FY21 RRL CC PreSol_QuestionsAnswers.xlsx

Sheet1

If yes, how does the government intend to handle the SETR process for complex media when for example complex media only accounts for three hours of over six hundred hours of media in the initial MA Delivery Order (DO)? The SETR process will only apply to complex media. Please note that the SOW is revised to use "ETIM" rather than "SETR" in an effort to avoid using an outside party for traditional SETR events (SRR, PDR, CDR, TRR). These are now SRR ETIM, PDR ETIM, CDR ETIM, and TRR ETIM.

The contractor should indicate in its IMS where complex media SETR events occur.

Are logic tables replacing story boards for complex media?

Also, "Figure 3. Complex Media (e.g., PC Simulation, Augmented/Mixed/Virtual Reality and Immersive Virtual Environment) Content Conversion Process" shows Logic Table Development after CDR. Confirm whether Logic Tables are a requirement as Entry Criteria of CDR. The Govt will provide an example Logic Table at DO RFP. Contractor format is acceptable for Logic Tables, which do replace storyboards, but only for complex media.

Logic Tables are an entry criteria for CDR ETIM and SOW Figure 3 will be revised to show that.

Clarification: Because there is no government estimate for the total value, and no CLIN Qtys for us to do our own pricing, we are unable to determine the most relevant past performance examples to use to address magnitude. This is the first critical step to make a bid or no-bid decision. Providing industry with the Government $ estimate or CLIN Qtys as soon as possible will allow all potential bidders to make a solid bid or no-bid decision.

RRL FY21 Content Conversion

a. Section L.B.2.1.k)3 asks to identify the contractor's role in the proposed in the FY 21 CC (identify either Prime if you are a prime, or Principal Subcontractor). Section L.B.2.1.k)14 asks to identify where the contractor performed the predominance of the work performed. For example, in a service support contract, the prime contractors address (as linked to its CAGE code and DUNs number) might be in Orlando, FL but the Government base where the support services are provided might be in Tampa, FL. Section L.B.2.2.d) requests the offeror identify the prime or principal subcontractor's location and division (to include CAGE and DUNS) that will be performing in the FY 21 CC effort and compare it to the past performance contract reference it has submitted for consideration in the proposal. Section L.B.2.2.d) further notes "Location and Division of the past performance contract reference shall be the same as the Location and Division performing this instant solicitation." Each section

b. The benefit is to ensure past performance credit is not provided to a contractor who did not perform the work as outlined by the CAGE Code, DUNs Number, Address and corporate name. By potentially considering a different CAGE Code, DUNS Number, address and corporate name, this deviates from how the Government acknowledges and evaluates past performance of contractors (e.x. CPARs are provided on prime contractors by CAGE Code and DUNS number). By deviating from this process, the Government assumes unnecessary protest risk that negatively impacts the end user and taxpayer.

c. The last paragraph of Section L.B.2.1(b), "Past performance contract references where supplies and services were sold or transferred between corporate divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of a contractor will not be considered unless the interorganizational transfer is identified in the form of a written agreement between the corporate divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates -- such as a subcontract, purchase agreement, modification incorporating a novation agreement, job order, or similar type written agreement – with the prime or principal subcontractor's CAGE code, DUNS number, or corporate name and address on the cover page of the written agreement" identifies what the Government requires in response to this question. The Government is still considering updating Section L & M language to allow for consideration of supplies or services that were sold or transferred between corporate divisions, subsidiaries, or affilitiates of a contractor but to factor the appropriate weight and consideration in the evaluation of past performance. Any potential updates will be addressed in the final solicitation release.

At Section L, Part B, Section 2, Subsection 2.1.b) (Page 78), the RFP states that “The government will not evaluate the past performance of any company other than the prime and principal subcontractor.” This requirement is not objectionable. However, the next sentence imposes an address restriction that is not logical to ensure compliance with this requirement. The two sentences together appear as follows:

“The government will not evaluate the past performance of any company other than the prime and principal subcontractor. Thus, the CAGE code, DUNS number, or corporate name and address of a prime or principal subcontractor must match the CAGE code, DUNS number, or corporate name and address on the cover page of the prime’s or principal subcontractor’s past performance contract reference proposed for past performance evaluation.”

The paragraph following this passage indicates that this requirement is included so that the government can avoid “being subjected to a potential protest”.

Will you delete the “and address” restriction to the consideration of past performance by a contractor that is a single corporate entity? This will allow consideration of relevant experience by a large corporation that performs work in different locations and that may even, as an organizational strategy, concentrate capabilities at certain locations whose work is then provided to another part of the corporation to fulfill a customer contract requirement for that capability. Such strategic leveraging of corporate capabilities enhances the quality of the competition the government is seeking and in no way provides an unfair advantage over other competitors.

If the Government is unwilling to delete this restriction, please explain:

a. why the required information at the RFP’s Section L, Part B, Section 2, Subsection 2.1.k)3 and k)14 at Page 80 along with its Subsection 2.2d) at Page 82 is not sufficient to ensure the past performance offered is relevant to the performance proposed;

b. the benefit to the end user or the taxpayer for eliminating consideration of past performance occurring at corporate addresses other than the address indicated by the companies CAGE Code on those prior contracts so long as the offeror provides reasonable assurance that it is the entity legally responsible for the past performance referenced;

c. the rationale for prohibiting consideration of past performance of a corporate entity as relevant in an offer made by that same corporate entity but allowing consideration of past performance of a subcontractor as relevant even though that performance was at a different location than and with no corporate control common to the offeror submitting the proposal.

Rolland, Audrey L CIV USN NAVAIRWARCENTRASYSDI (USA): Rolland, Audrey L CIV USN NAVAIRWARCENTRASYSDI (USA):

2. TRAINING ANALYSIS (Assumptions, Methodology, Training Goals)

3. TRAINING DEVICE DESCRIPTION (Functional Characteristics to be Modeled: Training Scenarios, Performance Capabilities, Target Performance Characteristics, Physical Environment, Instructor/Operator Station (if applicable), Degree of Fidelity)

4. TRAINING DEVICE SUPPORT (Technical Manuals, Training Course, and Training Documentation Requirements)

5. TRAINING DEVICE TESTS AND EVALUATIONS (Acceptance Tests and Evaluations, Training Effectiveness Evaluations)

At this time the Govt anticipates MCDs will not be available at DO award for several DOs.

For Past Performance Contract References where your firm served as PRIME: CPAQS should be sent to the contract PCOs, ACOs and PM who was assigned as the Assessing Official in CPARS. Once complete, those individuals will provide the completed CPAQS directly to Ms. Audrey Rolland.

Attachment L-1 FY20 Ready Relevant Learning Content Conversion Question & Answer Form N61340-19-R-0022