RFI Round 3 Clarifications-FINAL 23 12 20.pdf

# RFI Government Response

Answer to Question 71 in round 1 of Q&A stated that “A subcontract agreement for an A/E firm is required.” Further clarifications indicate only form D is required. Answers in this round indicate offerors should review

Factor 4 of the RFP that has qualification requirements for the A/E. Since there is no place on Form D to list A/E qualifications, how will GSA going to determine that the A/E meets those requirements?

Use the "Other (explain)" section of FORM D to enter the A/E qualifications

May offerors put the line item price described in question 17 (for patch repair and crack repair) on the SF1442 form or is there another place?

Response to question 293 RFI 1 stated: A unit price chart has been provided in section 2.1.1.18

A Separate Unit Price Sheet is now attached to this amendment

RFI ROUND 3 - FINAL Clarifications

FY24 NCR MATOC Construction IDIQ

Solicitation # 47PM0123R0023

Question 32 asks: Please confirm that a “Satisfactory” rating or no Evaluator rating entered for Small Business Subcontracting will be considered compliant/sufficient and/or not included in the requirement that all ratings for Small Business Subcontracting must be “Very Good” or better. (also question 31)

Based on the way question 32 is written, and based on the comments preceding the question, the offeror has two conditions they are asking about in their question, to which you provided one answer: The CPARS rating is required to be minimum "Very Good" for all categories.

They asked about “satisfactory” ratings in some categories, to which you replied that “very good” is necessary.

The offeror also included another part of the question that is causing confusion. It relates to categories that are BLANK. The offeror asked you to confirm if “a ‘Satisfactory’ rating or no

Evaluator rating entered,” was excluded from the “very good” evaluation.

The offeror appears to be asking if the “very good” rating requirement be waived if there is no evaluator rating in the small business subcontracting category, which does not apply to contracts set aside for small businesses. The response, The CPARS rating is required to be minimum "Very Good" for all categories,” indicates the CPARS must have very good in all categories, and by extension, if there is NO EVALUATOR RATING IN ANY CATEGORY, the

CPARS is not acceptable.

The reason categories are left blank is usually because the evaluator has determined it does not apply to the project, so the answer indicates you require a “Very good” rating on all categories, even those with “no evaluator rating entered,” that do not apply to the project seems like an error. Is it your intention that the requirement that “CPARS rating is required to be minimum ‘Very Good’ for all categories” apply to categories where there is “no Evaluator rating entered?”

Correction to RFI 2 Response to questions 31 & 32: The CPARS rating is required to be minimum "Very Good" for all RATED categories.

The PPQ is NOT disqualified if the evaluator includes NO RATING

(BLANK) for a specific category that is not applicable to the project being rated.

RFI Clarifications, RFI #8 " The answer to RFI#167 and your RFI question are undoubtedly connected. The (5) projects listed in the prior experience are the same (5) projects we are requiring past performance information for." Solicitation, page 31, Factor 1: Past Performance, "The Contractor is requested to choose two (2) of the projects that were submitted for the

Prior Experience evaluation factor (above)".

Please confirm that, according to the solicitation, of the five projects we list for Factor 2: Prior Experience, we are to include the CPARS or PPQs for two of those projects for Factor 1: Past Performance.

Yes, of the five projects submitted under prior experience, choose any two and submit a PPQ or CPARS demonstrating the past performance for those projects.