N00189-20-R-Z038-0002 Conformed.docx

N0018920RZ038

N0018920RZ038

Section SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

NOTICE TO OFFERORS

BLOCK 27A

Due to system limitations, Box 27a on page one of the solicitation is blank. Please note Box 27a should be checked as FAR 52.212-1, 52.212-4, 52.212-3, and 52.212-5 are incorporated by reference and/or full text into the solicitation. Furthermore, an addendum (additional instructions) to FAR 52.212-1 is included in the solicitation.

POINT OF CONTACT /COMMUNICATION

The point of contact (POC) for this solicitation is Martyn Piggott who can be reached via email at martyn.piggott@navy.mil or via phone at 215-697-9638.

SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

The Navy Electronic Commerce OnLine (NECO) website has a “submit bid” button next to the solicitation number. Offerors are cautioned NOT to use the “submit bid” button on the NECO website to transmit or submit their proposal in response to the solicitation. The offeror’s proposal shall be in the form prescribed by and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified in Solicitation Addendum to 52.212-1, SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS. Initial proposals and any modifications thereto are to be submitted via e-mail to Martyn Piggott at martyn.piggott@navy.mil on or before the closing date and time cited elsewhere in the solicitation. Faxes and/or responses through NECO, or any other method, are not acceptable.

CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

Potential offerors are encouraged to carefully review all solicitation requirements and, if they have questions concerning the solicitation, should submit one consolidated list of questions concerning the solicitation via email to the solicitation point of contact, Martyn Piggott at martyn.piggott@navy.mil, NO LATER THAN 2:00 pm (local time/Philadelphia, PA) on 20 April 2020. Questions should be submitted as early as feasible prior to the above date and time; questions received later may be answered at the discretion of the Navy.

AMENDMENT 0002 – SUMMARY OF CHANGES

With regards to the draft DD254, the block 13 addendum has been updated to match the security requirements of the PWS. The updated draft DD254 has been uploaded with this solicitation amendment and is titled DD254 (Rev. 1) 042820.

Updated versions of the following FAR clauses and provisions were incorporated into the solicitation:

FAR 52.212-1, FAR 52,212-3, and FAR 52.212-5.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

1. Question: Are all subcontractors required to have a Top Secret Facility Clearance for this contract, or just the Prime offeror?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

AMENDMENT 0001 – SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The pricing spreadsheet has been revised and uploaded as an attachment to this solicitation amendment. The revised document name is Pricing Sheet (Rev. 1). The revision now includes the price for Travel and the number of hours that equate to a full-time-equivalent (FTE). References to the pricing sheet throughout the solicitation are hereby referring to the revised pricing sheet titled Pricing Sheet (Rev. 1).

Instructions pertaining to the submission of subcontractor information have been revised.

Language has been added to the section titled SECURITY ADMINISTRATION requiring the cognizant security office information for all subcontractors. This requirement was previously listed in Section III. Proposal Content and has been moved for the purpose of clarity.

A minor typing mistake in 52.216-1 has been corrected.

As all proposals are to be submitted electronically via e-mail, the requirement to identify “original signature copies” has been removed.

The instructions pertaining to page limitations have been revised to allow for a glossary of acronyms, which is limited to one page, and the table of contents, which is now limited to two pages. A note was also added about the Past Performance Form margins.

The draft DD254 has been uploaded with this amendment. This draft DD254 matches the D254 that was uploaded with the original solicitation and is being re-uploaded for ease of accessibility.

The free text titled SUBCONTRACTING PLAN has been revised to be clear that the information relevant to that section will be filled in by the Government at the time of award.

In Section III. Proposal Content (1)(c), the sentence that previously stated “Targets will be incorporated into and become part of any resultant contract” has been removed. In accordance with the section titled SUBCONTRACTING PLAN, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into and become part of the resultant contract.

The following information in the Performance Work Statement has been revised:

· “Complimentary” information and services changed to “complementary” throughout.

· The “Instructor” labor category in the solicitation has been replaced with “Training Specialist”.

· Paragraph 1.6.10: changed from “Government employees” to “COR”.

· Paragraph 4.1.5: ability to meet 85% staffing has been removed.

· Paragraph 1.6.8.1: security requirements have been re-worded to be clear.

· Paragraph 1.7.1.2: requirements have been clarified.

· Paragraph 1.6.3: contractor-site has been added as a location.

· Paragraph 1.7.6: no longer requires proof of personnel’s qualifications, skills, and training to be provided in the proposal.

· Paragraph 4.2.3: the reference to kick-off meeting has been removed and the requirement clarified.

· Paragraphs 4.1.2 and 4.1.2.1: revised to make it clear phase-in tasks occur at the task-order level and the requirement to address Information Assurance 8570 certifications has been removed.

· Paragraph 4.3.1.1: clarified the minimum period to be covered by the long-range training plan.

· SECNAVINST references have been updated.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

2. Question: Is there an incumbent?

Answer: No. This requirement is being processed as a new requirement.

3. Question: Would the customer consider splitting the volumes or exclude past performance from the page count?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face and remains unchanged.

4. Question: Would the customer provide the current incumbent for this work? Providing a transition plan to support Subtask 4.1.2 is not clear without knowledge of incumbency.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent. Additionally, the solicitation has been revised to make it clear subtask 4.1.2 shall be completed at the task order level. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

5. Question: If no incumbent is available, would the customer allow a phase-in and phase-out plan without a transition plan within the management volume?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

6. Question: During Phase-In (4.1.2.1) the customer describes issuance of the task order but does not specify what task order is awardable upon award of the base IDIQ. Would the customer clarify what tasks are awardable upon IDIQ award to allow industry to provide a comprehensive phase-in response within the management volume?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

7. Question: Page 91 Subcontracting Plan, states that subcontracting plan is not required for Small Business offerors. Does this allow a small business offeror to exclude a socio-economic plan without penalty? Specifically, language on page 99 that states “If the offeror fails to provide targets for the contract and/or any of the six socio-economic categories, 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.”

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. Reference Page 99: “The Socio-economic Plan factor and the separate requirement for submission of a Small Business Subcontracting Plan are included in the solicitation in an effort to promote small business participation under the solicitation and the resultant contract. The Socio-Economic Plan is a non-price evaluation factor and is separate and distinct from the requirement for the offeror to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. All offerors, including small business concerns, must submit a socio-economic plan and may designate themselves as the primary or sole contractor on the effort.”

8. Question: The customer provides an $180,000.00 travel estimate to be used for evaluation of price but does not provide a travel CLIN within Attachment 1. Would the customer clarify how the offeror should propose travel within their price response?

Answer: The pricing spreadsheet has been revised to incorporate the travel amount. The revised pricing spreadsheet has been uploaded to beta.sam.gov along with solicitation amendment 0001.

9. Question: On page 101, the customer states “Any and all subcontracts identified in the non-price proposal shall be identified and priced in the price proposal. Subcontracts (regardless of dollar value) shall be adequately documented. Subcontractor price breakdowns may be submitted in separate sealed envelopes.” Will the customer be providing sealed submission instructions? Can the offeror submit one pricing volume for the team provided the workshare is broken down within the management volume?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

10. Question: On page 101, there is a note stating “NOTE: The prime contractor shall provide a list of all its subcontractors, the type of contract it will hold with each subcontractor (i.e. CPFF, FFP, LH, etc.), the value of each subcontract and the cognizant Security Office (name, address, and identification code) for each subcontractor.” Is the offeror to provide this information within the price volume or management volume or both?

Answer: This section has been revised. The information that is now required shall be submitted in the price volume. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

11. Question: On page 7 the customer states “all contractors working at an on-site or off-site location or Contractor’s facility in support of the classified portions of this contract must currently hold at a minimum an Interim Secret clearance.” Will the customer clarify which labor categories and locations, on-site (Suffolk, VA or Pentagon) and off-site, will require a TS clearance and which an Interim Secret would be acceptable?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. All labor categories, regardless of location of performance, must meet the security requirements of the solicitation. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

12. Question: What are the parameters of the “Contractor Facility” hours?

Answer: The hours should minimally match the hours of operations that are specified in the performance work statement (PWS).

13. Question: PWS 1.6.8.3, 3.2, and 3.3 – Would the Government clarify if a local contractor facility is required to support task performance and if so, what level of safeguarding is required.

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. The solicitation does not require a local contractor facility. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

14. Question: The scope of the PWS states “Support, as ordered, shall be provided to the AD, Information Management Division (IMD), and the offices under Directorate of Management (DOM).” Could the government provide the current organizational structure of the Joint Staff Director of Management showing the Actions Division, Information Management Division, Secretariat, Joint Staff, Administrative Services Branch, Customer Services Branch, and other Director of Management offices that will be supported?

Answer: This information will be provided upon contract award; however, a general overview of the Directorate of Management (DOM) is available on the www.jcs.mil. The Actions Division and Information Management Division are within the Office of the Secretary, Joint Staff.

15. Question: Section 4.1.2.2 Phase-Out: The phase-out takes place at the end of task order performance and, if applicable, will address the transition to the next Contractor at the end of this contract. The level of detail for the plan must be sufficient for the Government, the current Contractor, and next Contractor. During phase-out the Contractor shall present the transition plan to Government, which may be provided to a new Contractor. Will the awardee be provided a Transition Plan?

Answer: No. This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent. Consequently, there will be no transition plan to provide to the awardee.

16. Question: Section 4.1.5 Quarterly Program Status Reviews (QPSR): This sections the Contractor’s ability to meet the 85% staffing level requirement, status of hiring actions, and projected schedules, e.g., leave, holidays, etc. When is the Contractor expected to meet the 85% staffing level?

Answer: Section 4.1.5 has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

17. Question: Section 4.2 .1 and 4.2.2: These section discuss Executive Support Functions “…program planning, management, and execution support through a variety of means, to include but not limited to, providing information, advice, opinions, alternatives, analyses, recommendations, program and technical management, program planning and oversight, technical evaluation, training and/or services, preparation for and participation in meetings, working groups, receiving and handling telephone calls, responding to emails and monitoring task management systems for actions that require Joint Staff and Combatant Command equities.” Sections 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 are Executive Support Functions requiring SMEs possessing SES/FO/GO levels of Knowledge. None of the listed Labor Cats cover this level of Subject Matter Expertise. What Labor Cat did the government envision filling this requirement?

Answer: The contractor, and not the Joint Staff, shall assign labor categories based on the requirements specified in the PWS. The labor categories specified in the pricing worksheet and delineated in the PWS minimum personnel requirements encompass the Government’s estimates for the totality of the RFP requirements.

18. Question: Section 4.3 Joint Staff Actions Processing Training Support: This section states that the “Contractor shall assist the Government by delivering a suite of on-the-job, hands-on, technical training to Joint Staff personnel who will participate in the Joint Staff’s decision-making process, also known as the Joint Staff Actions Process (JSAP) or support. Training courses shall be conducted primarily at two separate facilities—the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and Joint Staff – South in Suffolk, Virginia, or remotely outside of these areas. The Contractor will deliver this training through variety of methods and means, which include but are not limited to classroom, instructor-led, web-based instruction, desk side assistance and other instructional methods. In order to facilitate learning, the Contractor should expect to provide physical products such as handouts, pamphlets, training documents, templates, guides, acronym guides, etc.” How and when will the Contractor receive update training on the newest version of the JSAP-Next decision-making tool/software?

Answer: The contractor should not presume that a newer version is on the horizon; rather, that upon contract award, it will receive proper orientation on the Joint Staff’s decision-making tool.

19. Question: Do handouts, pamphlets; training documents, templates, guides, acronym guides, etc. currently exist for JSAP training? If so when will they be provided? They are critical to enable the Prime to satisfactorily complete these requirements.

Answer: All relevant information will be provided to the selected vendor upon contract award.

20. Question: Section 4.3.2 JSTP Administration: This section states that the “Contractor shall support the administration of JSTP programs and activities, using a LMS to assist the Government with the administration, documentation, tracking, reporting, and delivery of JSTP training courses.” Is the government currently using a LMS? If so which LMS is being used?

Answer: This information will be provided by the Government upon contract award.

21. Question: Section 4.3.3 Facilitate an interactive Brown Bag on Joint Staff Actions Processing: This section states that “the Contractor shall support the delivery of training through a multitude of formats, primarily at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia and occasionally at the Joint Staff – South in Suffolk, Virginia or remotely as required by the Government. The frequency of these courses is on a weekly, monthly, quarterly, and as-needed basis, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The Government reserves the right to change frequency, time, location and method of delivery for any training course. Class size shall not exceed 32 students at any given time. The Contractor shall, in coordination with Government SMEs, administer or facilitate interactive brown bag courses. These sessions shall be conducted within 5 calendar days of the Government’s tasking, or within the timeline established in the Long Range JSAP Training Plan.” Are Brown Bag courses conducted during standard lunch periods or are they conducted as stated for typical courses from 0800 to 1700?

Answer: Administration of all learning activities, to include brown bags, will be conducted consistent with the responsibilities of the Joint Staff Training Program as detailed in the respective resultant task order.

22. Question: Section 4.4.1 Develop a Concept of Operations (CONOPS) and Implementation Plan for a Customer Service Help Desk: This section states that “AD serves as the Joint Staff’s information clearinghouse, with the responsibility for preparing, handling, and disseminating more than 20,000 written products, across its three branches, throughout the U.S. Government. Annually, AD receives, processes, and approves more than 2,000 requests for extensions; receives, processes; handles more than 10,000 public inquiries addressed to the Top-4 and Director, DOM; receives and resolve JSAP-Next-related inquiries from Joint Staff personnel in Hampton Roads and the Pentagon; and distributes more than 7,000 staff actions, correspondence, and mail throughout the Joint Staff, DoD, and U.S. Government. Currently, these activities are occurring in a silo’ed, stove-piped manner across AD branches, which hinders the Chief, AD’s ability to synchronize its activities. AD is creating a Customer Service Help Desk (HD) to provide integrate the Division’s activities; provide AD’s vast customer base with a single point of entry into the JSAP; and handle its 20,000+ annual written products. The HD will, among other activities, provide customer service support to AD’s CSB, ASB, JSTP, and SJS. Is there a current AD Help Desk? It doesn’t appear that there is since “Within 60 calendar days of issuance of a task order for this task, the Contractor shall submit for the Government’s approval, a draft CONOPS and Implementation Plan to operate a Customer Service HD. The Government may approve the consolidation of these documents.”

Answer: Currently there is no AD Help Desk.

23. Question: Are all course POIs and associated training support material government property that will be provided to the awarded contractor?

Answer: Upon award, all course POIs and associated training support material will be provided.

24. Question: Page 10, PWS paragraph 1.7.1.2 Education and Experience, says that the program manager shall minimally possess a four-year degree in a business-related field with 8 years of professional experience managing projects of a similar size and complexity. A certified Project Management Professional (PMP) is required. However, the next sentence states, A PgM with a graduate degree and is a certified PMP is highly desired. Please clarify if a PMP is required or just desired for the Program Manager position.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

25. Question: Will the Government consider an alternative for the requirement of a PMP certification to or a DAWIA Certification which also defines strict program management support capability?

Answer: No. The solicitation is clear on its face.

26. Question: Throughout the solicitation, the Government refers to Tasks and Task Orders. Will individual Task Orders be issued under the resultant award or is this terminology being used for the work performed under the contract?

Answer: The Government contemplates award of a single Firm, Fixed-Price, Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity type (FFP, IDIQ) contract resulting from this solicitation. It is intended to issue FFP task orders against the IDIQ contract.

27. Question: If the Government intends to issue Task Orders, will a quote be required for each Task Order to include a technical and pricing submission?

Answer: At the task order level, the Government intends on requesting a price quote for each Task Order.

28. Question: Will task orders only be issued for surge task or will they be issued for other than the Actions Division (Information Management Division (IMD), and the offices under Directorate of Management (DOM)?

Answer: It is intended to issue separate task orders for each different office. If surge support is ordered, it may be modified into existing task orders or issued as a standalone task order.

29. Question: 10 point font is typically easier to read for charts, diagrams, tables, and/or other graphics. Will the Government consider allowing 10-point font for charts, diagrams, tables, and/or other graphics?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

30. Question: As stated in the PWS, “The contractor shall not remove and/or store any documentation, files or materials from Government facilities or property without obtaining prior approval from the COR first.” Are documents anticipated to be stored at the contractor facility and working remotely when requirements such as COVID-19 occur?

Answer: When necessary, the Joint Staff will provide guidance and directions to the contractor at the task order level.

31. Question: Is contractor support to this office considered essential?

Answer: No. Contractor support under this contract does not entail “essential services”.

32. Question: Will the Government provide a draft NDA that contractor employees will be required to sign after award?

Answer: No.

33. Question: On page 7, in 1.6.8.1 of the PWS, the two paragraphs seem to conflict. Will the Government consider providing a draft DD254?

Answer: A draft DD254 was uploaded with the solicitation. It can be reviewed by clicking “Click here for Additional Documents” under the “Trading Partner/Order/Currency Information” section at the top of the NECO website. The same draft DD254 was re-attached to amendment 0001 of the solicitation for convenience. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

34. Question: Will the customer allow additional experience in lieu of degree for the Labor Categories listed?

Answer: No. The solicitation is clear on its face.

35. Question: Pricing Spreadsheet – Would the Government clarify if the indicated total hours for each labor category are the Government’s best estimate of hours for the work scope or merely “plug figures” for comparing offeror pricing. This information will enable offerors to better provide Past Performance references that are relevant in magnitude/size.

Answer: These hours in the pricing spreadsheet are the Government’s best estimate.

36. Question: PWS1.6.8.1 – Would the Government clarify if an Interim Top Secret clearance is acceptable for assignment within the Joint Staff. The first sentence indicates Interim or Final Top Secret is required, yet the last sentence appears to indicate only a Final clearance is acceptable.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

37. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.1.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

38. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.2.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

39. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.3.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

40. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.4.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

41. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.5.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

42. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.6.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

43. Question: PWS 4.1.2 – Would the Government clarify if there is an incumbent for the work of PWS 4.7.x? If so, please provide the contractor’s name and whether the incumbent has a “phase-out” contract requirement.

Answer: This requirement is being processed as a new requirement and there is no incumbent.

44. Question: PWS 4.1.2.2 – Would the Government clarify if a contract-level Phase In Plan is required or if the Plan is only due at the Task Order level.

Answer: Paragraph 4.1.2 has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

45. Question: PWS 4.2.5 – Would the Government clarify if the Documentation Repository is to be maintained on the contractor’s network or on a government network. The last paragraph indicates “…Upon completion or termination of the contract, transition the entire Documentation Repository to the Government…” Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. The Joint Staff is furnishing all equipment for work performed under this contract; therefore, the contractor will not remove any information without the Joint Staff’s permission.

46. Question: PWS 4.2.5 – Would the Government clarify if the current document depository will be transitioned to the successful offeror to maintain.

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. The awardee, under task orders issued for this task, shall be responsible for developing and maintaining an electronically accessible compendium of program documentation. The Joint Staff currently has intranet portals with extensive information that serve as document repositories.

47. Question: PWS 4.3.1.4 – Would the Government confirm whether there are currently approved programs of instruction and training materials for each of the six courses that will be made available to the successful offeror.

Answer: Yes, programs of instructions exist for all courses; however, vendors should carefully review the requirements throughout the PWS, as this provides ample guidance on the contract requirements.

48. Question: PWS 4.4.1 – Would the Government clarify if an Actions Division Concept of Operations for the Customer Service Help Desk currently exists which will be made available for the successful offeror.

Answer: An Actions Division Concept of Operations does not currently exist for the Help Desk.

49. Question: Solicitation page 97, II (3) – Since proposal submission is to be via email, would the Government clarify what is meant for each Volume by “Identification of original signature copies.”

Answer: The language in the solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

50. Question: On page 97-98 of the solicitation, Section L, paragraph II, subparagraph (5) Page Limitations, the Government does not mention a glossary of acronyms. Would the Government like for offerors to include one and, if so, please confirm it would be excluded from the page limit?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

51. Question: Is the Socio-economic Plan, which is listed under the Volume I requirements in paragraph (c) on page 99 of the solicitation, included in the 16-page limit on Volume I - Non-price Proposal?

Answer: Yes. The solicitation is clear on its face.

52. Question: On page 101, Section L Volume II – Price, paragraph (1)(f), the “NOTE” requires offerors to provide the Cognizant Security Office (name, address, and identification code) for each subcontractor. As this section relates to price, is the Government looking for the DCAA/DCMA cognizant office, or is the requirement indeed for the cognizant DSCA (formerly DSS) office?

Answer: Neither. The Government is looking for a POC for the subcontractor’s cognizant Security Office. This language has been removed from the instructions pertaining to the pricing section and the requirement has been moved to the free text titled SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

53. Question: The RFP identifies an “Instructor” labor category in paragraph 1.7.3 on page 11, please confirm this labor category is the same as the “Training Specialist” listed in the pricing workbook?

Answer: The “Instructor” labor category in the solicitation have been replaced with “Training Specialist”. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

54. Question: Section 4.2.5 Subtask – Documentation Repository states that the contractor shall develop and maintain an electronically accessible compendium of program documentation. Does this mean that this repository does not currently exist? Or is the contractor assuming control of the appropriate portions of an existing document repository and responsibility for maintaining / improving it?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. The awardee, under task orders issued for this task, shall be responsible for developing and maintaining an electronically accessible compendium of program documentation. The Joint Staff currently has intranet portals with extensive information that serve as document repositories.

55. Question: The PWS states “The contractor shall be required to possess an Interim or final Top Secret, or a Top Secret with Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) access based on a Tier 5 investigation prior to reporting to any assignment within Joint Staff.” In the next paragraph it states, “All Contractors working at an on-site or off-site location or Contractor’s facility in support of the classified portions of this is contract must currently hold at a minimum an Interim Secret clearance.” Will the Government please confirm if there is a minimum personnel security clearance for all contractor employees established at the IDIQ level, and what that clearance is (Interim Secret, Top Secret, or TS/SCI) by labor category, or if the actual Contractor candidate clearance levels will be established at the task order level?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

56. Question: Attachment II—DD254 was not included in the RFP package. Will the Government please provide the DD254?

Answer: A draft DD254 was uploaded with the solicitation. Due to limitations with NECO, only a total of four documents could be initially uploaded. Therefore, the DD254 had to be uploaded to a different section. It can be reviewed by clicking “Click here for Additional Documents” under the “Trading Partner/Order/Currency Information” section at the top of the NECO website. The same draft DD254 was re-attached to amendment 0001 of the solicitation for convenience.

57. Question: On page 91, the solicitation states that the subcontracting plan is, “To be completed at time of award.” However, under Submissions of Proposals, Vol II, the instructions state the offeror’s small business contracting plan is required as part of the price volume. Will the government confirm if the small business contracting plan is required at the time of proposal submission?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

58. Question: The instructions state that all PDF proposal submissions will be “locked and searchable.” Please confirm if by ‘locked’ the Government means password protected. If it does not mean password protected, please clarify what it means by ‘locked.’ Please confirm that by ‘searchable’ the Government means the Adobe Acrobat word search function is not disabled? If that is not the case, please clarify what it means by ‘searchable.’

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

59. Question: The RFP instructions state, “The table of contents should provide detail sufficient to allow the important elements to be easily located.“ It also states “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 the table of contents to exceed one page to ensure sufficient detail is provided and include a Table of Figures and Tables? Will the Government allow a Glossary/Acronym list outside the page count limit?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

60. Question: The RFP instructions specify that Volume I, “Non-Price Proposal” not exceed 16 pages and that those 16 pages include the 3 “Past Performance Information Forms.” Each past performance form consists of almost ½ page of administrative contract data, providing little remaining space to provide relevant past performance information for the Government to adequately assess performance quality. Will the Government consider increasing the page count for Volume I to 20 pages to allow for two page past performance information forms? Or exclude the Past Performance Information Forms from the 16 page Volume I page limit?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

61. Question: Under the Socio-economic plan requirement, the Government states, “The offeror shall address the extent of participation of small businesses, small Under the Socio-economic plan requirement, the Government states, “The offeror shall address the extent of participation of small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, women-owned small businesses, 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.” The RFP also states, “[A]n offeror that provides no socio-economic plan in response to this factor may be considered ineligible for award,” and that “The solicitation does not establish separate small business participation objectives for the Socio-economic Plan evaluation factor.” Please clarify under what circumstances that failure to provide a socio-economic plan may make an offeror ineligible for award if the solicitation does not require participation by the listed socio-economic entities? Since the socio-economic plan is an evaluation criteria, please clarify how the government plans to evaluate the plans? If the Government intends to use an acceptable/unacceptable criteria, please provide the metrics by which the plan will be deemed acceptable.

Answer: The socio-economic plan evaluation will NOT be evaluated using acceptable/unacceptable or pass/fail criteria. The socio-economic plan evaluation with comply with the “Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures” memorandum issued on 1 April, 2016. A copy of the memorandum can be viewed at the below link:

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA004370-14-DPAP.pdf

62. Question: The RFP states, “The non-price evaluation factors are Management Approach, Past Performance and Socio-economic Plan. Management Approach and Past Performance are of equal importance to each other, and are each significantly more important than Socio-Economic Plan.” However, no specific criteria is provided for each of the elements of the non-price volume. Criteria ensures a common set of metrics from which to measure and rate each offer. Please provide the criteria, and any associated rating scale(s), that the government intends to use for evaluation of the non-price volume.

Answer: The Technical and Past Performance evaluation will comply with the “Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures” memorandum issued on 1 April, 2016. A copy of the memorandum can be viewed at the below link:

http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/USA004370-14-DPAP.pdf

63. Question: The pricing sheet does not include a line or cell in which to include the $180,000 travel amount designated as the not to exceed travel costs in the solicitation instructions (pp. 100 & 102). Please provide an updated pricing attachment template with a place for the travel amount to be included; or please clarify why it was excluded from the excel template.

Answer: The pricing spreadsheet has been revised to incorporate the travel amount. The revised pricing spreadsheet has been uploaded to beta.sam.gov along with solicitation amendment 0001. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

64. Question: Currently the Past Performance Form table exceeds the 1-inch margins specified in the proposal instructions. Please clarify that Attachment IV is excluded from the 1-inch margin requirement specified in the Instructions to Offerors.

Answer: Yes. The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

65. Question: The Past Performance Form requires “Total dollar amount for PAST five (5) years.” The form as written does not ask for total awarded value of the contract, thereby missing relevant data to reflect “full scope and magnitude of the effort.” This prevents an accurate assessment of both ongoing contracts and recent, older contracts that expired within the past five years. Will the Government please change the PPF to read “Total dollar amount for each year of the contract”?

Answer: The offeror may provide this information. However, only the scope and magnitude of effort performed within the past five years (as of solicitation closing) will be considered in the evaluation. The Past Performance Form has not been revised.

66. Question: The solicitation states, “(f) Any and all subcontracts identified in the Non-price proposal shall be identified and priced in the price proposal. Subcontracts (regardless of dollar value) shall be adequately documented. Subcontractor price breakdowns may be submitted in separate sealed envelopes.” Question: Since the anticipated award for this solicitation is a single Firm, Fixed-Price, Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), without clearly defined Task Orders for the entire Period of Performance (PoP), the offeror is unable to provide a credible proposal that defines precise allocation of subcontractor hours by labor category, hence, the requirement for Subcontractor documentation and price breakdown is unclear. Additionally, the only case in which the Government generally requires a separate sealed envelope from a Subcontractor is when a Subcontract Agreement is expected to be CPFF. Please clarify this requirement.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

67. Question: The solicitation states, “NOTE: The prime contractor shall provide a list of all its subcontractors, the type of contract it will hold with each subcontractor (i.e. CPFF, FFP, LH, etc.), the value of each subcontract and the cognizant Security Office (name, address, and identification code) for each subcontractor.” Question: Without clearly defined Task Orders for the entire IDIQ PoP, the offeror is unable to state with certainty the value, or type, of each Subcontract. Please clarify this requirement.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

68. Question: Will the Government allow a Compliance Matrix to be submitted with the proposal outside of the page count?

Answer: No. A compliance matrix is not a requirement of the solicitation.

69. Question: Are resumes included or excluded in the total proposal page count?

Answer: Paragraphs 1.7.6 of the PWS has been revised. Resumes are not a requirement of the solicitation. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

70. Question: Does the government intend for one winner or multiple for this IDIQ?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

71. Question: Should the contractor assume 1,920 hours for each FTE listed in the Attachment 1 – Pricing Sheet?

Answer: Yes. This definition of a Full Time Equivalent has been incorporated into the revised pricing spreadsheet. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

72. Question: Section 1.6.3- Place of Performance does not include a Contractor Site as a place of performance, however there are hours identified in the Pricing Sheet that indicate work will be performed at a Contractor Site. Please clarify. If work is expected to be performed at a Contractor Site we request an amendment to include it in Section 1.6.3. If work is not to be performed at the Contractor Site we request an amendment Pricing Sheet.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

73. Question: Section 1.6.3- Place of Performance states the “contractor may also be required to provide support to the Joint Staff in Suffolk, VA.” Is the support to the Joint Staff Suffolk, VA facility expected to be provided by contractors that primarily perform at the Pentagon and only travel to the Joint Staff Suffolk, VA facility to support the requirements?

Answer: The precise place of performance will be defined at the task order level.

74. Question: Section 1.6.4- Hours of Operation states the “Contractor support may be required on weekends, at the request of the Government and at no additional cost, and may be regular, irregular, or episodic”? To effectively price this effort will you provide a more definitive estimate for the frequency of weekend support?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. DOM, and its organizations, supports the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s 24/7/365 responsibilities; regrettably at this time, it is neither possible, nor practical for the Government to presume the frequency or hours of this support. To the greatest extent possible, AD works to avoid weekend operations. This is a new requirement and there is no historical information or data that can be leveraged to provide such information.

75. Question: Section 1.6.8.1- Clearance Level states the “contractor shall be required to possess an Interim or final Top Secret, or a Top Secret with Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) access based on a Tier 5 investigation prior to reporting to any assignment within Joint Staff.” The next paragraph appears to contradict the Top Secret or SCI requirement because it allows for an Interim Secret clearance at on-site locations. Our interpretation of an on-site location is one of the Joint Staff facilities identified in Section 1.6.3. Will you please clarify the security clearance requirement?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

76. Question: We request that the labor hours for the Program Manager be increased from 960 hours per year to 1,920 hours per year to sufficiently support a potentially 28 FTE contract.

Answer: The requirement being solicited is NOT a Fixed-Price, Level of Effort contract type. The hours provided in the pricing spreadsheet are the Government’s best estimate of hours required for successful accomplishment of the PWS requirements and are being utilized for the purposes of establishing ordering maximums for labor rates and for the accumulative total value of task orders. The awardee will be responsible for quoting pricing in response to the Government’s Request for Quotation at the task order level.

77. Question: Section 1.7.3 contains the labor category of Instructor. We suspect this is the same as the Training Specialist identified on the Pricing Spreadsheet. Please confirm these are the same and amend the appropriate solicitation document so to identify the correct labor category title.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

78. Question: Section 1.7.6- Qualifications and Skills Requirements states proof of all qualifications “shall be provided to the Government in the proposal…” This requirement is not identified in Requirements for Proposal Content or Evaluation Criteria. Are resumes required for the ID/IQ proposal submission or is this just at the task order proposal level?

Answer: Paragraph 1.7.6 has been revised. Resumes are not required as part of the offeror’s proposal. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

79. Question: Section 1.7.6- Qualifications and Skills Requirements states contractors must ensure personnel that “require a technical application and understanding possess, obtain and maintain industry-approved certifications and qualifications.” Furthermore, in Section 4.1.2.1- Phase-In contractors are required to address Information Assurance 8570 certification compliance. Other than the Program Manager who must be a certified PMP, no certifications are identified as a requirement in the Labor Category, Qualifications, and Skill Requirements. Please identify any other required certifications for each labor category. If only the Program Manager requires a certification, the reference to Information Assurance 8570 certifications should be removed.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

80. Question: Section 4.2.1 item 1) identifies administrative support services that include but are not limited to newspaper distribution, security management, human resources and personnel management support, planning for and execution of awards programs, ceremonies and events. These duties do not fit within the description of any of the labor category descriptions. We request that this requirement is removed or an additional labor categories are added to incorporate these duties and a requisite education and experience.

Answer: The contractor, and not the Joint Staff, shall assign labor categories based on the requirements specified in the PWS. The labor categories specified in the pricing worksheet and delineated in the PWS minimum personnel requirements encompass the Government’s estimates for the totality of the RFP requirements.

81. Question: In Section 4.2.3 does the four working hour completion deadline pertain only to the kick-off meeting minutes? Depending on the unknown complexity of other tasks within this section, completion within four working hours may not be feasible.

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

82. Question: Does the Documentation Repository referred to in Section 4.2.5 already exist? If so what is the common name of the Documentation Repository and what software and computer languages does it consist of? If it does not exist and this is new development, does the government have any preference as to the platform used to build the Documentation Repository?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face. The awardee, under task orders issued for this task, shall be responsible for developing and maintaining an electronically accessible compendium of program documentation. The Joint Staff currently has intranet portals with extensive information that serve as document repositories.

83. Question: Section 4.2.5 item 1) references information maintained at the Joint Staff locations at the Pentagon and Hampton Roads. Is all the information in electronic format? If so, does location matter as the Document Repository would likely be web based and accessible from any location with the proper credentials and NIPR/ SIPR access?

Answer: All of the information is in electronic format.

84. Question: In Section 4.3 web-based instruction is mentioned. Under this contract is the contractor expected to develop web-based instruction? If so what level of interactivity? Depending on the level of interactivity graphic designers and other skill-sets not identified in the existing labor categories may be required.

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

85. Question: How far in the future does long-range planning as identified in Section 4.3.1.1 consist of?

Answer: The solicitation has been revised. See the RFP conformed through Amendment 0001 for details.

86. Question: Is JKO the only LMS that the Government intends to utilize as identified in Section 4.3.2? If not what other platforms may be used? Will the contractor need to provide/develop and LMS?

Answer: The solicitation is clear on its face.

87. Question: Will the contractor be provided the material for the courses identified in Section 4.3.1.4?

Answer: Upon contract award, the Joint Staff will provide additional information for all tasks described throughout this PWS.

88. Question: In Section 4.4.1 it states normal hours of operations are from 7:00a.m.