Amendment_2_Q_and_A_5.28.15.pdf

NIH Wide Business and Professional Support Services

Questions and Answers

Questions Ref Answer

Will the Government please confirm that the Letter of Commitment referred to in the Q&A refers to the corporate letters of commitment and not any letters of commitment from proposed key personnel. While there are several references to letters of commitment from personnel in the Q&A, there is no instance of such a requirement in the revised solicitation released with Amendment 001.

If letters of commitment are, in fact, required from proposed key personnel, will the

Government please confirm that these letters are only required from proposed key personnel who are not employed by the offeror or its subcontractors at the time of proposal submission?

Q&A, Question 15, 94

Letters of Commitment are required for all subs and consultants proposed. Therefore if you propose as sub or consultant as key personnel (KP). A LOC is required.

How should offerors map their key personnel to the labor categories provided in Attachment

20?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions

Key Personnel does not need to be mapped to

Attachment 20. Key Personnel should be mapped to have at least one Key Personnel for each technical task area.

What is the Government’s expectation of availability for Offerors’ proposed key personnel given that there is no work to be executed upon IDIQ award?

Q&A, Question 14, 55, 66, 95

Attachment 5

It is Government's expectation that Task Order's (TO's) will be awarded as a result of this IDIQ. Offereors need to ensure that appropriate staffing (KP) is available to perform on the TOs.

How will offerors be evaluated when submitting Attachment 5? There is no work to be performed upon contract award and, as such, offerors have no way of ensuring a sufficient level of availability for their proposed key personnel. The concern is that offerors may be evaluated negatively should their proposed personnel’s availability be judged as “over utilized” based on the utilization provided in Attachment 5 when compared to the

Government’s project utilization on the OLAO program.

Q&A, Question 14, 55, 66, 95

Attachment 5

It is Government's expectation that TOs will be awarded as a result of this IDIQ. Offereors need to ensure that appropriate staffing (KP) is available to perform on the

TOs.

RFP-NIH-OD-2015057

Attachment 12 has hours totals that add up to 99 FTE in the base year (and increasingly more in each option year). We understand that this spreadsheet allows the Government to compare like things during price evaluation, however, completing the spreadsheet as provided results in a total price that will be significantly higher than the $30.75 million contract ceiling per awardee? Even with reasonable cost rates per labor category, the ceiling will be exceeded and significantly so. Should offerors accommodate the annual contract ceiling when pricing their sample task orders, or just fill out the labor rates and disregard the contract ceiling since, thus treating the spreadsheet as truly notional and exemplary for evaluation purposes?

Attachment 12 Fill out the labor rates and treat the spreadsheet as truly notional and exemplary for evaluation purposes.

Given the response to Question 61 and others stating the potential for Task Orders to be executed at both customer site and contractor site, should offerors propose both on-site and off-site rates with their proposals? If so, how will labor rates be evaluated?

Q&A, Question 61

Fill out the labor rates and treat the spreadsheet as truly notional and exemplary for evaluation purposes. For the sake of consistency, propose on-site rates.

Given that there is no scope of work to be executed within the solicitation, what is the

Government’s expectation of offerors when proposing key personnel to be available and committed for the life of the IDIQ contract?

Attachment 5

It is Government's expectation that TOs will be awarded as a result of this IDIQ. Offereors need to ensure that appropriate staffing (KP) is available to perform on the

TOs.

Would the Government consider adding definition of scope to the Sample Task Order

(Attachment 12) so that an offeror may more accurately show how they would construct a team to execute the work, including relevant key personnel.

Attachment 5, Attachment 12 No. Attachment 12 is provided solely to evaluation the

BP.

Section C.2.a.2 states that “The Contractor will be required to prepare and submit, with the final report, a summary (not to exceed 200 words) of salient results achieved during the performance of the contract. “ In Section C.2.a.1, neither of the Final reports is checked. Will the Government please clarify what final report is being referenced in Section C.2.a.2?

C.2.a.1 (Technical Progress Reports) and C.2.a.2 (Summary of Salient

Results) Page 6

C.2.a.1 is revised to allow any of the listed reports to be requested at the TO level.

Regarding Task Area 4, item c) “Work in collaboration with the COR to develop, manage, and evaluate the NIH Succession Management Program.” Can the government please provide additional background on the “NIH Succession Management Program” to include its significance to this task area.

Attachment 3 (Statement of Work),

3.4 (Task Area 4: Program Planning and Management Services) ATT 3, p. 6 of 7

Not at this time. Specific details will be provided at the

TORFP.

The Business Proposal must be comprised of the following files:

a. The first file must be a PDF of your Business Proposal, with all attachments, including the

Solicitation Section J, Attachment entitled “Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs (plus Fee) with Excel Spreadsheet.” The Business Proposal should be created in a PDF format that enables word searches to the maximum extent practicable. Forms and/or documents requiring signature(s) may be scanned and merged into the Business Proposal PDF file.

b. The remaining file(s) must be the “Breakdown of Proposed Estimated Costs (plus Fee) with

Excel Spreadsheet” in its original Excel format, not PDF.

Multiple Excel files may be included, as necessary.

References “Solicitation Section J, Attachment entitled “Breakdown of Proposed Estimated

Costs (plus Fee) with Excel Spreadsheet.” This attachment has been deleted in Amendment 1.

Should this not now refer to “Attachment 12: FULLY LOADED HOURLY RATE PRICING TABLE”?

In addition, please confirm that is now only a single excel file.

Attachment 1 (Packaging and Delivery of the Proposal, I. PROPOSAL

SUBMISSION, II. DISCS (i.e., CD or

DVD), B. Discs – Creating and Naming

Files

Amendment 2 corrects this error.

A separate Disc must be submitted for the Technical Proposal and Business Proposal. Offerors who submit both Technical and Business Proposals on the same Disc will be required to resubmit the proposals on separate Discs.” Based on changes provided in Amendment 1, are offerors to provide the proposal in 2 discs or 1 disc?

Attachment 1 (Packaging and Delivery of the Proposal, I. PROPOSAL

SUBMISSION, II. DISCS (i.e., CD or

DVD), B. Discs – Creating and Naming

Files

Offerors are expected to provide the BP on one disc and the TP on another.

The RFP states, “HHS expects each procuring activity to establish minimum subcontracting goals for all procurements. The anticipated minimum goals for this RFP are as follows: 35% for

Small Business; 5% for Small Disadvantaged Business; 5% for Women-Owned Small Business;

3% for HUBZone Small Business; and 3% for Veteran-Owned Small Business and Service-

Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business.”

Q&A #67 states, “Question: The small business target is 35% - is there any target percentage allocations of small business subcontracting by socio-economic category – Women-owned, HUBXZone, VOSB, SDVOSB? Answer: No.”

Can the government please clarify the Small Business Subcontracting goals, including any allocations that should be accommodated for specific socio-economic interests (e.g., HUBZone, WOSB)?

4. Small Business Subcontracting Plan, item 11 p. 57

Our previous answer to question 67 was incorrect. The correct allocations are located in quoted RFP text.

The item states, “Demonstrated understanding of the requirements as supported by the offeror's methodology/approaches, and scheduling.” Per Amendment 1, the requirement for a Schedule has been removed. Will the government please confirm that offerors will not be evaluated on scheduling?

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS

FOR AWARD, 2. TECHNICAL, p. 62

The text in Section M is revised to remove scheduling. It now references objectives, approach, and methods.

Both the Technical and Business proposal instructions on page 49 end with references that offerors must submit the attachments that are included in Section J that are relevant to each volume. However, with Amendment 0001 it appears that none of the attachments are required to be submitted with the Technical Volume. Will the Government confirm that all attachments are now required to be submitted with the Business Volume?

Section J – Attachments, Section L –

General Instructions p.

43 and p. 49

Correct. There are no attachments to the Technical

Proposal.

Section 3 contains the following sentence as paragraph three: “It is required that Offerors provide a detail[ed] explanation how they developed their fully loaded hourly rates based on the same order.” Offerors typically will develop master labor rate schedules and then apply those rates to the sample order, applying any discounts that they see fit. Our question is in two parts:

1) Does the Government expect discounts on the sample order?

2) Given that the previous paragraph requires offerors to propose their own Section B Pricing

Tables, should offerors explain instead how they arrived at IDIQ labor rates PRIOR to developing rates for the sample order?

Section M, 3. Business p. 63

1) The Government does not expect offerors to propose discounted rates on the sample TO. However, discounted rates may be offered at the TO level.

2) Section M is revised. Offerors do not need to provide an explanation of how they developed their rates.

Would the Government please clarify the small business-size standard for NAICS 541611.

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, the small business size for this NAICS code is $15 million.

L.1.a.2 p.46 Amendment 2 corrects this error.

In response to Question 12, the Government stated that “past performance is an unrated evaluation factor.” Section L.2.a.8.d.1 infers that the Government will use past performance as a “determining factor preventing [offerors] from being placed in the competitive range.” If past performance is an unrelated evaluation factor per the Government’s response to

Question #12, will the Government please clarify what role past performance will have in the evaluation process?

Q&A Question #12, L.2.a.8.d.1.

Q&A Pg. 1; and 51

The answer to Question 12 was incorrect. Past

Performance will be evaluated. See Section M for evaluation criteria.

The Government response to Question 12 stated that, “past performance is an unrated evaluation factor.” Section M.4 contains a rating method (+2 to -2) for use “in the evaluation of past performance information.” If past performance is an unrelated evaluation factor per the Government’s response to Question #12, would the Government please clarify the purpose of the past performance evaluation rating method in Section M.4?

Q&A #12 and Section M.4

Pgs. 1, 63 & 64

The answer to Question 12 was incorrect. Past

Performance will be evaluated. See Section M for evaluation criteria.

Section 2 of the SOW (Attachment 3) provides a detailed list of Program Management, Project

Control, and Contract Administration requirements. However, these requirements are not listed in Section M.2. Will the Government please confirm that SOW Para. 2 (Requirements) will not be evaluated?

Attachment 3 (Para 2, Requirements), M.2, Criterion 1

Attch 3, pgs. 3-4; and 62

The requirement listed in 2.1 will be evaluated as an extension of the qualifications of Key Personnel under

Section M Criterion II.

Under the “Qualifications of the Offerors” section, the last sentence of the “Pertinent

Contracts” paragraph states that “The same type of organizational experience and past performance data should be submitted.” Would the Government please clarify to what, “the same type of organizational experience” refers?

L.2.b.1.c Pg.54 "The same type of organizational experience" refers to PP performing under a contract of similar size or scope.

Will the Government clarify what is meant by NIH “Supplier of choice” strategy?

Attachment 3 3.5.d page 77 "Supplier of Choice" cannot be further defined at this time. Details will be provided at the TORFP.

Within the labor category descriptions, several of the years of experience requirements seem low in comparison to the role described in the position description. Will the Government clarify whether the years of experience requirement is an “overall” requirement (i.e., total years of professional experience) or years of experience in a similar position?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions pg.1

Years of experience listed in attachment 20 are the minimum years of experience required in a similar position.

The labor category description for the Project Manager requires 3 or more years of experience. However, the Assistant Project Manager, presumably the subordinate of the two project manager positions requires a minimum of 8 years of experience. Will the Government clarify the years of experience required of the Project Manager?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions pg.1 See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

The labor category description for the Web Project Manager requires 3 or more years of experience. However, all other web development positions also require 3 years of experience.

Will the Government confirm that the Web Project Manager requires only 3 years of experience?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

Will the government allow for a certain number of years of professional experience to be substituted for Education requirements (particularly for the “technical” LCATs requiring a

BA/BS degree)?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions Yes. See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

The labor category description for the Financial Manager requires a Bachelor’s degree in finance or related field and 5 or more years relevant experience.

However, the Accounting Analyst, presumably the subordinate of the two Finance-focused

LCATs requires an MBA in Accounting MSAcc or an MBA degree with an Accounting

Specialization and no specific minimum years of experience (along with functional responsibility in “public company financial statements).” Will the Government please clarify the requirements of these LCATs?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

The Business Process Reengineering Specialist (LCAT #16) requires an MBA and 10 or more years relevant experience, while the Subject Matter Expert (LCAT #12) and other “specialist”

LCATs require only a BA/BS degree and minimum of 5 years relevant experience. Would the government consider rationalizing the education and years of experience for the “specialist” and Subject Matter Expert LCATs?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

The Logistical/Technical Support Specialist Labor Category (LCAT #13) includes a functional responsibility a requirement to “Respond to queries from students…” Would the government please provide more information on the nature of this requirement (or, alternatively, delete it)? Also, this LCAT refers to “she” in several places; is the requirement to provide a female for this position?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions

1. No. The government cannot provide more information on the nature of this requirement. We believe that the text is clear.

2. The position is not gender specific.

30 Given the emphasis on process, would the Government consider the addition of CMMI Level 3 or ISO 9001 certification as a requirement from offerors?

General It will not be a requirement, but relevant certificates should be listed on the resumes of key personnel.

31 Please confirm that offerors may include information from their subcontractors in their responses to this section to illustrate the full qualifications of the team.

Section L, Technical Proposal

Instructions, Item 1.C – Qualifications of Offerors pg.54

Yes, so long as the subcontractors or consultants is identified and the necessary Letter of Commitment's

(LOC) are provided.

In the Q&A there are two questions that inquire about the applicability of the $650,000 requirement to which the Government points offerors to the Past Performance Information in

Section L of Amendment 001. The language included within Attachment 001 is still ambiguous and, as such, we ask for the following clarification.

A) Is the $650,000 benchmark intended to be used to determine a subcontractor’s classification as a “major subcontractor”, and that to achieve classification as a major subcontractor that company must be allocated more than $650,000 on the upcoming contract?

OR

B) Is the $650,000 benchmark to be used in determining whether a past performance reference can be used in the proposal submission, wherein offerors are allowed to reference a project on which it or its subcontractor served in the role of subcontractor, and on which project they completed more than $650,000 worth of work?

If the Government answers that the intent of the $650,000 benchmark is for option A) above, we recommend that the Government remove the concept of “major subcontractor” because there is no metric that can be applied to determine which companies will qualify as a major subcontractor since there is no defined work to be performed at the task order level.

Section L, Past Performance

Information

Q&A Questions 73, 147 pg.52 Option B best describes our intention.

The Amendment document states, “Offerors must acknowledge receipt of this Amendment on each copy of the proposal submitted.” However, it seems that no paper copies of the proposal are required per Amendment 001. Will the Government confirm that only CD copies of the proposal are required?

Amendment 1 p. 2 of 3

Yes. Offerors shall acknowledge the receipt of all amendments with the submission of their proposal. The proposal shall be submitted via CD.

Would the government consider incorporating FAR Clauses 52.217-8 and 52.217-9 in the IDIQ contracts, Task Orders, and Delivery Orders?

Section I See Article H.5

Does the government intend this element and its associated weight (10/110, as amended) to address all of Task Area 1, or just financial analysis?

Section M.2.a, pg. 62 Para. 1 The first element under Criterion I references "in depth financial analysis," but not business solutions or acquisition lifecycle areas.

See revised Section M. Business solutions and acquisition lifecycle support are added under criterion I.

Via amendment 1, the government moved the Qualifications of the Offeror (i.e. past performance) from the Business Proposal to the Technical Proposal. To allow for an adequate description of past performance, would the government consider setting a ~2-3-page limit on each past performance reference instead of including it in the 35-page technical approach page limit? If included in the technical proposal page count, the quality of the response will be diminished significantly due to page count limitations.

Section L, pg. 52 vs.

Section L, pg. 54

Past Performance should be submitted with the Business

Proposal. The instructions have been moved from

Technical Proposal instructions to Business Proposal instructions.

If the government intends for Offerors to include past performance in the Technical Proposal

(see Comment 4), would the government consider excluding offeror's past performance descriptions from the Technical Proposal's 35 page limit?

Pertinent Contracts descriptions

Section L, pg. 54 Para. 9

Offerors shall not provide Past Performance with the

Technical Proposal.

As the amended solicitation was not released until May 22, 2015, can the government confirm the deadline for submitting the Proposal Intent Response Sheet?

"Please review the attached Request for Proposal. Furnish the information requested below and return this page by May 21, 2015. Your expression of intent is not binding but will greatly assist us in planning for proposal evaluation."

The Proposal Intent Response Sheet (PIRS) is used for internal planning. The date for submission of the PIRS has passed; however, submission of a PIRS is not required for an offeror to submit a proposal.

Can the government provide some context for the 'traffic management' and 'data warehousing' requirements in Task Area 1?

Attachment 4, Section 3.1, pg. 4

"Provide support for traffic management, and data warehousing."

Specific details will be provided at the Task Order

Request for Proposals (TORFP).

The response to question 74 indicates that letters of commitment are to be included in the 35-page limit of the technical proposal. However, the business proposal instructions require subcontractor commitment letters. Are the commitment letters to be included in the business or technical proposal? If included in the technical proposal page count, the quality of the response will be diminished significantly due to page count limitations.

L.2.c.8 Pg. 60-61

The answer to question 74 was incorrect. The RFP request LOC to be submitted with the BP and there is no page limit on the BP.

If no lobbying activities are conducted by a firm, are offerors still required to complete

Attachment 11 (Disclosure of Lobbying Activities, OMB Form SF-LLL)? If so, would Offeror insert “N/A” in cells 10.a-b of the referenced form?

Attachment 11 Yes.

Can the government confirm that it intended for the requirements for Assistant Project

Manager (8 years +) to be higher than the Project Manager (3 years +)?

Attachment 20 – Labor Category

Descriptions See updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2

43 Please clarify what NIH logistics functional reviews are.

Attachment 3, p. 7 Paragraph j) Work in collaboration with the COR to conduct NIH logistics Functional

Reviews in all areas of property

Specific details will be provided at the TORFP.

44 Please confirm the Period of Performance (PoP) is one base year + two, one-year options. General Correct.

Q&A #15 states the offeror is to provide commitment letters for subcontractors. Q&A #94 states letters of commitment are included in the 35-page limit for the Technical Proposal.

Q&A #15 and 94 See answer to question 42. LOC shall be submitted with the BP.

Please confirm the only requirement for commitment letters/letters of commitment are for subcontractors, as required per Request for Proposal (RFP) Section L.2.c.8, and may be included in the Business Proposal (not to be included toward the page limit of the Technical

Proposal).

Q&A #69

Correct.

Q&A #69 states the $30.75M will be the ceiling per contract. Please confirm this figure represents the total value of the Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ).

Attachment 6: HHS Section 508

Product Assessment Correct. The ceiling for each contract is $30.75M

Please clarify whether Attachment 6 is a requirement for this IDIQ or if it is required for individual task orders.

Attachment 6: HHS Section 508

Product Assessment This is a requirement for each Task Order.

This form requires offeror to provide the name and contact information of its “Principal

Investigator.” Can the Government please clarify who or what type of investigator it wants offeror to name? Is this supposed to be an individual from the offeror’s institution, or will this be someone assigned by NIH?

Attachment 7: Proposal Summary and

Data Record, NIH-2043

List your primary Point of Contact (POC) as the Principal

Investigator (PI). The primary POC should have signature authority.

This form requires offeror to provide the name and contact information of its “Proposed

Principal Investigator.” Can the Government please clarify who or what type of investigator it wants offeror to name? Is this supposed to be an individual from the offeror’s institution, or will this be someone assigned by NIH?

Attachment 9: Offeror’s Points of

Contact List your primary POC as the PI. The primary POC should have signature authority.

The labor category descriptions, including education and experience requirements, provided in the amended Attachment 20 ("NIH Wide Business and Professional Support Services Labor

Category Descriptions") are very narrowly defined and some, such as the Accounting Analyst, specify skills that may not be applicable to the Federal government ("...evaluates public company financial statements. Public companies issue (10-k) annual financial statements as required by the Security and Exchange Commission."). The specificity of the labor category descriptions and the required years of experience may limit the ability of vendors to staff the most appropriate and cost effective resources to be applied across a range of IDIQ task orders.

Would the government, therefore, consider omitting the labor category descriptions, education and experience requirements and permit vendors to align staff and pricing to the labor category names similar to how staff and pricing are proposed for other OLAO contract vehicles such as CIO-SP3? The labor category descriptions will remain but see the updated Attachment 20 located in Amendment 2.

Section L-b. TYPE OF CONTRACT AND NUMBER OF AWARDS on page 46 has been updated to remove the option for Fixed Price task orders. For flexibility at the Task Order level across the spectrum of customers being serviced and the breadth of services provided, will the government consider the allowance of FFP task orders?

The TOs will be limited to Time and Material and Labor

Hours.