The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Response to Questions and Comments received under the RFP NIHJT2010002
Response to Questions and Comments received under the
RFP for CIO-SP3 Small Business (Restricted) Following are responses to the questions and comments received in response to the Request for Proposal (RFP) NIHJT2010002, entitled, “Chief Information Officer – Solutions and Partners 3 (CIO-SP3) Small Business (Restricted).
Several questions were slightly modified in order to clarify intent. Further, similar questions/comments were consolidated, where practical.
The responses are organized by RFP Section, beginning with a general category.
Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
There are no questions under Section A
Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article B.1 |
| How will fee (CPFF, CPAF, CPIF) be calculated? |
| The fee on cost type task orders will be determined by the OCO based on the individual task order. |
| 2 |
| Article B.1 |
| If NIH determines that the requirement for backup cost and price details are required, will they allow sub contractors to submit that data directly to NIH under separate sealed cover? |
| Sub contractors must submit cost and pricing information through the prime contractor. |
| 3 |
| Article B.1 |
| Article B.1 states: “This contract is intended to provide IT solutions and services as defined in FAR 2.101(b) and further clarified in the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996.” However, the Hourly Rate tables 1 and 2 only reference labor categories (hourly rates). Where can one propose pricing for actual solutions? |
| The specific solutions or requirements will be defined by the OCO at the task order level. |
| 4 |
| Article B.4 |
| Will the NIH require backup cost and pricing details for the proposal to be deemed responsive |
| The price and cost data required with the proposal is detailed under Paragraph L.3.5. |
| 5 |
| Article B.4 |
| Regarding Section B.4, Prices and Costs, to estimate the labor category rates, should the offeror assume the contract award date of September 21, 2011 identified in L.1.5 to also be the Period of Performance start date? |
| Yes, for planning purposes, the vendors should use the start date of September 21, 2011. |
| 6 |
| Article B.4 |
| In the case of a company that provides online services via a Software as a Service (SaaS) Model and does not have a labor category rate pricing but a per consumed unit of service pricing, does is mean that our company will be excluded from this solicitation? |
| All vendors must submit proposals that conform to the requirements of the solicitation. Paragraph L.3.5 requires offerors to submit the completed Attachment J.1 for all labor categories. |
| 7 |
| Article B.4 & B.6 |
| Can a contractor propose rates solely for CONUS work and omit rates for OCONUS if the contractor has no interest in OCONUS work? |
| Article B.4 only requires the contractor to propose rates for work to be performed in CONUS. Any OCONUS rates will be determined at the applicable task order level. Successful contractors under the GWAC can choose whether to propose under such task orders. |
| 8 |
| Article B.4.1 |
| How will the government view an application for rate adjustments in the event of inflationary impact to the ability to attract and retain talent? |
| Offerors should consider inflation when developing their rates under Attachment J.1. Article B.4.1 gives the PCO the ability to determine the need to adjust pricing based on specific circumstances. |
| 9 |
| Article B.5 |
| Are there any restrictions on the use of the ceiling across federal agencies, i.e. would NIH, HHS etc have priority as the ceiling gets close in the out years? |
| This is a government-wide contract. There are no restrictions or priorities on which agencies can use the contracts. |
| 10 |
| Article B.5 |
| Section L.1.5 says the award will be made in Sep 2011. Should the date in B.5 after which awardees can invoice for $250 be Sep 30, 2012? |
| The date in B.5 may change based upon the award date. The current projection is September 30, 2011. |
| 11 |
| Article B.6 |
| The definition in RFP Attachment J.7 for CONUS contains "Continental" which would imply Alaska, but not Hawaii. Further, section B.6 is titled Work Outside of the Continental United States (OCONUS) and then its text defines OCONUS as “other than the 48 contiguous states plus the District of Columbia.” Which meaning for CONUS (and consequently) OCONUS applies for this solicitation? |
| The complete definition is what is contained in Article B.6. |
| 12 |
| Article B.6 |
| “B.6 Work Outside of the Continental United States (OCONUS)” and “C.1 Introduction” describe the requirement “…for work outside the United States.” Which evaluation factors and/or subfactors will evaluate the offeror’s capacity and experience supporting health and biomedical-related IT services OCONUS? |
| Those will be the non-price factors, i.e, Factor 1, Factor 2, and Factor 3. |
| 13 |
| Article B.6 |
| Can the government elaborate on the locations that are primary to "OCONUS" work? |
| Any OCONUS locations will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 14 |
| Article B.6 |
| Is an OCONUS methodology required in response to this solicitation, or is a proposed methodology only necessary at the time of task order? |
| An OCONUS pricing methodology is not required as part of the proposal. Any OCONUS pricing will be done in response to individual task orders for OCONUS work. |
| 15 |
| Article B.6 |
| Could OCONUS work included under task orders include any work required in hazard zones? |
| There are no restrictions for OCONUS locations under the contract. Such requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. Successful contractors under the GWAC can choose whether to propose under such task orders. |
| 16 |
| Article B.6 |
| Can you hire foreign nationals for OCONUS requirements? |
| The requirements of the OCONUS work force will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 17 |
| Article B.7 |
| Will the website for contractor rates be protected so that only authorized users have access? This is a concern as Contract rates are proprietary. |
| No. Article B.7 requires the contractor to publish their rates on a publically available website and agree for the government to post their rates on a publically available government website. |
| 18 |
| Article B.7 |
| In Section B.7, Note 1 following the labor rate tables states that contractors are required to propose on all labor categories. Does this hold true under the restricted competition for all small businesses? |
| Yes, paragraph L.2.12.1(e) requires offerors to complete the pricing tables in Attachment J.1. |
| 19 |
| Article B.7, Tables 1&2 |
| When proposing as a CTA, how is the CTA to propose on all labor categories, e.g., does each CTA member propose on all labor categories and then submit a blended rate, or is it up to the CTA to determine which teaming partner will provide which labor categories? |
| The lead vendor under the CTA is responsible for the submittal of the proposal. The offeror is expected to submit one pricing set under Attachment J.1. |
| 20 |
| Article B.7, Tables 1&2 |
| Tables 1 & 2 state that rates shall not include Contract Access Fee (CAF). However, p. G-7, paragraph G.6, states that for T&M and FFP task orders, the contractor shall add the CAF to the loaded labor rates proposed in Tables 1 & 2. Can the offeror include CAF as part of the proposed rates in Tables 1 & 2? |
| Article B.7 states that the rates submitted under the GWAC shall not include the CAF. Article G.6 refers to the task orders. At the time a proposal is prepared for an individual task order, the CAF can be blended into the Task Order proposal. |
| 21 |
| Article B.7, Tables 1&2 |
| In Section B.7 Table 1, the Government specifies the following: "Level I is the most junior of any one labor category Levels II and III are sequentially more senior." However in the description of the labor categories; years of experience and education level is not specified. Will the government provide education and years of experience required in each level? |
| The labor descriptions provide general guidance for pricing the labor categories for purposes of the GWAC. Any further detail will be provided under the specific task orders. |
Section C – Description/Specifications
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article C.1 |
| There is a reference to government agencies having a mechanism "to help meet their socio-economic contracting goals." Where can offerors see what those goals are? |
| Each federal agency publishes its annual small business and small disadvantaged business goals in their public websites. The specific agency Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization can provide information regarding these goals. |
| 2 |
| Article C.1 |
| Article C.1 states that “the geographic scope of this requirement includes the Continental United States (CONUS) and Outside the Continental United States (OCONUS).” Can the government be more specific as to the place(s) of performance? |
| The specific location of the work to be performed will be determined at the Task Order level. |
| 3 |
| Article C.2 |
| Is there consistency in database platforms across the enterprise (Oracle, SQL Server, DB2, MySQL, etc)? |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 4 |
| Article C.2 |
| What GIS systems are currently used? |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 5 |
| Article C.2 |
| How often are database backups currently done? What naming convention is followed for the database suite? |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 6 |
| Article C.2 |
| Is real-time mirroring a required capability? |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 7 |
| Article C.2 |
| Do the evaluation factors and/or subfactors include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to support every “example area” or just the Task Area in general? Will an offeror that supports fewer “example areas” be evaluated lower than an offeror that support more “example areas?” Is there a minimum number of “example areas” that must be supported in order to qualify for a Task Area? |
| The examples provides under the Statement of Work, are simply examples to help illustrate some, but not all, of the types of potential solutions and services that may be required under task orders. Offerors do not need to document their ability in the subfactors, and there is no minimum number of subfactors needed to qualify in the task area. |
| 8 |
| Article C.2 |
| What percentage of the Task Areas should the contractor be capable in order to meet the minimum acceptance criteria for this RFP? |
| There is no specific percentage of the Task Areas defined. |
| 9 |
| Article C.2 |
| How shall we designate the Task Areas that we are NOT bidding? Should we mark them No Bid, or just omit them all together. |
| Offerors are only required to respond to Task Area 1 plus a minimum of 3 other Task Areas [Task Area 1 plus two other task areas for HUBZone; Task Area 1 plus two other task areas for SDVOSB; and Task Area 1 plus 2 other task areas for Section 8(a) contractors] described in Section C. |
| 10 |
| Article C.2 |
| C.2.1 d) references some legacy health systems. Can NIH be more specific about these systems? E.G. Vendor/supplier, version, use? |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 11 |
| Article C.2 |
| If an offerors proposal is initially written to address 5 task areas (including task area1) can additional task areas be added post award? |
| Yes, it will be possible at the discretion of the Contracting Officer under the “Ramp On” provisions of Article H.20. |
| 12 |
| Article C.2 |
| How many sub-task areas under Mandatory Task Area 1 would need to be demonstrated through past performance to qualify as a prime contractor? |
| There are no specific numbers required. Please see Section M of the RFP for evaluation criteria. |
| 13 |
| Article C.2 |
| Application or system hosting as an example of a work activity does not appear under any of the 10 task areas. Please identify under which task area "hosting services" would best fit as an example of support required. Is it task Area 4 or could it also be Task Areas 2 or 5? |
| The offeror is required to meet the general description of the task area and should categorize its approach to hosting services as it deems appropriate to the task area. |
| 14 |
| Article C.2 |
| Is NIH utilizing, or wishing to utilize, a specific IT operations and Service Management framework (e.g. ITIL, ISO20000, etc?) |
| The specific requirements will be defined at the Task Order level. |
| 15 |
| Article C.2.1 |
| Regarding the requirement to qualify in Task Area 1, will the Government allow for an offeror to demonstrate qualifications of a subcontractor teammate in this or any other task area? If the offeror has established a Contractor Team Arrangement, will the capabilities of the team be considered to be the same as the capabilities of the “team lead” prime offeror? |
| An offeror may use the qualifications of a team member if a CTA is formed under FAR 9.601(1). If the CTA is formed under FAR 9.601(2), the team member’s qualifications will not be considered in this area. |
| 16 |
| Article C.2.3 |
| C.2.3 includes Identity and access management under Imaging. Are IdAM activities exclusive to imaging operations, systems and applications? |
| Article C.2.3 provides IdAM as an example under imaging. To the extent that it would be relevant to other task areas would be detailed in an individual task order. |
| 17 |
| Article C.2.3 & C.2.7 |
| Document Management appears in Section C as an example under both Task Area 3 – Imaging and Task Area 8 – Digital Government. If an offeror is intending to cite corporate experience in document management, please indicate any difference between the types of document management services NITAAC expects under each of these two task areas. |
| The examples are a sampling of the work to be performed under the specific Task Area. Examples of work may fall under more than one Task area. |
| 18 |
| Article C.2.8 |
| Article C.2.8 includes a reference to "504 compliance." Please explain relevance of 504 compliance to this task area. |
| Section 504 compliance would be something that may be relevant to digital government. Any specific requirements will be provided at the task order level. |
| 19 |
| Article C.3 |
| If we submit under a qualifying CTA with a lead identified then is the lead firm the only firm that submits these reports or must all CTA firms submit these reports? |
| Only one set of reports is required for each contract. |
| 20 |
| Article C.3 |
| Per section C.3, "... reports are due by the 10th of each month..." Is this calendar month or fiscal month? If calendar month, will the government entertain changing this to be the prime contractor's fiscal month? |
| Article C.3 refers to the 10th day of the calendar month and will remain as is. |
| 21 |
| Article C.4 |
| Article C.4 addresses the requirement for an IT-Security Plan. There does not appear to be a place in Section L that identifies where IT security is to be addressed. Also, if NIH requires the offeror to address IT security, is this requirement excluded from the page count? |
| An IT Security Plan is not required as part of the proposal. Paragraph L.5(c) addresses the contractor security deliverables and the timeframes for when they are due when an IT Security Plan is required. The solicitation has been revised to clarify paragraph L.5 and Article C.4. |
| 22 |
| Article C.4 |
| Upon contract award, is an IT Security Plan (SP) submitted by each member of an authorized CTA? If a traditional subcontractor has a task under a CTA's contract does the traditional subcontractor also submit an IT SP? |
| Only one IT Security Plan is required on behalf of the CTA. At the task order level, any required IT Security Plan will have to meet the requirements set forth in the task order and include applicable subcontractors in the plan. |
| 23 |
| Article C.4 |
| In Section C the final header is mislabeled and currently reads Article C.1 IT Security Plan (IT-SP). In sequence this should be Article C.4 IT Security Plan (IT-SP). Please clarify. |
| The numbering in the solicitation has been corrected. |
Section D – Packaging and Marking
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article D.1 |
| As this proposal is being submitted entirely as electronic files, what is an example of something in the proposal being marked, packaged and shipped? |
| Section D is applicable to the Task Order level as well as any deliverables required under the contract. |
Section E – Inspection and Acceptance
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article E.1.1 |
| Can the offerors assume that the FAR clauses referred to have a cut off date relative to any amendments that are issued in close proximity to the proposal being submitted, i.e., is there a reasonable cutoff date, like 12/31/2010 that offerors can use relative to any new amendments to FARs? |
| The FAR clauses identified in the solicitation are the ones that are to be used. If changes are made, the Contracting Officer will identify any such changes either as an amendment or as a modification as applicable. |
Section F – Deliveries or Performance
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article F.2 |
| Please clarify the length of the Base Period and the Option Periods within the entire contract period of performance. |
| The period of performance for the contact is 10 years. There are no option periods associated with the contract. Task Orders may contain options. |
Section G – Contract Administration Data
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article G.3.1 |
| Please describe the role of the ISSO relative to task orders. |
| The role of the ISSO at the Task Order level will be defined by the OCO. |
| 2 |
| Article G.3.2 |
| Will the Government allow offerors to propose additional key personnel beyond the Contractor Program Manager? |
| Article G.3.2 states that offeror will, as a minimum, identify a program manager as a key personnel. Offerors may propose additional key personnel at their discretion. |
| 3 |
| Article G.3.2 |
| The only "Key Personnel" title listed is "Contractor Program Manager". Is this the only key personnel that is required? |
| Yes, this is the only required key personnel. |
| 4 |
| Article G.3.2 |
| Section G.3.2 identifies Key Personnel as the Contractor Program Manager. M.2.2(b)(1) mentions both the Contractor Program Manager and Contract Administrators as being favorably evaluated. Is the Contract Administrator position a Key Personnel position? |
| Article G.3.2 does not identify the Contract Administrators as “key.” However, the offeror may identify a contract administrator as a key personnel at their discretion. |
| 5 |
| Article G.3.2 |
| Please clarify if the Contractor Program Manager identified in Article G.3.2 is the same as the Program Manager listed under labor category 0001 CO00, and if the Contract Administrator identified under paragraph M.2.2b) is the same as the Program Control Specialist under labor category 0001 CP00. |
| No. The Contractor Program Manager and Contract Administrator listed in Article G.3.2 refer to the GWAC. Labor categories under Article B.7 Tables 1 & 2 are for task orders. |
| 6 |
| Article G.5 |
| Please describe the process NITAAC will use to determine which CIO-SP3 contract (unrestricted or small business) a task will be posted on for vendors to bid for the work. |
| Agency Ordering Contracting Officers will have the discretion to determine which contract to use. |
| 7 |
| Article G.5 |
| How will task orders be classified if they cover multiple task areas? If task orders are classified into multiple task areas, will offers be required to qualify across all task areas or only one? |
| If a Task Order request covers multiple task areas, only those vendors who qualify under all the covered task areas may propose. |
| 8 |
| Article G.5.1 |
| Under Article G.5.1, please clarify whether the pricing mechanism described for Firm-Fixed Price Task Orders means that the contractor will multiply the quantity of each item or labor category required against the rate listed in the pricing schedule (Tables 1 and 2 under Article B.7) or as negotiated for the task, and how is this mechanism different from that provided under “G.5.3 Time-and-Materials Task Orders”? |
| Articles G.5.1 through G.5.3 describe the three contract types and cost/pricing methodologies used in the various types of task orders. The pricing mechanism for Article G.5.1 task orders is similar to the methodology used in Article G.5.3 task orders. |
| 9 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Can a third-party accounting firm be a non-government entity? Are there limitations on which accounting firm can be used? |
| Yes, a third party accounting firm may be a non-government entity for purposes of verification of an adequate accounting system. There are no restrictions on which accounting firms may be used as long as they are qualified. |
| 10 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Can you clarify if the audited verification is required pre-award of the GWAC or if it is only required in order to participate in and be awarded a Cost-Reimbursement Task Order? |
| Paragraph L.3.5(c) requires offerors to provide verification of an acceptable accounting system with the submission of the proposal. |
| 11 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Under Generally Accepted Account Principles, a JV absorbs all of the assets of its members, including the personnel, systems and tools, therefore if the JV utilizes the managing members approved accounting system is there any additional accounting system verification required? |
| No. The solicitation does not include any additional requirements other than what is required under an adequate accounting system for cost reimbursement task orders. |
| 12 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Article G.5.2 indicates that an offeror is required to demonstrate an adequate accounting system only if they elect to participate in cost-reimbursement task orders; whereas Article L.3.5(c) states that to be eligible for award under the GWAC the offeror must demonstrate an adequate accounting system. Which is correct? |
| In order to qualify for the GWAC, paragraph L.3.5(c) requires offerors to provide verification of an acceptable accounting system with the submission of the proposal. Additionally, prior to award of ay cost reimbursement task order, Article G.5.2 states that contractor will be required to verify that they have an adequate accounting system. |
| 13 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Will the Government require DCAA review and approval in order to for a JV member to receive cost-reimbursement type subcontract task orders from the JV Prime entity where the JV Prime entity has and maintains an audited and acceptable accounting system? |
| The specific circumstances of a need for a DCAA review for a specific task order will be determined at the time the task order is issued. |
| 14 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| In the case of an offeror whose auditing system is in full compliance but has never been audited by a "Federal Civilian Audit Agency", will that fact prohibit its ability to participate in "Cost Reimbursement" task orders? |
| Evidence of an adequate accounting system must be provided. An audit from a "Federal Civilian Audit Agency" Is not necessary as long as the contractor’s accounting system is determined adequate for cost reimbursement task orders. This verification can be provided from a third-party accounting firm. |
| 15 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Has NITAAC set any ceiling on allowable fees? |
| No, the NITAAC has not set any ceilings on allowable fees. |
| 16 |
| Article G.5.2 |
| Has NITAAC set any ceiling on Indirect Costs? |
| No, the NITAAC has not set any ceilings on Indirect Costs. |
| 17 |
| Article G.5.4 |
| How and when are incentives applied? |
| The Incentive type Task Orders will be at the discretion of the OCO. |
| 18 |
| Article G.5.5 |
| The RFP says profit is not allowed on ODCs under T&M Tasks. What about under Fixed Price Tasks where the ODCs are included in the fixed price? |
| There is no prohibition on profit on ODCs under Fixed Price Task Orders. See also Article G.5.1. |
| 19 |
| Article G.5.6 |
| If a task order request is initiated and only one contractor responds does this meet the requirements for “Fair Opportunity”? |
| Yes. The requirements for fair opportunity will have been met under the criteria set forth in FAR Part 16.505(b)(1) provided the provisions of Article G.5.6 are followed. |
| 20 |
| Article G.5.6 |
| Does the Government intend to solicit task orders solely within a single group of awardees (e.g. a task order competed only among HUBZone prime contract holders)? How will an OCO determine what group in which to solicit task order proposals? |
| The Government anticipates having multiple vendors from each small business category for each Task Area. The type of set-aside will be at the discretion of the OCO. |
| 21 |
| Article G.5.6 |
| May an Offeror propose as Prime for on CIO-SP3 Restricted Proposal and as a sub on two or more other CIO-SP3 Restricted Proposals? |
| Yes. There are no restrictions on how an Offeror may propose under the CIO-SP3 SB except in paragraph L.2.4 that states that only one offer will be accepted from a single prime contractor. |
| 22 |
| Article G.5.9 |
| How and to what extent will the evaluative information developed during the award of the GWAC be made available to customers, if at all? That is, will the results of evaluations of each “example area” under each Task Area be used to determine the distribution of Task Order Opportunities or will the information be limited to the list of qualified offerors in each Task Area? |
| The evaluative information developed in determining award of the GWAC will not be made available to customers after award. Proposals under the GWAC will be evaluated based on the offerors’ ability to perform in the task areas, not the individual example areas. Each new Task Order will be evaluated on it own merits and be competed within applicable contract grouping as determined by the OCO among the qualified contractors in the respective groupings. |
| 23 |
| Article G.5.9 |
| Will the government reimburse the contractors for fees related to E-Signature? |
| No reimbursement from the Government will be provided. |
| 24 |
| Article G.5.9 and Section K |
| Does each company that is a subcontractor to a prime … have to register for e-GOS and in ORCA? |
| Subcontractors do not have to register under e-GOS or ORCA. |
| 25 |
| Article G.6 |
| In paragraph 2 the contractor is instructed to multiply the Total Price or Cost by the CAF yet in paragraph five the Government uses the wording" contractor shall add the CAF..." This is a potential conflict of terms that could effect the pricing evaluation. |
| Article G.6 applies to funded task orders. There is no funding, and thus no CAF, on the basic GWAC. |
| 26 |
| Article G.6 |
| Article G.6 provides a formula for estimating CAF (Contract Access fee). is there a methodology to approximate the number of task orders in the proposal? |
| The provisions of Article G.6 apply to individual task orders. There is no methodology to estimate the number of task orders. |
| 27 |
| Article G.6 |
| If NIH has the right to unilaterally adjust the CAF, how are the contractors going to maintain their pricing ratio? |
| If the NIH adjusts the CAF, the new CAF will apply prospectively to new Task Orders. |
| 28 |
| Article G.9 |
| The last sentence in this paragraph states that "Contractor Program Managers are required to attend these meeting.” Is travel to and from these meetings reimbursable? Is Contractor allowed to bill for this time? |
| The travel under these meetings is not reimbursable as a direct cost under the GWAC. |
Section H – Special Contract Requirements
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article H.1 |
| Given the scope of Health IT services, please confirm that, although contractors may have similar labor categories, because the CIO-SP3 labor category descriptions are different as is the scope of work that CIO-SP3 specific pricing can be submitted? |
| The contractor pricing for the submission of the proposal must conform to the labor categories in Sections B and J. |
| 2 |
| Article H.5 |
| Are training resources provided by the government at "no charge" to the contractors |
| Yes, there is no charge to the contractors. |
| 3 |
| Article H.9 |
| Should the reference in Article H.9 Year 2000 Compliance on page H-3 (41 of 150) instead refer to Year 2038 compliance? |
| The reference should be Year 2000 as stated. |
| 4 |
| Article H.9 |
| Is Y2K Compliancy relevant to this bid? |
| Yes, Y2K compliance is relevant to this solicitation. |
| 5 |
| Article H.9 |
| Can the government confirm that all legacy systems involved in CIO SP3 are currently Y2K compliant? |
| The Government cannot confirm that all legacy systems are Y2K compliant. Such requirements will be detailed at the task order level. |
| 6 |
| Article H.14 |
| There does not appear to be any mention of purchasing /sourcing of any of the hardware and software for general IT in the solicitation. When such hardware/software is required, does the government would go through its normal procurement processes outside of this RFP? |
| CIO-SP3 is a services and solutions contract. Hardware may be purchased under this contract if it is incidental to the overall solution of the work to be performed. Also, please see H.14, Hardware/ Software Acquisition. |
| 7 |
| Article H.15.1 |
| Which evaluation factors and/or subfactors will evaluate the offeror’s capacity and experience supporting cleared facilities and personnel and implementing other security requirements? Is there a DD Form 254 and/or minimum facility clearance level for the overall GWAC? Will the distribution of Task Order Opportunities through e-GOS be limited to those offerors that already hold the required facility security clearance specified by the Task Order’s DD Form 254 in order to better meet customer requirements? |
| The evaluation factors for award are described in Section M. The detailed security requirements, such as a DD Form 254 will be detailed in the individual task order. Article H.15.1 states “only those contractors that meet the required security clearance levels on individual task orders are eligible to compete for such task orders.” |
| 8 |
| Article H.15.1 |
| Section H.15.1 refers to Security Document DD-254 and supplies what appears to be a place holder for a hyperlink. However, there is no link. Will the Government provide the DD254? |
| The link is available by clicking on the hyperlink behind “DD Form 254.” |
| 9 |
| Article H.15.1 |
| We have a secret cleared facility. If additional clearances are needed for any of the work under this RFP, will the NIH provide the sponsorship? |
| NIH will not provide the sponsorship. Any new sponsorship will be at the discretion of the OCO on the specific Task Order. |
| 10 |
| Article H.15.1 |
| Is there any restriction to the classification level of classified work done (Secret, TS, TS/SCI, Q, etc.) done on the CIOSP3 vehicle. |
| There are no restrictions on the classification level of the work to be performed under the contract. This determination will be made by the OCO on individual task orders. |
| 11 |
| Article H.16 |
| Will subcontractors be required to post information regarding their subcontract on their company web page as prime contractors are required to do within 30 days of award? |
| No. Subcontractors are not required to post information on their website. |
| 12 |
| Article H.19 |
| Is an approved Purchasing System required? If so, is it required at time of award or after contract award? |
| No, an approved Purchasing System is not required for the GWAC. |
| 13 |
| Article H.2 |
| It appears that the numbering in the section may be erroneous. Will the Government please clarify if the numbering in this section should begin with #1 instead of #6. |
| The solicitation has been revised to correct the numbering. |
| 14 |
| Article H.20 |
| Can the “Ramp On” provision encompass an offeror that later qualifies to be a member of one of the three socio-economic Contract Groupings? Will the Government be creating another Contract Grouping for WOSBs in order to give government agencies a mechanism to help meet their socio-economic contracting goals? |
| The “Ramp On” procedures will be at the discretion of the Contracting Officer based partly on the need in specific categories and may apply to incumbent contractors as well as new contractors as detailed in the article. There are no plans to add a WOSB category at this time. |
| 15 |
| Article H.21 |
| Does the “Ramp Off” procedures described under Article H.21 encompass the requirement for annual rerepresentation of small business status under the incorporated FAR 52.219-28 and the annual re-certification of socio-economic status for the purposes of membership in one of the three socio-economic Contract Groupings? |
| The “Ramp-Off” procedures will be at the discretion of the Contracting office and may consider the rerepresentation process in making this decision. |
| 16 |
| Article H.22 |
| Are there any restrictions/ requirements/policies for CTAs under FAR 9.601(2) for team member replacements/ additions? |
| Article H.22 does not apply to CTAs under FAR 9.601(2). |
| 17 |
| Article H.22 |
| If" Team" was formed without the use of CTAs may members be replaced at will? |
| If a team is formed not under a CTA, then there is no restriction on the members. |
Section I – Contract Clauses
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Article I.1 |
| The Solicitation only references FAR 52.219-14 for vendors who are HUBZone, SDVOSB and 8(a). Should one assume that this FAR clause is thus NOT applicable to a small business that is NOT classified as one of these three groups? |
| The clause 52.219-14 applies to small business. |
| 2 |
| Article I.4(a)(7) |
| If one of the prime awardees outgrows the small business size under NAICS 541512 during the 10 year period of performance will that prime become ineligible to continue to participate in the program? Is there any difference in the rules if the prime is a JV? What about a sub exceeding the 25M threshold during the POP. |
| A contractor that rerepresents its size standard during the course of the contract as other than small may still continue to participate in task orders (see FAR Clause 52.219-28, Post-Award Small Business Program Rerepresentation). However, customers will not be able to take credit for the work in meeting their agency small and disadvantaged business goals. |
| 3 |
| Article I.4(a)(7) |
| Please confirm that the base period of the contract is 10 years and the requirement for rerepresentation is therefore after the base period. If there is an alternate base period, please clarify the period of performance and rerepresentation clause. |
| The period of performance for the GWAC is 10 years with no “base” period. The post award small business program reprepresentation shall be made in accordance with the criteria of FAR Clause 52. 219-28. |
| 4 |
| Article I.7 through I.9 |
| If an awardee has team members (subcontractors) who are HUBZone Small Businesses, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses (SDVOSB), and / or Section 8(a) businesses, can that awardee bid on task orders set-aside for these types of businesses, provided that the awardee performs less than 50% of the work on the task (i.e., the appropriately qualified sub performs 51%+ by value)? |
| A contractor can only participate on task orders competed within the contract grouping(s) and task areas in which the contractor qualifies. Subcontractors may perform more than 51% of work on individual task orders as long as the team lead/prime contractor performs at least 51% of the value over the period of performance of the GWAC. See 13 C.F.R. § 124.513 for specific requirements pertinent to Section 8(a) contractors. |
| 5 |
| Article I.7 |
| Shouldn’t FAR 52.219-14 apply to all categories under Section I rather than be limited to subcategories HUB, SDVB, and 8a (Sec I.7, etc)? |
| The solicitation has been revised to include FAR Clause 52.219-14 in all of the general clauses of Section I. |
| 6 |
| Article I.4 and F.2.2 |
| Regarding references to the potential for task orders extending 60 months beyond the GWAC order period, recommend the government set some standards or framework to accommodate escalation of labor and other costs in this lengthy period. |
| The pricing under the Task Orders that may go beyond the base of the prime contract may be negotiated with the OCO. |
J - List of documents/exhibits & other attachments
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| Would the Government clarify if the labor categories are in any mapped to or aligned with the 10 different task areas? If so, may offerors propose only on the subset of the categories applicable to the task area under which they are proposing? |
| The labor categories are not mapped to a particular Task Area. Offerors are expected to propose on all labor categories. |
| 2 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| Is the Offeror to include the travel costs associated with contractors traveling to the Government site location to perform services in the hourly labor rate for each labor category? |
| Under task orders, the offeror should propose prices that are consistent with its business practices. |
| 3 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| RE: Please confirm that offerors forming a CTA may submit one version of Attachment J-1 which contains a single set of rates for all members to use? |
| Yes, offerors who form a CTA may only submit one version of Attachment J.1. |
| 4 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| Are subcontractor rates permitted as a basis of estimate or sources for the proposed rates? |
| The offeror should propose prices that are consistent with its business practices. However, the prime contractor/team lead is ultimately responsible for the rates submitted under the proposal. |
| 5 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| The escalation rate on the pricing spread sheets allows a value like 2.8 to be entered. However, it is displayed as 3 because of the defined cell formatting. Are we allowed to change the display format for our submittal? |
| Yes, offerors may change the display format for its submittal. |
| 6 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| Once the GWAC has been awarded, can a contractor add additional labor categories on a task by task basis? |
| Specific Task Order information such as the adding of labor categories will be at the discretion of the OCO. See also Article H.1. |
| 7 |
| Attachment J.1 |
| Of the current project labor categories, which ones require clearances if any? |
| Clearance levels will be determined at the Task Order level by the OCO. |
| 8 |
| Attachment J.1 & J.9 |
| The attached pricing files, Attachments J-1 and J-9 do not meet stated format standards. Will the government confirm that these attachments can be submitted as currently formatted and do not need to meet format requirements specified in Section L.2.12.2? |
| Paragraph L.2.12.2 (e) states that the offeror should submit the pricing tables found in Attachments J.1 and J.9. No further formatting is required. |
| 9 |
| Attachment J.2 |
| How are you going to evaluate the personnel being proposed since the main requirement is a working knowledge of different software and there are no educational and/or certification requirements? |
| Attachment J.2 is provided as a guide to help in pricing the labor categories in Attachment J.1. The evaluation of the proposals for the GWAC will be in accordance with Section M. Evaluation of specific personnel proposed under task orders will detailed at the time the individual task orders are issued. |
| 10 |
| Attachment J.3 |
| The summary reference sheet includes a section for a general description of the products/services. Is the offeror to include a detailed description of the work demonstrating relevance? If so,please clarify whether the form will be multiple pages which are excluded from the page count. |
| Attachment J.3 provides a section for the offeror to include a general description of the work. “General” is the key word in order to keep the size of the attachment to one page. |
| 11 |
| Attachment J.3 |
| Because Acqutrak contains a form that requests the Attachment J.3 information, please clarify if offerors must submit Attachment J.3 both as an attachment in Acqutrak and by completing the form fields in Acqutrak―in other words, do offerors need to do both? |
| Offerors should submit Attachment J.3 by completing the form fields in AcquTrak. |
| 12 |
| Attachment J.3 |
| Under Attachment J.3, what contract value (including options) should be provided for IDIQ or GWAC contracts, e.g., contract ceiling value or total task orders awarded to date? Also, does the "type of contract" refer to firm fixed price, cost reimbursable or time and materials? |
| The “value” could be the value of the GWAC if the offeror is a prime contract holder or the “value” could be the amount of the Task Orders if the offeror is a subcontractor. The type of contract refers to Firm Fixed Price, Cost Reimbursement, or Time and Materials, etc. |
| 13 |
| Attachment J.4 |
| Does the statement “Past performance evaluation data will be collected electronically in AcquTrak, the secure web-based portal used to receive proposals” mean that the references fill out the reference questionnaire online? Or can the offeror collect from the references and submit signed copy using AcquTrak? |
| Paragraph L.3.4 (b) states that the government will contact each of these references with instructions on how to submit the questionnaire through AcquTrak. |
| 14 |
| Attachment J.4 |
| When does the Government anticipate contacting the submitted references? |
| The Government may contact the references at any time prior to award, which is anticipated to be in September 2011. |
| 15 |
| Attachment J.4 |
| Should this form be directly mailed or emailed back to Contract Officer by customer or should it be mailed back to offeror and offeror will upload them through AcquTrak? |
| Paragraph L.3.4 (b) states that the government will contact the references and provide instructions on how to complete the past performance questionnaire. |
| 16 |
| Attachment J.4 |
| “Attachment J.4 Past Performance Customer Survey Questionnaire (See Section L.3.4.b) – (24-Sep-10)” includes a rated dimension for subcontracting which may not be applicable. How will the Government ensure that past performance is not unfairly penalized if it does not incorporate subcontracting (i.e., a default value of acceptable would penalize a past performance that otherwise included only highly acceptable ratings)? |
| The Past Performance will be rated as a whole in accordance with Section M. |
| 17 |
| Attachment J.5 |
| Should the compliance matrix be granular at the subtask area level, or can the compliance matrix reference the general Task Areas? |
| The Compliance Matrix is to be used for the offeror to cross reference the Compliance Checklist items to the appropriate section and/or page number in their proposals as applicable. The subtask areas are examples that may or may not be applicable. |
| 18 |
| Attachment J.5 |
| The Compliance Checksheet references item L.3.4 (a), which addresses a narrative of past performance in the management of IT related efforts. Does this section constitute the 20 page limit noted in L.2.12.1 (d), Section 4 – past performance? |
| Yes. The requirements of L.3.4(a) should be addressed with the Past Performance section. |
| 19 |
| Attachment J.5 |
| Is this Checklist expected as part of our response to Proposal Section 1 or completed in Acqutrak or both? |
| The entire proposal submission is to be completed through AcquTrak. |
| 20 |
| Attachment J.6 |
| For offerors composed of a team of prime with subcontractors: |
1. Must all team members be small business concerns for the purposes of this RFP (i.e., subcontractors may not be other than small business concerns)?
2. Must a team member conform to both the NAICS size and dollar limit to be considered a small business (i.e., if a member is over the $25M limit, but under the organization size limit, can they be considered to be a small business for this RFP?
Under a FAR 9.601(2) CTA, subcontractors may be small business or other than small business. For a team member to be a small business, they must conform to the standards under NAICS code 541512, which is $25 million.
| 21 |
| Attachment J.6 |
| We are finalizing a CTA that involves forming a Joint Venture with another small business. If the proposed team member was nearing the end of small business status and the JV submitted their proposal before the proposal due date, would they still be considered for an award? If an amendment was released after their submittal, would the proposal still be valid without further acknowledgment of that amendment. |
| Status is determined at the time the contractor submits its proposal with properly completed Attachments J.6, FAR 52-219-1, Small Business Program Representations (MAY 2004). |
| 22 |
| Attachment J.8 |
| Is a quarterly sales report submitted by each member of an authorized CTA? If a traditional subcontractor has a task under a CTA's contract does the traditional subcontractor submit a sales report or must the lead in the CTA submit that report? |
| Only one quarterly report is required from the prime contractor/team lead. |
| 23 |
| Attachment J.9 |
| We assume all references to Attachment J.10 should be Attachment J.9. Correct? |
| Yes, this is correct. Changes have been made in this amendment. |
| 24 |
| Attachment J.9 |
| There are only a few Labor Categories that request Detailed Labor Rates. Do we just submit the details for those categories listed or should we add all the labor categories listed In attachment J.1 as well |
| For Attachment J-9, offerors are to use only the categories identified. |
| 25 |
| Attachment J.9 |
| Please confirm whether offerors forming a Far 9.601(1) CTA may submit one version of Attachment J9 which contains the buildup of the rates or will each member need to submit separated Attachments J.9? |
| Offerors proposing as a FAR 9.601(1) CTA should submit only one Attachment J.9 for the team. Paragraph L.3.5(d) states that the offeror will use the rates that would be used in pricing cost-reimbursable task orders whether from the team lead or specific members of the CTA. |
Section K - Representations/certifications & other statements of bidders
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Section K - HHS Reps and Certs page 6 |
| If the offeror does not anticipate being awarded any contract of $ 50 million or more during the current cost accounting period, can it claim the eligibility? |
| Offerors may claim the exemption if, during the cost accounting period immediately preceding the period in which this proposal was submitted, the offeror received less than $50 million in awards of CAS-covered prime contracts and subcontracts. However, the offeror may not claim this eligibility if this proposal is expected to result in the award of a CAS-covered contract of $50 million or more or if, during its current cost accounting period, the offeror has been awarded a single CAS-covered prime contract or subcontract of $50 million or more. |
| 2 |
| Section K - HHS Reps and Certs page 7 |
| In the Representations, Certifications, and Statements of Offerors under paragraph 2(2), if the offeror checked “Yes,” should the offeror submit the description called for in subsection (2) above as part of the proposal? |
| Yes – as part of the Price and Cost Proposal under paragraph L.3.5 |
| 3 |
| Section K - HHS Reps and Certs page 7 |
| In the Representations, Certifications, and Statements of Offerors under paragraph 1.III, which Cost Accounting Standards Clause does the above instruction refer to? |
| Whatever is applicable to the offeror’s proposal and accounting system. |
| 4 |
| Section K - Article K(3) |
| Is an Offeror’s size standard representation and determination based on the date of its actual proposal submission or the last date the proposal may be submitted? For instance, should an Offerer submit prior to December 31, 2010, its size standard certification will be its size effective prior to January 1, 2011. |
| The size standard is the standard based on the date of the proposal submission. |
| 5 |
| Article K(2) |
| Should the two .pdf documents referred to in Section K be submitted as separate documents along with our proposal, or should they be embedded in Proposal Section 1? As a general rule if .pdf's need to be included in the proposal document (which will be in MS Office), can they be included as embedded .pdf files? |
| The AcquTrak tool is flexible enough to let the offeror organize their proposal however they see fit. New proposal files can be added as needed. Offerors should click the "Add New Proposal File" button at the top of the screen to add new proposal files. |
| 6 |
| Article K(2) |
| If offerors are required to submit reps and certs in Part IV of the RFP then why must offerors also submit completed Attachment J-6? |
| The certification contained in Attachment J.6 is part of the representations and certifications that are required to be submitted in Section 1 of the proposal (see paragraph L.3.1.5) |
Section L - Instructions/conditions and notices to bidders
| Question/Comment |
| Response |
| 1 |
| Paragraph L.1.1 |
| Where in the proposal should the offeror include the information required by FAR Clause 52.232-38, Submission of Electronic Funds Transfer Information with Offer? |
| Paragraph L.2.8 states that the offeror’s Electronic Funds Transfer information is entered in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) system prior to award of the GWAC. |
| 2 |
| Paragraph L.1.1 |
| The prescription for FAR Clause 52.215-8 states “As prescribed in 15.209(h), insert the following clause: Order of Precedence -- Uniform Contract Format (Oct 1997).” Where do offerors insert the clause in our proposals? |
| The prescription for this clause applies to the government, and as such, the clause has been included in the solicitation to give the order of precedence for any inconsistency in the solicitation or resulting contract. |
| 3 |
| Paragraph L.1.1 |
| FAR Clause 52.204-06, Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number requires offerors to, “enter, in the block with its name and address on the cover page of its offer, the annotation “DUNS” or “DUNS+4” followed by the DUNS number or “DUNS+4” that identifies the offeror’s name and address exactly as stated in the offer.” Recommend that the solicitation be amended to include a requirement for a Cover Page to address this requirement as well as the requirements listed under paragraph L.1.2(c)(2). |
| Paragraph L.3.1.1 states that the information required under FAR 52.215-1(c)(2) shall be included in the Cover Letter. |
| 4 |
| Paragraph L.1.2 |
| In reference to L.1.2, where in the proposal does the government want the responses and items required by these FAR items to be placed? |
| The FAR provisions in Paragraph L.1.2 are general provisions. The specific requirements for the proposal submission are detailed elsewhere in Section L beginning with paragraph L.2. |
| 5 |
| Paragraph L.1.2 |
| FAR Clause 52.215-1 states tat "Offerors using commercial carriers should ensure that the proposal is marked on the outermost wrapper with the information in paragraphs (c)(1)(ii) of this provision". Because there are no sections numbered (c)(1)(i) or (c)(1)(ii), please confirm that the Government intended to reference sections (c)(2)(i) and (c)(2)(ii). |
| This is a direct quotation from FAR Clause 52.215-1. However, the provision referenced is not applicable to this solicitation because proposals are to be submitted electronically as described in paragraph L.2.3. |
| 6 |
| Paragraph L.1.2 |
| The requirements of paragraph L.1.2 (c) (2) seem to apply to a proposal submitted in paper media. Please clarify. |
| Paragraph L.3.1.1 states that this information shall be included in the cover letter. |
| 7 |
| Paragraph L.1.2 |
| Page L-2 provides a list of items that must be displayed on the 'first page of the proposal'. Should the offeror consider the first page of the proposal to be the Cover Letter or the cover page of the proposal? |
| Paragraph L.3.1.1 states that this information shall be included in the cover letter. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
