Vendor_Questions_for_RFP_NIHLM20014036.docx

1. Who is the incumbent?

· Humanitas was the previous contract holder

2. What is the contract number for the incumbent’s most recent contract (even if it’s expired)?

· A Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request will be necessary to obtain the contract number

3. Is the incumbent eligible to bid on this contract?

· The last contract holder is eligible to bid on this contract

4. Can the government extend the response date?

· The response date is firm

5. What is the place of performance?

· Dependent upon awardee location

6. When does the government intend to award the contract?

· On or around April 1st

7. Is the $6.3MM for the 5 years of the contract?

· The $6.3M is the potential value of the contract including options

8. I noted you would like to have a copy of prior work experience; our deliverables are always covered by CDA. We can supply you with a sample deliverable(s) that is cleansed if that would work for you

· The contractor shall submit past performance by listing contracts awards held similar in scope to this requirement.

9. Is this statement supposed to be in the SOW?: The contractor shall furnish all management, supervision, labor, transportation, and equipment to provide janitorial services in accordance with the attached Statement of Work (SOW) necessary to provide Janitorial Services

· An amendment to the RFP will be made

10. Can you confirm if only for-profit small businesses can bid on this opportunity or can non-profit corporations also bid?

· Only for profit small businesses are permitted to bid on this opportunity.

11. Also, are there are any restrictions on the business type of subcontractors?

· Other business types are permitted to act as sub-contractors

12. Are the cover page of the proposal, transmittal letter, and Table of Contents excluded from the 20-page limit?

· Yes

13. Based on past experience, how many companies are anticipated in the regulatory track?

· This is a new track envisioned to meet the needs of a significant proportion of SBIR/STTR awardees, could be as much as 40% of companies needing focused regulatory assistance

14. Given the increasing restrictions on travel, what is NIH's position on utilizing some [not all] virtual meetings, if the case can be made that this is of equivalent value?

· Virtual meetings and use of social media are very appropriate throughout the duration of the program with the exception of a few in-person meetings which NIH feels bring irreplaceable value and experience to the nature of business consulting and mentoring whose effectiveness heavily relies on personal relationship building

15. In Task 4, it specifies that a get- to know, two hour face-to-face meeting between each participant and their advisor will be scheduled early in the program, either prior to the Kick-Off workshop or at the workshop itself. Is Skype considered face-to-face?

· In the context of this program's expectations, no

16. The RFP seems to imply that the "Industry experts" are always external to the contractor. If the company employs industry experts as members of its core staff, will NIH recognize them as "industry experts" or by definition does NIH consider only consultants as industry experts?

· NIH is agnostic to where the industry expert is employed so long as they possess the necessary qualifications

17. What is the main reason for the attrition in the CAP program?

· a. What is the current rate of attrition?

· very low, 0 to 5 companies historically

· b. At what stage do most CAP participants leave the program?

· pre- program kick off

18. What will be the time commitment of the individual mentors for each of the CAP participants?

· depends on details worked out between vendor and COTR, expectation is to provide optimal 1-1 mentoring on a continuous basis

19. Do you have a breakdown of current CAP participants by technology area?

· yes, all sub-sectors are strongly represented ranging from IT health, education, behavioral to therapeutics, drugs research tools, etc

20. What system is currently being utilized for collecting, tracking, and evaluating CAP applicants? What system/tools are being used to support the evaluation of the overall CAP program?

· a. Is it expected that the web-based project management system be built or is there a system that needs improvement?

· vendor should develop a system if not already in existence that would have capacity to intake and seamlessly interface with large amounts of records about each program participant from application to final deliverables

· b. For Task 1, does the government expect the level of effort for year 1 to be different than other options years, given that the system is built during year one?

· Yes, correct

21. Would the Web-based project management system be hosted on NIH facility, or externally through a 3rd party hosting service? If hosted externally, would NIH expect to migrate the system back to NIH and what’s the timeline?

· at present, hosted by 3rd party, system migration to NIH expected at end of contract

22. In order to stay compliant with NIH and HHS IT standards / requirements, are there any technical strategic guidelines for web solution? Are there existing software / technologies to be leveraged, or is it NIH’s expectation of the vendor to come up with the architecture / solution?

· The program COTR expects to be working closely with vendor on optimal system with main expectation that vendor proposes a creative solution that can manage program's needs

23. The contractor is charged with developing, reviewing and evaluating applications prior to making recommendations to NIH for consideration. How many applications to the program are expected?

· The number varies and can be twice the number of available slots (80)

24. NIH has targeted 80 total participants. How many participants are expected for each of the three tracks or does NIH anticipate an equal distribution among tracks?

· Participants will be assigned to each track based on the needs they express in their application and fit with particular track objectives