RFP_GSMO_QA2_Rev_G_20160331.pdf

GSMO-2 RFP Q&A 2

#1 Question: RFP States “The Offeror shall instruct each of its references to return the questionnaire directly to the Government in a sealed envelope…” Please confirm direct e-mail submissions to

Jason Lou are also acceptable (per the Government’s earlier response to a question on the Draft

RFP).

Reference: RFP, Section L.15(b), Page 135

Answer: PRIOR CUSTOMER EVALUATIONS (PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRES) are acceptable by direct e-mail submissions to Jason Lou.

#2 Question: Reference "Statement of contract past safety performance and a record of your company’s

OSHA recordable injuries and illnesses for the past 3 years." Please confirm the Government is asking for the safety performance for the individual contracts cited, and not for the company as a whole for three years?

Reference: RFP, Section L.15(a), Page 134

Answer: “Record of your company’s OSHA recordable injuries and illnesses for the past 3 years” is in reference to the company and not individual contracts cited.

#3 Question: Should FAR Clause 52.222-43 be incorporated into the RFP with the directed use of the

Wage Determination (Attachment N) for the Engineering Technicians I and VI?

Reference: Attachment N, RFP Section I.1, Page 41

Answer: No, FAR Clause 52.222-43 is not applicable. GSMO-2 is neither a fixed-price, time-and-materials, nor labor-hour service contract.

#4 Question: "Any Offeror proposing to use the incumbent workforce must use the incumbent labor rates provided in Enclosure CC for those labor categories for which rates are available to develop the proposed estimated cost." Three labor categories in Enclosure CC are not located in Enclosure DD, are these skills supposed to be included in attachment DD? Software Systems Engineer (Senior), Systems Engineer (Mid-level), and Systems Engineer (Associate).

Reference: Enclosure CC: Historical Rates, Enclosure DD LCat Hours, RFP Section L.14.2a, Pages

122-123

Answer: The three labor categories “Software Systems Engineer (Senior), Systems Engineer (Mid-level), and Systems Engineer (Associate) are not to be included in Attachment DD.

#5 Question: “"The effective ordering period of this contract shall be for a period of five (5) years from the contract effective date of TBD." The Final RFP effective start date is TBD, please confirm the anticipated start date to use is 1 March 2017.”

Reference: RFP Section F.2 Effective Ordering Period, Page 17

Answer: The anticipated start date of the effective ordering period is March 1, 2017.

#6 Question: “Reference Government’s table summarizing percentage goals for participation by various categories of small businesses. In the table provided, the total participation by all Small

Businesses is shown as 22%, yet a sum of the percentages for all categories is 24.3%. Please clarify.”

Reference: RFP Section L.13.3(a)(2) Page 117

Answer: Small Businesses may represent themselves under multiple categories. There may also be

Small Business Concerns that do not meet any of the sub-category criteria. Ex) One Small Business may be a Veteran-Owned Small Business Concern (VOSB) and a Woman-Owned Small Business

Concern (WOSB). This business would count under the “Small Businesses (SB), Veteran-Owned

Small Business Concern (VOSB) and Woman-Owned Small Business Concern (WOSB) categories.

#7 Question: “In the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, should offerors only state the proposed subcontract goal percentages and not the IDIQ Maximum Order Value percentages, even though the goals are derived from the IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value, and both are required in Exhibit

12? Please clarify.”

Reference: RFP Section L.13.3.Subfactor C.a.7, in NOTE parenthesis, Small Business

Subcontracting Plan and Section L.13.3.Subfactor C.a.2, Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Answer: For the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, see Section L.13.3 Subfactor C.a.7 NOTE:

“For the purposes of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, the proposed goals shall be stated as a percent of total subcontracts, not as a percent of the IDIQ Maximum Ordering Value.”

Exhibit 12 requires both, “SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN GOALS, which provide a breakdown of the offeror’s proposed goals, by small business category, expressed in terms of both a percent of the IDIQ MAXIMUM ORDERING and a percent of TOTAL PLANNED

SUBCONTRACTS.”

They are separate, although related, instructions.

#8 Question: The referenced paragraph states, “Any Offeror proposing to use incumbent workforce must use the incumbent labor rates provided in Enclosure CC for those labor categories for which rates are available to develop the proposed estimated cost.” The data points provided have an interesting weight whereas some senior levels are more expensive than principal levels or level I are more expensive than level II. This reflects a possibility for the rates to look unreasonable or unrealistic due to the averages provided by the Government. Please confirm that any use of the provided incumbent rates will not cause an unreasonable or unrealistic view during evaluation of the labor rates.

Reference: Reference: Section L.14 2.a, Amendment 1 Enclosure CC

Answer: Use of the provided incumbent rates in developing the proposed estimated cost is required in cases where incumbents will fill positions for which historical rates are provided. Any adjustments made to Offeror labor rates in establishing the Probable Cost will be based on evaluation methods that are applied consistently to all proposals.

#9 Question: Who is the designated Source Evaluation Board Chair?

Reference: NNG16551793R_Cover_20160311

Answer: The Government does not wish to disclose.

#10 Question: Attachment B Section 5; In Section 5, the Prime Offeror shall include a fully-loaded direct labor rate matrices for each Significant Subcontractor. What Section does the Government expect for the

Prime Offeror to submit fully-loaded direct labor rate matrices for Non-Significant Subcontractors (all

Subcontractors, regardless of dollar value) similar to the requirement for the Government Pricing Model

(GPM)?

Reference: L.14 Cost Volume Instructions; Section 2; Para (b) DIRECT LABOR RATES, INDIRECT RATES AND FEE MATRICES.

Answer: See L.14 GSFC 52.215-223 Cost Volume Instructions, Section 2, (b)

“In Attachment B, the Prime Offeror shall propose, by Contract Year, unburdened direct labor rates for all labor categories in Section 1; all individual bid indirect rates in Section 2, Onsite and Offsite rates; and all rates or factors for Cost Estimating Relationships in Section 3. Onsite is defined as NASA Goddard

Space Flight Center. Offsite is defined as the Contractor’s facility. The Offeror’s fee percentage(s) included in Section 4 of the matrices shall be used to calculate the maximum available award fee for performing all task orders issued under the resultant contract. In Section 5, the Prime Offeror shall include a fully-loaded direct labor rate matrices for each Significant Subcontractor.”

The Government does not expect Prime Offerors to submit fully loaded direct labor rate matrices for

Non-Significant Subcontractors.

#11 Question: Total Composite GPM-Specified (Prime/Sub) Non-Management Loaded Rates in Exhibit

1A for each GPM-Specified Contract Non-Management Direct Labor Category shall be multiplied against the respective GPM estimated direct labor hours for each GPM-Specified Non-Management

Direct Labor category set forth in Exhibit 1A to derive the Total GPM-Specified Non-Management

Direct Labor Costs for each Category plus the overall Subtotal GPM-Specified Non-Management

Direct Labor Costs.

What does the Government mean by “plus the overall Subtotal GPM-Specified Non-Management

Direct Labor Costs”?

Reference: RFP Reference: L.14 Cost Volume Instructions; Section 2; Para (c) GOVERNMENT

PRICING MODEL (GPM)

Answer: “Plus” in this context means “as well as”. “The overall Subtotal GPM- Specified Non-

Management Direct Labor Costs” = (Subtotal GPM-Specified Non-Management ONSITE Direct

Labor Hours/Costs + Subtotal GPM-Specified Non-Management OFFSITE Direct Labor

Hours/Costs) ”.

#12 Question: Exhibit 4 shows the Offeror’s plans to obtain the required personnel at the contract level.

The Offeror shall show the total number of staff proposed for each position, how many are available from within the company, and how many will be newly hired for the first contract year. The Exhibit

4 is titled “Exhibit 4: Contract Source Personnel” and Section L requirement implies “required personnel at the contract level”. Is it the Government’s expectation that Exhibit 4 match the GPM provided staffing or an Offeror’s anticipated staffing level during performance?

Reference: L.14 Cost Volume Instructions; Section 2; Para (h) CONTRACT SOURCE OF

PERSONNEL,

Answer: The Offeror should capture the non-management staffing levels stipulated in the GPM, as well as its proposed levels of Management and Administrative Labor, for purposes of completing this exhibit.

#13 Question: Safety and Health Plan: Cover indicates Safety and Health Plan is no longer a part of the evaluation, but is due 30 days after award. Is it the government’s intent to have the Safety and Health

Plan due during Phase In since Phase In is expected to be 45 days long and Cover indicates due 30 days after award or is it due 30 days after contract start?

Reference: NNG16551793R_Cover_20160311 and B.1 GSFC 52.211-90 SUPPLIES AND/OR

SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED (NOV

2015); Page 5

Answer: See Section J page 84. “Safety and Health Plan” is to be submitted during Phase-In and is

“Due 30 days after award”.

#14 Question: Safety and Health Plan: Cover indicates Safety and Health Plan is no longer a part of the evaluation, but is due 30 days after award. Will the government include the requirement in Section

B.1?

Reference: NNG16551793R_Cover_20160311 and B.1 GSFC 52.211-90 SUPPLIES AND/OR

SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED (NOV

2015); Page 5

Answer: No, the Government will not include the requirement in Section B.1. The Safety and

Health Plan, once accepted, will be incorporated as Attachment G of the Contract.

#15 Question: GPM Basis of Estimate. Please confirm that the information related to describing how subcontracts were estimated and how determined reasonable satisfies the requirement set forth in

Section L.14, paragraph 1, 7th subparagraph which defines a “subcontract” and the required cost/price analysis of subcontractors? If not, please clarify the difference.

Reference: Section L.14 Cost Volume Instructions, para 2(g)

Answer: Yes, this is confirmed.

#16 Question: The solicitation states that the submission of Exhibits 10A and 10B “fulfills the Total

Compensation Plan requirement under FAR 52.222-46 for non-significant Subcontractors”. Does the submission of Exhibits 10A and 10B also fulfull the requirements under NSF1852.231.71 for non-significant Subcontractors?

Reference: Section L.14 Cost Volume Instructions, para 2(n)

Answer: The requirement under NFS 1852.231-71 is for “Service Subcontractors”. The submission of Exhibits 10A and 10B do not fulfill the requirements under NFS 1852.231-71. “Discussion” and

“Written Support” is expected for those subcontractors that meet the definition of NFS 1852.231-71

(d).

See section L.1 NFS 1852.231-71 (APR 2015)

(a) The proposal shall include a total compensation plan. This plan shall address all proposed labor categories, including those personnel subject to union agreements, the Service Contract Act, and those exempt from both of the above. The total compensation plan shall include the salaries/wages, fringe benefits and leave programs proposed for each of these categories of labor. The plan also shall include a discussion of the consistency of the plan among the categories of labor being proposed.

Differences between benefits offered professional and non-professional employees shall be highlighted. The requirements of this plan may be combined with that required by the clause at FAR

52.222-46, “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.”

(b) The offeror shall provide written support to demonstrate that its proposed compensation is reasonable.

(c) The offeror shall include the rationale for any conformance procedures used or those Service

Contract Act employees proposed that do not fail within the scope of any classification listed in the applicable wage determination.

(d) The offeror shall require all service subcontractors provide, as part of their proposal, the information identified in (a) through (c) of this provision for cost reimbursement or non-competitive fixed-price type subcontracts having a total potential value expected to exceed the threshold for requiring certified cost or pricing data as set forth in FAR 15.403-4.

See FAR 15.403-4

(a) (1) The contracting officer shall obtain certified cost or pricing data only if the contracting officer concludes that none of the exceptions in 15.403-1(b) applies. However, if the contracting officer has reason to believe exception circumstances exist and has sufficient data available to determine a fair and reasonable price, then the contracting officer should consider requesting a waiver under the exception at 15.403-1(b)(4). The threshold for obtaining certified cost or pricing data is $750,000.

Unless an exception applies, certified cost or pricing data are required before accomplishing any of the following actions expected to exceed the current threshold or, in the case of existing contracts, the threshold specified in the contract:

See L.1 52.222-46 EVALUATION OF COMPENSATION FOR PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES

(FEB 1993)

(a) Recompetition of service contracts may in some cases result in lowering the compensation

(salaries and fringe benefits) paid or furnished professional employees. This lowering can be detrimental in obtaining the quality of professional services needed for adequate contract performance. It is therefore in the Government’s best interest that professional employees, as defined in 29 CFR 541, be properly and fairly compensated. As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract. The Government will evaluate the plan to assure that it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. This evaluation will include an assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work. The professional compensation proposed will be considered in terms of its impact upon recruiting and retention, its realism, and its consistency with a total plan for compensation.

Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure.

(b) The compensation levels proposed should reflect a clear understanding of work to be performed and should indicate the capability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives. The salary rates or ranges must take into account differences in skills, the complexity of various disciplines, and professional job difficulty.

Additionally, proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintaining program continuity, uninterrupted high-quality work, and availability of required competent professional service employees. Offerors are cautioned that lowered compensation for essentially the same professional work may indicate lack of sound management judgment and lack of understanding of the requirement.

(c) The Government is concerned with the quality and stability of the work force to be employed on this contract. Professional compensation that is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the Contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees, may be viewed as evidence of failure to comprehend the complexity of the contract requirements.

(d) Failure to comply with these provisions may constitute sufficient cause to justify rejection of a proposal.

(End of Provision)

#17 Question: This clause is prescribed if services by the contractor’s employees involve performance of acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions. GSMO-2 SOW does not appear to reflect work related to inherently governmental functions (planning acquisitions;

determining what supplies or services are to be acquired by the Government, including developing statements of work; Developing or approving any contractual documents, to include documents defining requirements, incentive plans, and evaluation criteria; Evaluating contract proposals;

Awarding Government contracts; Administering contracts (including ordering changes or giving technical direction in contract performance or contract quantities, evaluating contractor performance, and accepting or rejecting contractor products or services); Terminating contracts; Determining whether contract costs are reasonable, allocable, and allowable.

Does the Government intend to have the GSMO-2 contractor perform inherently governmental functions?

Reference: Section I.1 FAR 52.203-16 Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest

Answer: The Government does not intend the GSMO-2 contractor to perform inherently government functions. Please see the Attachment A: SOW, 2.2 Engineering Studies, “The

Contractor shall perform engineering analysis and studies as tasked for operations concept development and definition, system and subsystem trade studies to identify and evaluate alternative approaches, and system definition in support of missions operations” and 2.4 Ground Systems

Development, “The Contractor shall define operations concepts, define system and subsystem requirements, design, develop, and implement systems and subsystems to perform mission operations.” The clause will remain in the contract.

#18 Question: Block E indicates offerors should sign and return 2 copies to the issuing office. Are the signed copies to be returned with the submission of the proposal in the Offer Volume? Or does the

Government want the signed Amendment copies prior to proposal submission? (Note: there is no instruction in Section L for signed Amendments.)

Reference: Amendment 1

Answer: The return of signed Amendment copies are expected no later than the due date of the proposals within the offer volume.

#19 Question: Section L.14 (Pg. 121 of 147) indicates a Non-Significant subcontractor shall complete

Exhibit 2C and 2D (if applicable) and submit either within the Prime Offerors package or under separate cover. This seems to indicate the only cost/price submission requirements from Non-

Significant Subcontractors would be these exhibits. However, the final paragraph before Section 2 on page 122 states “…each Offeror, including proposed subcontractors, shall submit the other than certified cost or pricing data described in Section 2 below”. These instructions seem to be in conflict and cause some confusion as to the submission requirements for Non-Significant Subcontractors.

Could the Government confirm the only required cost/price submission files for Non-Significant

Subcontractors are Exhibit 2C and 2D (if applicable)? If other cost/price submission files are required, could the Government please detail which files must be submitted?

Reference: Section L.14, Pg. 121-122 of 147

Answer: 10A and 10B are required of all service subcontractors as they are defined in NFS

1852.231- 71.” Non-Significant Subcontractors may or may not meet the definition of Service

Subcontractors as defined in NFS 1852.231-71, and depending on that status, 10A and 10B are or are not required to be completed.

#20 Question: Sec. L states: “The offeror shall describe its strategy for using (or not using) significant subcontractors (based on the definition of significant subcontractor in the cost volume instructions).

If significant subcontractors are proposed, identify their interfaces to your organizational structure and provide …”, implying that the information is to be provided for each proposed significant subcontractor.

Sec. M states: The Government will evaluate the contractor’s strategy for using (or not using) significant subcontractors (based on the definition of significant subcontractor in the cost volume instructions) to include…”

Sec. L states that the specified list of information is only required for significant subcontractors.

Section M does not clearly state “If significant subcontractors are proposed”.

Will the Government evaluate the specified information for ALL subcontractors, or just for the proposed significant subcontractors if any are proposed as implied in Section L?

Reference: Sec. L, L.13.3, Subfactor B; Sect M, M.2.1, Subfactor B

Answer: The Government will evaluate the specified information for the proposed significant subcontractors or lack thereof.

#21 Question: Is it acceptable for Offerors to use a font other than Times New Roman for graphics - in particular diagrams, schedules, artwork, and photographs?

Reference: Sec L.10.b (2)

Answer: See Section L.10.b(2). Offerors are expected to submit pages “using not smaller than 12 point type Times New Roman font.”

#22 Question: Government provided updated Enclosure CC Rates on 3/22/16. Four Rates seem to be inconsistent. The rate for the Software Engineer (Senior) is lower than the Software Engineer

(Principal) and the rate for the SME II is lower than SME I. Also, if the rates are simply reversed, the salary differential between the Senior and Principal category and the SME II and SME I category is not adequate to align with the increased experience and qualifications requirements.

Enclosure CC Amend 1 FRFP Delta

Software Engineer

(Principal) $63.17 $60.83 2.34

Software Engineer (Senior) $64.80 $53.61 11.19

Subject Matter Expert I $74.21 $74.99 (0.78)

Subject Matter Expert II $70.08 $92.07 (21.99)

Will the government amend the Enclosure CC Rates to replace them with the FRFP Enclosure CC

Rates for these categories?

Reference: Amendment 1 posted 3/22/16, Enclosure CC

Answer: The rates provided are a result of weighted averaging in the labor categories. Labor categories have varying levels of seniority and rates within themselves. The Government will not amend the Enclosure CC Rates to replace them with the FRFP Enclosure CC Rates for these categories.

#23 Question: For pricing spreadsheets, the Government specified using Adobe Acrobat DC to convert

PDFs to templates in Excel for use. Since the Government templates were set-up in Arial, can the

Government confirm that text font Arial is acceptable for all Excel file submissions?

Reference: Sec L.10.b (2)

Answer: For the spreadsheets where the Government templates were set-up in Arial, Arial is acceptable for submission. An amendment will be issued to address this.

#24 Question: Section L states that Position Qualifications are to be submitted with the Cost Volume, however, Section M still contains evaluation criteria for Position Qualifications in Section M.2.1 on page 141, under the title of Subfactor B – Management Approach of Mission Suitability. Please confirm that Position Qualifications should be included only in the Cost Volume and will not be evaluated as part of Mission Suitability.

Reference: “Position qualifications are to be submitted in the Cost Volume only (per the table in

Section L.10.b.1).” Section L.10.b.1, Section L.13.3, Section M.2.1 pages 104, 124, 141

Answer: Position Qualifications are to be submitted as a part of the Cost Volume (Attachment B).

Position Qualifications will be evaluated as a part of Mission Suitability. There is no page limit on

Position Qualifications.

#25 Question: Is it the Government’s intent that assumptions include rationale if they are part of the

Management Scenarios, but not include rationale if they are part of the Technical Scenarios?

Reference: “’Any assumptions made in preparing a response to these questions must be clearly stated.” (pg. 112) “Any assumptions and rationale made in preparing a response to these questions must be clearly stated.” (pg. 113), Section L.13.3 Section M.2.1, pages 112, 113, 138, 139

Answer: The intent was for both these sections regarding scenarios to be similar in there information requests. Both sections should include the word “rationale”. An amendment will be issued to address this.

#26 Question: Enclosure CC includes the labor category Engineering Technician VI with an hourly rate of $37.21. Enclosure DD indicates that this is a DOL Wage Determination position. Based on

Attachment N Wage Determination this category should have an hourly rate of $52.76. Please clarify which rate should be in the GPM.

Reference: Enclosure CC – Historical Rates, Enclosure DD – Position Descriptions, Attachment N –

Wage Determination

Answer: Offerors should propose consistent with the Wage Determination for positions which fall under the Wage Determination.

#27 Question: Can we produce Exhibit 1A on 11 * 17 paper? This would make the hardcopy presentation to NASA easier to review, offering the ability to view all of the team data on a single sheet at a font size that is easier to read.

Reference: GPM Exhibit 1A

Answer: Yes, See L.10 GSFC 52.215-201 PROPOSAL PREPARATION—GENERAL

INSTRUCTIONS (FEB 2016) (b) (2) page 104. “Foldouts count as an equivalent number of 8-1/2" x 11" pages.” Cost exhibits have no page limitation.

#28 Question: In order to normalize the cost evaluation, will NASA please provide dollar amounts for the Material, Travel, and Other Direct Costs in Exhibit 1B?

Reference: GPM Exhibit 1B

Answer: NASA will not provide dollar amounts. GPM Exhibit 1B should be disregarded. An amendment will be issued to address this.

#29 Question: The following rates in Enclosure CC appear to contradict one another:

Software Engineer (Principal) $63.17

Software Engineer (Senior) $64.80

Typically the Principal labor category has a higher rate. Will the Government please confirm these rates are accurate?

Subject Matter Expert I $74.21

Subject Matter Expert II $70.08

Typically the SME I has a higher rate than the SME II. Will the Government please confirm these rates are accurate?

Reference: Enclosure CC – Historical Rates

Answer: Rates are confirmed as accurate.