N00421-16-R-0088_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS.docx

N00421-16-R-0088 – SOLICITATION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Question 1: The magnitude requirement for past performance is listed as $35M. Will past performance submissions with values less than $35M be considered not relevant, and not evaluated? If a robust competition is desired by the Government, a contract value of $20M for multiple contracts would still provide adequate confidence in a company’s ability to successfully execute this contract and would significantly increase the competitive field within the 541330 NAICS code.

Answer 1: Section M, Part A, Paragraph 2.0 Past Performance states “More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Performance Confidence Assessment Rating than past performance of lesser relevance”. The Relevancy definition in Section M, Part C, Paragraph 4.0 Other Definitions “is the measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance”. Magnitude is only one aspect of relevancy, and an overall relevancy rating will take into consideration all aspects as outlined in the definition.

Question 2: Do key personnel who are contingent employees require two separate letters – a contingent offer letter and a letter of intent?

Answer 2: In accordance with Section L, Part B, Paragraph 1.3.2.2 “If the “Key” employee is a contingent hire, the Offeror shall submit a corresponding letter of intent in Volume 4. The letter of intent is a separate written agreement signed by the potential employee(s) to work for the Offeror effective at task order award”.

Section L, Part B, Paragraph 3.3(c) inadvertently states “For contingent hires, the Offeror shall provide contingent offer letters outlining salary information for contingent hire employees”. In order to address this ambiguity, Paragraph 3.3(c) will be updated in a forthcoming amendment to read: “For contingent hires, the Offeror shall provide letters of intent outlining salary information for contingent hire employees.”

A letter of intent is required for all Key personnel who are contingent employees.

Question 3: Section M, Part B, is missing paragraph 4.0. The paragraphs jump from 3.0 to 5.0. Should 5.0 be renumbered as 4.0?

Answer 3: Paragraph 5.0 should be renumbered as 4.0 and will be updated in a forthcoming amendment.