15. Answers to draft Questions.pdf

N6134019R0034, Courseware IDIQ Solicitation Question and Answer Form

Question

Number Subject (title) Question Question Reference (SOW, L&M, Page #s, etc.) Answer

1 Do you have an approximate date for release of the RFP on the SURFACE NAVY TRAINING ANALYSIS

AND CURRICULUM MODERNIZATION opportunity?

The Government is working towards an November RFP release.

2 Legacy Curriculum Conversion Will there be approved Job Duty Task Analysis (JDTA), Training Project Plans (TPP) and Training Course

Control Documents (TCCD) provided for Legacy Curriculum Conversion efforts?

Base SOW, Section 1.2.4 Task Area 4 - Legacy

Curriculum Conversion

No Government will provide GFI that will allow JTA Data, TPP, TCCD, to be entered into CPM that will then allow for approved

JDTA,TPP, & TCCD.

3 CDM Cycle Is the USG's intent to hold CDMs per course or per lesson? Base SOW, Section 3.1.9.2 Content Design

Meeting (CDM)

CDMs will be held at the course level.

4 Travel Locations Please confirm travel locations for data-gathering trips will include Fort Leonard Wood, MO; Bangor, WA; and Coronado, CA as they are not indicated within Section 3.1.7, Travel.

Base SOW, Section 3.2.1.4, Data-Gathering The location of all data gathering trips cannot be determined at this time as they will be dependent on the requirements of each delivery order. The list of locations in SOW 3.1.7 Travel and 3.2.1.4 Data Gathering states the locations listed may include, but are not limited to.

In accordance with SOW 3.2.1.4 data-gathering trips, including the location and number of trips, will be specified in each DO. Pricing for travel will be Firm Fixed Price under each DO based on the requirements of that DO.

5 IMDP Development Please confirm if Section 3.2.1.10 applies to ILT. Base SOW, Section 3.2.1.10, Instructional

Media Design Package (IMDP) Development

(Lesson Design Strategy Document)

Section 3.2.1.10 applies to ILT. The SOW is revised to reflect the requirement.

6 IMDP Development Please confirm if Section 3.2.1.11 applies to IMI. Base SOW, Section 3.2.1.11, Instructional

Media Design Package (IMDP) Development

(Prototype Lesson & Style Guide)

Section 3.2.1.11 applies to IMI. The SOW is revised to reflect this requirement.

7 SSB Development Please confirm if Section 3.2.1.13 applies to ILT. Base SOW, Section 3.2.1.13, Script Storyboards

(SSB Development)

Script Storyboard Development applies only to IMI. The SOW is revised to reflect this requirement.

8 Printing of Trainee Guide Please confirm the requirement for contractor printing of Trainee Guides. Please confirm if this requirement applies to Pilot Phase only or also applies to class convenings.

Base SOW, Section 3.2.2.4.5, Trainee Guide

(TG) Development

Printing of Trainee Guides by the contractor for subsequent course convenings is not practical and will be removed from the requirements.

9 R3 Requirements The U.S. Government (USG) indicates the contractor shall reuse and repurpose existing content.

Please confirm that this requirement only applies to content currently existing within AIM CPM/LOM and/or only for IMI-related materials.

Base SOW, Section 3.2.2.4.8 It refers to all existing content in all formats; please refer to DoDI 1322.26. This applies to IMI and ILT Content.

10 Unique Assessment Items Will the USG confirm the requirement for 9 unique Assessment Questions (i.e., 3 Checks on Learning, 3 Pretest, and 3 Posttest) per each Enabling Learning Objective (ELO). For example, if a 1-hour lesson includes 4 ELOs, the USG desires a total of 36 unique Assessment Questions.

Base SOW, Section 3.2.2.7, Assessment Items When determining the right number of Test Items per Learning Objective. Refer to Navy School Testing Program Management Manual, NAVEDTRA 132, pp. 11-4 through 11-5.

11 Implementation Please clarify contractor requirements for Implementation. Base SOW, Section 3.2.2.14 Implementation The Government will implement the training products delivered by the contractor. This requirement will be removed.

12 Delivery Order Pricing Regarding the Fully Burdened Factor Rates be applied for Travel and Other Direct Costs, and the Draft

Solicitation inclusion of FFP CLINs for Travel and Other Direct Costs. Please confirm that travel &

ODCs Fixed Factor Rates are to be applied in pricing travel and ODCs to be priced on a FFP basis with each Delivery Order?

Resource Allocation Matrix, RFP B.1 Delivery

Orders

Yes, the fixed factor rate in attachment 2 shall be applied to the Travel and ODCs costs proposed in individual delivery orders.

13 CDRL Discrepancy in Number of Days

Please confirm if the USG will have fourteen or twenty calendar days for review and acceptance.

Please confirm if the contractor shall have seven or ten calendar days to correct and resubmit rejected materials.

CDRL F002, Training Situation Document, Remark 2

The Government will have twenty calendar days for review and acceptance. The contractor shall have seven calendar days to correct and resubmit rejected materials.

14 CDRL Discrepancy in Number of Days

Please confirm if the USG will have twenty or ten calendar days for review and acceptance. Please confirm if the contractor shall have ten or five calendar days to correct and resubmit rejected materials.

CDRL F00A, Instructional Media Design

Package, Remark 2

The Government will have twenty calendar days for review and acceptance. The contractor shall have ten calendar days to correct and resubmit rejected materials.

15 Ceiling Value On the Draft RFP page 36 of 92 under B.2 it states that, “The total dollar ceiling for all delivery orders issued under this contract is $49.45M.” On the N6134019R0034 Surface Analysis and Curriculum

Modernization Draft Inof document on page 1 it states, “This is a Woman Owned Small Business Set-

Aside for a single award IDIQ contract with a ceiling amount of $45.45M…”

Please clarify if this is a ceiling of $49.45M or $45.45M.

Draft RFP page 36 of 92, B.2

N6134019R0034 Surface Analysis and

Curriculum Modernization Draft Info document

The total ceiling is $49.45M

16 Delivery Order 01 Will the USG be awarding to DO-1 Delivery Order 01 SOW1700211 / L-1 Delivery Order 01 Terms and

Conditions requirements? Or is this a sample task for evaluation purposes only?

DO-1 Delivery Order 01 SOW1700211

L-1 Delivery Order 01 Terms and Conditions

Deliver Order 01 is an actual requirement, not a sample task, and will be awarded at the same time as the basic contract.

Solicitation Question Form

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

When Filled In 1 of 3

17 Delivery Order 01 Good morning. I have a question/request. Within the Surface Modernization Draft documents there is a secret DD 254 requirement. We are submitting under a woman-owned JV – each of our companies holds a Secret Facilities Clearance; however our JV will not hold this clearance at proposal submission time.

Would your team and NAWCTSD consider sponsorship of the JV (should the JV become the eventual winner) and allowing a JV to submit their proposal without the secret facilities clearance a proposal due date because of the Low Risk associated because each firm currently holds a secret clearance, thus the JV will be able to obtain that required Secret Facilities clearance to perform the contract.

Note: NAWCTSD recently made this type of consideration for their upcoming services requirement by moving the DD254 requirement from TS to Secret due to low risk.

Yes, If the JV is awarded the contract the Government will sponsor the JV for a Secret facility clearance.

18 DRFP Section L and M Will the Government please provide details of proposal requirements Section L and evaluation criteria in Section M? Please provide in advance of the FRFP to permit effective evaluation of the requirements.

DRFP Section L &M The Government will provide Section L&M in RFP, not in advance.

19 Labor Categories The Resource Allocation Matrix indicates "*Labor categories will be inserted by the Government in the

RFP." Will the Government please provide detailed Labor Categories position descriptions to ensure equitable insight into to the Government specified labor categories?

Resource Allocation Matrix Yes, labor categories and position description will be provided in final RFP.

20 Labor Categories The Resource Allocation Matrix calls out an "offeror's Personnel Allocation Matrix". Will the

Government please provide details of required content of the "offeror's Personnel Allocation

Matrix."

Resource Allocation Matrix The Personnel Allocation Matrix language has been deleted from the Resource Allocation Matrix document.

21 Supplies or Services and Prices DRFP Section B.1 requires the offeror to propose the "Quantity" of hours for each CLIN. However, notwithstanding that this procurement has been designated as "new contract", the incumbent contractor(s) executing similar contracts awarded in December 2016 and April 2018 will have a significant advantage over non-incumbents which detracts from "fair and open competition". Will the

Government please provide detailed work load indicators for each of the four Task Areas by year to ensure an equitable competition?

DRFP Sec B.1 The Government will provide all hours associated to this effort and the different task areas.

22 Contract Type The Sources Sought indicated: "The Government anticipates a contract type with Firm-Fixed Price

(FFP) CLINs (possibly pre-priced) and a possible mix of Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or an alternative pricing strategy utilizing pre-established fully burdened rates for the Analysis and Design portions of the effort“. However, the DRFP 52.21.-1 calls out "The Government contemplates award of a FFP contract resulting from this solicitation" without consideration for additional contract types.

Notwithstanding the statement in B.1 Delivery Orders "The contractor shall provide CLINs X001

(Training Systems Analysis and Design) and X002 (Curriculum Format Conversion) on a negotiated

Firm Fixed Price basis . Each delivery order for these products shall be proposed by the contractor when requested by the Government, and negotiated with the Government utilizing the rates set forth in Attachment 2 Resource Allocation Matrix." Is it theGovernement's intent that all remaining

CLINs be FFP at initial award?

Given the lack of data available to companies without access to the current and earlier procurements in support of Center for Combat Surface System (CSCS), the cost of proving such services cannot be predicted with an acceptable degree of certainty. Such uncertaity makes a No Bid extremely likely.

Will the Goverment please considere making all CLINs subject to negotiation utilizing the rates set forth in Attachment 2 Resource Allocation Matrix prior to the award of a FFP delivery order or some form Cost Plus contract?

Sources Sought

DRFP Section 52.21-1

DRFP Section B.1

It is the intent of the Government to award contract that includes only Firm Fixed Priced CLINs. The IMI and ILT CLINs (X101-X503) will establish a fully burdened hourly rate on the base contract. This will be the fully burdened rate to produce and deliver to the

Government 1 hour of the IMI or ILT associated to the specific CLIN. Each delivery order for IMI or ILT will detail the requirement, including the number of hours of IMI or ILT required. The Government will issue a delivery order for that number of IMI or ILT hours at the hourly rate established on the basic contract.

The Training Systems Analysis & Design CLINs (X001) and the Curriculum Format and Conversion(X002) CLINs will be negotiated at each delivery order and based requirements of that delivery order. The negotiated price of these CLINs at each delivery order will be Firm

Fixed Price and shall utilize the fully burdened labor rates from the Resource Allocation Matrix, Attachment 2. At award, the basic contract for these two CLINs will include an estimated dollar value associated to the estimated work the government anticipates under these CLINs. As stated in B.2, the Government reserves the right to reallocate the ceiling value across the CLINs as necessary.

Travel (X501) and Other Direct Costs (X502) will be negotiated as a Firm Fixed Price at each delivery order and will be based on the requirement of that specific delivery order. The delivery order negotiated price of these CLINs shall utilize the fixed factor rates as stated in the Resource Allocation Matrix, Attachment 2. The Contractor and Government will negotiate on a per order basis the costs (if any) to which the rate will be applied. At award, the basic contract for these two CLINs will include an estimated dollar value associated to the estimated work the government anticipates under these CLINS. As stated in B.2, the Government reserves the right to reallocate the ceiling value across the CLINs as necessary.

23 SOW response Will the Government be asking for a response to the Base SOW or the Delivery Order (DO) SOW, or a combination of both? Will the Government provide any additional DO SOWs in addition to the

“LANDING CRAFT UTILITY (LCU) CHIEF ENGINEER QUALIFICATION COURSE AND ADVANCED WELDING

COURSE” DO?

Draft RFP SOW 1.2 Proposal instructions are detailed in section L. No additional DO SOW will be provided as part of the solicitation.

24 Technical Data Can the Government please describe the Tech Data they expect to receive in CLINs 1503, 2503, 3503, 4503, and 5503?

RFP Section B, pgs 8, 15, 22, 29, 36 The technical data is detailed in the Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs) DD Form 1423 and provided as Exhibits B and F.

25 Pricing Can the Government please provide guidance on the pricing required for Section B? The ILT and IMI

CLINs have an undefined Max Quantity so is the Government requesting a 'per hour of courseware' price? In a related issue, what unit of measure does the Government anticipate for the 'Analysis and

Design' CLINs?

RFP Section B Please refer to the answer to question 22.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1021 Each TDPC - Functional Area 1 - LOT I FPI Training Data Products, Functional Area 1, LOT I NON-SET-ASIDE PORTION. The contractor shall deliver the Functional Area 1 (Analysis, Design, and Evaluation) Training Data Products requirement as specified in each individual DO/TO in accordance with the Statement of Work # 110023. BASE ORDERING PERIOD (AWARD + 60 MONTHS). FOB: Destination TARGET COST TARGET PROFIT TOTAL TARGET PRICE CEILING PRICE SHARE RATIO ABOVE TARGET SHARE RATIO BELOW TARGET

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 2 of 3

26 Schedule Will the Government have 14 or 20 calendar days to review and accept? CDRL F002 - Block 16.2 Please refer to Question 13 27 Schedule Is it the Government's intent to have both the JDTA (CDRL F003) and the FEA (CDRL F004) due six calendar months after Delivery Order award, if both required in a DO?

CDRL F003 - Block 16.10 and CDRL F004 - Block

16.4

No, CDRL F004 Deliver Date is revised to nine months after contract award.

28 Schedule There are no Preliminary Design Reviews or Technical Interchange Meetings defined in the SOW. Is it the Government's intent for the 3 referenced deliverables to be provided 45 calendar days prior to the

Content Design Meeting?

CDRLs F005, F006, F007 - Block 16.4 No. CDRLs F005, F006, and F007 are revised. Delivery dates for these CDRLs, when applicable, will be negotiated at the delivery order level, based on the specific requirements of that delviery order.

29 Schedule Will the Government have 20 or 10 calendar days to review and accept? Will the contractor have 10 or

5 days to resubmit?

CDRL F00A - Block 16.2 The Government will have twenty calendar days for review and acceptance. The contractor shall have ten calendar days to correct and resubmit rejected materials.

30 BASE SOW The SOW says no flash and yet the SOW states that re-formatting of courses that contain FLASH may be required. Can the Government please clarify if their intent is update legacy Flash course elements or to convert Flash elements to a currently supported standard?

Base SOW sec 1.2.2 and sec 3.2.4 NETCINST 1500.22 restricts the use of ADOBE FLASH Components (e,g, .SWF, .FLA, .FLV, etc.) in the development of new courseware.

When specified in a DO, Legacy Content shall be converted to HTML5 Standards.

31 Base SOW Are there specific tools that will be used: a SCORM learning management system or an authoring tool?

SOW 1.2.2 All content will be SCORM compliant and run on the Naval Education and Training Command Learning Management System. Specific development tools will be specified in each DO SOW. All training developed will run on a standard Navy Marine Corp Internet (NMCI) configured computer.

32 Conflict of Interest and

Competitive Advantage

Recent NAWCTSD content development solicitations and awards (S2025) have provided that entities conducting analysis that defines the requirments in the solicitation will be inelligible for award as their involvement would provide them with a competitive advantage. In the instant solicitation, Delivery

Order one (DO1) describes two tasks, the first of which is the LCU CHENG Course development. The

GFI List for the Delivery Order, items "a.- f." are analysis and design deliverables developed by contractors under seperate contract. Question: Will Contractors that developed the GFI documents designated for DO1 be allowed to participate in this competitive solicitation as either a Prime or principle subcontractor?

Solicitation, DO1, DO_2 (Should be DO_1) GFI list

Each requirement has to be reviewed based on the specific circumstances of that effort. Even when two efforts appear similar, not all elements of the competitive source selection are the same.

FAR 9.505 discusses the general rules governing organizational conflicts of interest. As stated in that provision: "The two underlying principles are-- (a) Preventing the existence of conflicting roles that might bias a contractor's judgement; and (b) Preventing unfair competitive advantage..." That section further states that an unfair competitive advantage exists when a contractor competing for award possesses proprietary information or source selection information that is relevant to the contract and not available to all contractors.

After review of FAR 9.505 the Government determined that because the Analysis and Design, to which the LCU CHENG development is based, will be provided to all potential offerors as GFI at RFP release, an unfair competitive advantage does not exist; no contractor will possess information that is not available to all contractors. Therefore, NAWCTSD is not excluding any company from proposing as the

Prime or Subcontractor.

33 As this potential RFQ comes into being, is there a way we can find out who is bidding on this work as a

WOSB? We are not women owned, but are a small business involved with Maritime training specific to the requirement. We would like to pair with the prime if the solicitation becomes an RFQ. In any case your reply and assist is welcomed.

The Government cannot provide information on potential or actual offerors to a competitive solicitation as that is considered source sensitive information. NAWCTSD conducts an industry outreach meeting known as "PALT" every other month and provides an opportunity for companies to network after the presentation. Dates and times of the PALT are located on the NAWCTSD website under industry outreach.

34 My team is interested in submitting a proposal when the RFP is released for the subject opportunity.

However, we would like to ensure that we qualify.

My WOSB/EDWOSB does not yet have our facility security clearance. However, our tier 1 team members are established businesses with facility security clearance who will assist us through the process. Will this be an issue?

We noted that the work is to occur at contractor facilities. Some of the work would require a SCIF room. Will the government provide this room or location?

If the JV is awarded the contract, yes the Government will sponsor the JV for a Secret facility clearance. Performance under this ID/IQ is to take place at the contractor's facility. The Government may be able to provide a SCIF room, however any access to a SCIF room would be on a limited basis.

35 At the Jan PALT, Paul Honold stated the DO1 requirement was pretty mature and that RFP will be released in March. Will you release a DRFP? If yes, what is estimated date of DRFP release?

- Regarding evaluation criteria - Will subcontractor past performance be evaluated? This will influence our teaming approach.

A DRFP was released with an expectation of a final RFP in November 2019.

Evaluation criteria will be provided with the posting of the final RFP.

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 3 of 3