RFP_Amendment_05.pdf

Research Service Section Support

Amendment of Solicitation No. RFP N02TR-17-4002

Amendment No.: 05

Amendment date: 7/24/2017

Due Date for Proposals: August 2, 2017. 3:00 pm Eastern (unchanged)

Issued by:

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences NINDS R&D Contracts Management Branch 6001 Executive Boulevard Suite 3287, MSC 9531 Bethesda, Maryland 20892-9531

Primary Point of Contact: Secondary Point of Contact:

Jeffrey Schmidt, Contracting Officer Stuart Kern, Contract Specialist Phone: (301) 402-1488 Phone: (301) 402-3334 E-Mail: schmidtjr@mail.nih.gov E-Mail: stuart.kern@nih.gov

NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR: To All Offerors

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth below. Offerors must acknowledge receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter, provided each letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

PURPOSE: To respond to questions submitted to the Government

All other terms and conditions of the RFP remain unchanged.

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

1. Is there an incumbent? If so, who is it, what is contract number, what is contract value? Is the incumbent a WOSB that is eligible to bid?

This is a new requirement. However, Digital Infuzion currently provides these services. See answers 4 and 5 of Amendment 04.

2. We are a WOSB SBA Approved Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture. The 51% controlling protégé member is assessed at CMMI-DEV-3. Do we correctly assume that under these circumstances, we meet the requirement for CMMI-DEV-3? In NCATS recent CIOSP3-8A solicitation C-39855-8A [using the NITAAC GWAC], NCATS provided that “It is adequate for the team proposed to have CMMI- DEV3 experience and qualification by a sub/teaming partner. Whether a company has CMMI- DEV3 qualification is not a hard requirement, but qualification at CMMI-DEV3 or lack thereof will be taken into account along with the other technical factors.” Since this has been NCATS stance in the past, do we correctly assume that CMMI-DEV3 can be provided by a sub/teaming partner and that CMMI-DEV3 qualification is not a hard requirement, but qualification at CMMI-DEV3 or lack thereof will be taken into account along with the other technical factors?

Correct, third-party assessments and certifications will be considered along with any other evidence of organizational experience, but are not required and will not be considered as a stand-alone factor. See Amendment 02.

3. There does not seem to be any mention of application of general and administrative (G&A) cost as related to material costs and handling. Under what circumstances can G&A expense be applied to material costs?

See FAR 16-601(c)(3).

4. There is no percentage rate stated in B.4.b. [Material Costs and Material Handling Costs]. What is the percentage rate ceiling for material costs?

Your proposed percentage rate should be part of your proposal, and will be included in the contract once agreed upon.

5. Administrative effort is required to plan, book and pre-pay travel costs that may not be immediately reimbursed. There does not seem to be any mention of application of general and administrative (G&A) cost as related to Travel Costs. Do we correctly assume that our NIH approved G&A rate can be applied to Travel Costs?

Include this as part of your technical proposal in accordance with L.2.a.4, Instructions to Offerors – Separation of Business and Technical Proposals, RFP p. 41.

6. How do the four different versions of labor categories [found in the RFP and the SOW] map to each other? What are the consistent relationships between the four occurrences of labor categories and the clear mapping to related experience, education and functional responsibility for each labor category?

The labor categories listed in Section L.1.e, Estimate of Effort, RFP p. 39, reflect current roles and titles, but offerors should propose such categories and job titles as will accomplish the work described in the SOW even if different. It is expected that your organization may have different job titles, position descriptions, and staffing assignments to successfully perform the work described in the SOW. The function described in Section L.2.b.1.b.1, Instructions - Personnel – Project Director, RFP p. 56, is descriptive, and maps to a program manager function.

7. Questions with regard to the Excel file referenced in Attachment 1, Packaging and Delivery of Proposals for Use with the NIH electronic Contract Proposal Submission (eCPS) Website:

Page 10 indicates that this is expected to be a time and materials (T&M) contract. The Excel spreadsheet referenced in Attachment 1, I.B.3 seems to be intended for use in Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contracts. Do we correctly assume that while this appears to be evaluated as FFP, the resulting contract will be T&M?

Do we correctly assume that the labor categories and hours stated in the table on page 11 should be applied to tab 4, Labor - hourly, and that Tab 3 will not be used in the evaluation?

Can we use TBD (to be determined) for personnel names in Column B of Tabs 3 and 4?

Do we correctly assume that only the first three “periods” of the Excel file should be populated?

Do we correctly assume that we should we modify the dates in the Excel file to match the dates in F.1?

Correct, this will be issued as a Time and Materials contract. The spreadsheet referenced in Attachment 1, Packaging and Delivery of Proposals, was developed by NIH as a general tool that can support a wide variety of contract submissions. As the spreadsheet states, feel free to modify the spreadsheet to suit your business proposal. You are only required to submit names of individuals as identified elsewhere in the RFP.

8. Instructions for “schedule” [F.2, Deliveries, pp. 11-12, and L.2.b.1.a.4, Instructions - Technical Discussion – Schedule, p. 55] seem to indicate that there are phases or segments involved in the work. Yet, Attachment 3 requirements seem to be ongoing with no stated milestones or completion dates. Do we correctly assume that the only required information to provide in response to the schedule described in the Technical Discussion is the deliveries required by F.2? If not, what are the phases, segments, milestones that are required to be addressed in response to L.2.b.1.a.4?

Correct, the performance requirements of this solicitation are ongoing, and the schedule of deliverables in F.2., Deliveries, controls.

9. Since the term “key personnel” appears in Attachment 3, page 8, 2.1.6.1 [SOW 2.1.6.1, Program Management], do we correctly assume that the two personnel mentioned therein are the only two personnel requiring the letters of commitment required by the [technical proposal instructions]?

See Amendment 04, Answer #23.

10. Do we correctly assume that we are not required to provide Attachment 6 with our business proposal?

See Amendment 04, Answer #20.

11. [In Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, section] M.4.C specifies that 30% of technical evaluation is related to organizational experience. [Section L, Instructions to Offerors, section] L.2.a.13 requires that past performance information be submitted in the business proposal, not the technical proposal. L.2.b does not specify any place in the technical proposal to provide organizational experience. Will evaluators of the technical proposal be provided the past performance section of the business proposal? If not, where in the technical proposal should information related to organizational experience be provided?

Offeror’s past performance information will be evaluated by the contracts office subsequent to the technical evaluation committee’s review of the technical proposal. Past performance information (as described in L.2.a.13) should be included in the business proposal.

Offeror’s organizational experience will be evaluated by the technical evaluation committee. The technical evaluation committee will only receive the technical proposal. Accordingly, you should include all information that supports your organization’s experience in the technical proposal. You are not required to include the information in support of your organization’s experience in a specific section within the technical proposal.

12. The instructions to offerors seem to indicate that subcontractors must submit a complete copy of the referenced Excel file that is separate and distinct from the Excel file submitted by the prime.

Do we correctly assume that subcontractors must provide a complete copy of the Excel file referenced in Attachment 1, I.B.3? If not, what is required to be submitted by subcontractors to satisfy the requirement of L.2.c.8.f [Business Proposal Instructions – Subcontractors]? Is there a mechanism available that would allow subcontractors to provide the prime with just the “bottom line” cost for the “subcontracts” tab of the required Excel file, while submitting the subcontractor’s full cost proposal Excel file to NCATS under separate cover?

Offerors’ subcontractors are not required to submit a complete copy of the referenced Excel file.

Offerors are required to propose a fully loaded hourly rate for each labor category for each contract year. Labor rates are the price paid to the contractor for the labor hours, regardless whether the labor is provided by contractor or subcontractor personnel.