyze the data framework to enable value-oriented decision-making for future POM development. The contractor shall tie Navy strategy and planning to resource requirements and measures for effective performance, including recommendations on the future POM to develop those plans and improve the process to maximize return on investments.

· Deliverables: The contractor shall deliver a considerable number of products such as POA&M reports, technical progress reports, final reports, technical briefs and meeting minutes on the schedule agreed to with the Government as specified in each task order.

4.2 WARFARE AND WARFARE SUPPORT ANALYSES

4.2.1 Analytic Framework for Capability Based Assessments and OSD/Joint Studies

· Objective: The contractor shall develop an analytic framework for each warfare analysis to be conducted.

· Description: The contractor shall develop analytic framework to support capability based assessments and analyses of platform sponsor’s products, campaign analyses and assessments for OPNAV, the Fleet, OSD/Joint Staff, and for Navy senior leadership decision forums.