Amendment_01.pdf

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing items 8 and 15, and returning or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION

NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required) copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO.

IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

NSSC

The purpose of this amendment is to provide answers to the questions submitted in response to solicitation NNX16ZXD040R, and to provide replacement pages.

NASA/Shared Services Center (NSSC) Building 1111, Jerry Hlass Road Stennis Space Center MS 39529-0001

NNX16ZXD040R

1 34

07/27/2016

07/13/2016

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR SOLICITATION NNX16ZXD040R

1. Q. Is this a follow-on requirement? If so, could you please provide the incumbent contract number for this opportunity? If not, is this a new requirement?

A. No. This is not a follow-on requirement; this is a new requirement.

2. Q. Page 27 of 53 states: Items that must be included in Volume 1 but excluded form page limitation. We are unable to locate any “page limitations” can the government provide if applicable?

A. See page 34 of 53. The narrative that accompanies the past performance submissions are limited to two (2) pages.

3. Q. Page 16 of 53 states: Delivery Orders can be issued form date of award through 073117, however Standard Form 1449 calls for 5 years of prices. Can the government clarify, as to price, how to bid? Do we bid a price for the 3 sample task orders only?

A. Offerors are to bid the three (3) sample task orders only. The line items on the SF1449 reflect the periods in which orders may be placed. Offerors are not required to fill-in any information.

4. Q. The sample Task Orders. Task orders 2 and 3 -the combined auditable numbers apparently do not tie to the Auditable Costs Claimed by Element (they appear to tie for Task Order number 1). What is the amount to be audited for sample Task Orders 2 and 3?

A. The amount to be audited is the auditable dollar value (ADV) identified on the respective executive summaries under the heading “Combined Auditable Dollar Value”. The “Combined Auditable Dollar Value” and the “Summary of Auditable Costs Claimed By Element” will not match because indirect expenses for non-NASA contracts are included in the latter.

5. Q. Solicitation p. 33, Section F-RFP Submittals Requirements: The last paragraph states that if the Offeror identifies any proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, the Offeror shall also provide copies of their most recent AICPA Peer Review. If a subcontractor would be providing qualified personnel, but is not a CPA firm, then will this requirement be removed? Are subcontractors required to be CPA firms?

A. The Offeror shall provide a copy of its most current AICPA Peer Review. If the Offeror identifies any proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, the Offeror shall also provide copies of their most recent AICPA Peer Review

6. Q. Regarding the SF1449, are we to fill in any information regarding Item numbers

001 through 005 on page 2? If so, could the Government clarify what should be provided? Or should those line items be left blank?

A. The line items on the SF1449 reflect the periods in which orders may be placed. Offerors are not required to fill-in any information.

7. Q. No specific requirement was provided in the RFP to provide labor category and billing rates for other than the Base Period. Could the Government clarify whether a labor category and billing rates schedule should be provided in a separate Excel tab for the Base Year and Option year periods?

A. The requirements of FAR provision 52.222-46 requires Offerors to submit for evaluation a total compensation plan setting forth proposed salaries and fringe benefits for professional employees (labor categories) working on the contract. Offerors shall provide rates for the base period and all option periods. This information shall be on a separate Excel tab.

8. Q. We would like to be considered as a sub-contractor for this solicitation. Is there a way that we can be added to a list for consideration?

A. The Government no longer maintains bidder lists. You may register as an interested vendor on FBO.

9. Q. If two CPA firms wish to partner and submit a combined proposal, is this approach acceptable to NASA?

A. Yes. Two CPA firms may partner to submit a combined proposal. However, the proposal must clearly identify who the prime contractor is.

10. Q. If it is acceptable for two CPA firms to partner and submit a combined proposal, will the “Offeror” be considered both firms (for purposes of identifying past GAGAS audit reports to include with the proposal)?

A. Yes, it is acceptable for two CPA firms to partner and submit a combined proposal. However, the proposal must clearly identify who the prime contractor is.

11. Q. General: Would the Government please provide an estimated award date?

A. The Government intends to award within 60 days of the proposal due date.

12. Q General: Would the Government please clarify the number of firms invited to respond to this solicitation?

A. This is a full and open competition, therefore there is no restrictions on the number of offerors.

13. Q. General: Are large businesses authorized to propose simultaneously as a prime and as a subcontractor to a small business?

A. Yes.

14. Q. General: Would the Government please clarify its requirements with regard to background checks or levels of clearance needed?

A. There are no background checks or levels of clearance to win an award. This will be addressed at the task order level, if required.

15. Q. Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI) (page 22 of 53): Would the Government please confirm that it only requires an OCI mitigation plan for task orders 1, 2, and 3 if the Offeror determines that there is an actual or potential OCI at the order level?

A. An OCI mitigation plan is only required for task orders 1, 2, and 3 if the

Offeror determines that there is an actual or potential OCI at the order level.

16. Q. OCI (page 22 of 53): Would the Government please exclude the OCI mitigation plan from the page limits, if applicable?

A. Yes. An OCI plan would be excluded from the page limitations.

17. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and

Organization (page 27 of 53): Would the Government please confirm whether the compact disks containing the proposal volumes should be submitted to the address in Block 9 of the SF-1449?

A. Compact disks shall be sent to:

NSSC

Attn: Justin D. Dudenhefer Bldg 1111, Jerry Hlass Rd.

Stennis Space Center, MS 39529

18. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and

Organization (page 27 of 53): Would the Government please clarify what information should be included in the price breakdown to be provided with the proposal volumes?

A. The information required by FAR provision 52.222-46, by labor category, and travel breakdown shall be in excel format.

19. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and Organization (page 27 of 53): The Volume I requirements note that certain items must be included in Volume I but are excluded from the page limitation; however, no page limitations are included in the solicitation. Would the Government please clarify whether any page limitations apply to the proposal, and which sections are included in them?

A. See page 34 of 53. The narrative that accompanies the past performance submissions are limited to two (2) pages.

20. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and Organization (page 27 of 53): Would the Government please clarify whether offerors should provide proposed key personnel resumes at either the IDIQ or task order level?

A. The solicitation does not ask offerors to submit key personnel resumes.

21. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and

Organization (page 27 of 53): If resumes are required, would the Government please exclude them from the page limits, if applicable?

A. The solicitation does not ask offerors to submit key personnel resumes.

22. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and

Organization (page 27 of 53): The Volume I requirements include letters of commitment from key subcontractors. Would the Government please clarify whether offerors should provide the letters of commitment at the IDIQ level, the task order level, or both? Would the Government please clarify whether the letters of commitment should be at the firm level or for individual subcontractor personnel?

A. Letters of commitment shall be at the IDIQ (contract) level. The letters of commitment shall also be at the firm level.

23. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and Organization (page 27 of 53): The Volume II requirements include a small business subcontracting plan. Would the Government please clarify whether it has a specific format that it would prefer offerors to use in their subcontracting plan? For example, does the Government have specific percentage goals by socioeconomic category that offerors should include?

A. The subcontracting plan shall follow the format specified in FAR clause

52.219-9.

24. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section B: Basis for Award (page 29 of 53):

Section B states, “The Contracting Officer may reserve approximately 3 of these IDIQ contract awards for small businesses.” Would the Government please clarify whether these three potential small business contract awards constitute small business set-asides in which 51 percent of the work under the engagement must be performed by small businesses? If so, would the Government please clarify whether this 51 percent must be performed by the prime contractor, or whether it may be divided among the prime and other small business subcontractors?

A. These are reserve awards IAW FAR 19.502-4(a). If FAR clause 52.219-14 applies to an order, then the prime must perform 51% of the work.

25. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section F: RFP Submittals Requirements

(page 33 of 53): The peer review letter instructions state, “If the Offeror identifies any proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, the Offeror shall also provide copies of their most recent AICPA Peer Review.” Would the Government please confirm that offerors may subcontract with firms that are not subject to peer review, and that these firms are exempt from the requirement to provide peer review reports?

A. The Offeror shall provide a copy of its most current AICPA Peer Review. If the Offeror identifies any proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, the Offeror shall also provide copies of their most recent AICPA Peer Review

26. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section F: RFP Submittals Requirements

(page 34 of 53): As grant audits are similar to contract audits, would the Government please confirm that work samples and past performance references related to grant audits would be considered relevant?

A. No. Grant audits are not considered relevant for this procurement.

27. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section F: RFP Submittals Requirements

(page 34 of 53): The past performance instructions state, “Offerors shall provide a narrative… that demonstrates the submitted work product samples are relevant…” Would the Government please clarify whether the past performance references/questionnaires must be for the engagements for which we provide the sample work products?

A. Yes. The past performance references/questionnaires must be for the engagements for the provided sample work products.

28. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section F: RFP Submittals Requirements (page 34 f 53): Would the Government please clarify whether offerors may use subcontractor past performance references and work samples in their proposals?

A. The offeror can utilize past experience of a subcontractor. If utilizing experience of a subcontractor, a letter of commitment from that subcontractor must be included in the offeror’s proposal.

29. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section F: RFP Submittals Requirements

(page 35 of 53): The instructions state, “Completed PPQs should be submitted with the Offeror’s proposal… As a courtesy, questionnaires shall also be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact via email.” In addition, Attachment D, Letter to Respondent, states, “We encourage you to provide the requestor a copy of your comments for his proposal package” (emphasis ours), rather than indicating that it is a requirement. Would the Government please confirm that Offerors should request that clients provide a completed copy of the questionnaire both to the Government and to the Offeror, to be included in the proposal package? If so, would the Government please update the Letter to Respondent to state, “Please provide the requestor a copy of your comments…”?

A. Offerors should request that clients provide a completed copy of the questionnaire both to the Government and to the Offeror, to be included in the proposal package. The letter has been updated to reflect this change.

30. Q. Attachment A: Would the Government please clarify whether the three task orders are example task orders for evaluation purposes, or whether they will be awarded and performed by the successful offeror?

A. The task orders are requirements that shall be awarded and performed.

31. Q. Attachment A: Would the Government please clarify whether subcontractors are subject to the OCI clause if they are also a subcontractor with one of the government contractors listed in the task order(s)?

A. Subcontractors are subject to the OCI clause.

32. Q. Attachment A, Task Order Statement of Work Section 7, Travel: Would the

Government please clarify whether it expects any portion of the work to be performed from the Offeror’s site, or whether the majority of the work is to be performed at the travel locations noted in the task order statements of work?

A. The Government expects the work to be performed at the Offeror’s site;

however the Government does recognize that travel may be required to perform the work.

33. Q. Attachment C, Statement of Work Section 3.8, Conflict of Interest: Section 3.8 states: “See the NASA Annual Procurement Report for fiscal year 2015 for a current list of potential auditees. See 3.10 for a link to the report.” Section 3.10, Reference Documents, states: “NASA Annual Procurement Report for Fiscal Year 2015 available at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/, Under NASA Procurement Information, select NASA Annual Procurement Reports.” The fiscal year 2015 report is not available at the linked location, however. Would the Government please either provide a copy of the fiscal year 2015 report, or clarify whether offerors should see the fiscal year 2014 report instead?

A. The 2014 report may be used until the 2015 report is posted.

34. Q. Is an offeror required to have a GSA schedule?

A. No. Offerors are not required to have a GSA schedule contract.

35. Q. For Volume I of the proposal, is an audit approach and staffing plan required?

A. The solicitation requires the submission of a corresponding audit program for the submitted product work samples and for Task Orders 01, 02, and 03.

36. Q. For Volume II of the proposal, is NASA requiring offerors to fill out the Price

Schedule of those three task orders only?

A. Yes. Offerors are only required to fill out the Price Schedule for the three task orders attached to the solicitation.

37. Q. Since the IDIQ contract will cover a 5 year period, will NASA require offerors to provide separate labor rates for each year?

A. No. Rates are not required for all five years.

38. Q. If awarded an IDIQ contract, will the offeror be required to bid on all task orders or RFP’s issued during the 5 years period under the IDIQ?

A. Yes. However, there are exceptions to fair opportunity listed under the Ordering Procedures.

39. Q. Does NASA have an estimate of the labor hours required (budget) for the 3 incurred cost audits listed in Volume 2?

A. This information is considered part of the Independent Government Estimate, and not releasable information.

40. Q. For the number of Cost-Type contracts listed in the Executive Summary of each task order for Volume II, does it include NASA contracts only?

A. Yes. The Cost-type contracts listed are limited to NASA contracts only.

41. Q. For the ICP audits, does NASA require an audit on the cost-type contracts of NASA contracts only, or also contracts of other Federal government agencies?

A. For direct costs, NASA-only contracts; Indirect costs will include contracts from other Federal agencies.

42. Q. For Task Order 01, will the audit also cover the T&M contracts?

A. Yes. Audits of T&M contracts are covered under this contract.

43. Q. For each of the 3 Task Orders included in the Price Proposal (Volume 2) will an audit of contract direct costs be required or just those costs used in the indirect cost rate bases?

A. Yes. Direct costs should be audited.

44. Q. For Task Order 02, ICP audit of ARES Corporation, will the audit cover the indirect costs and indirect cost rates on the ICP only?

A. The Audit should include both direct and indirect cost.

45. Q. For Task Order 02, ICP audit of ARES Corporation, does NASA require a separate audit report for each contract year?

A. No. NASA requires one single audit that encompasses the entire ICP of ARES

Corporation.

46. Q. For Task Order 02, ICP audit of ARES Corporation, will the audit be expected to cover an audit of the corporation allocated costs (i.e. an audit of the Home Corporate Office)?

A. Yes. The audit should cover corporation allocated costs (i.e. an audit of the

Home Corporate Office)?

47. Q. For Task Order 02, ICP audit of ARES Corporation, does it mean there are 9 Cost- Type contracts on each year of the ICP’s?

A. Yes. There are 9 Cost-Type contracts on each year of the ICPs.

48. Q. For Task Order 03, should the contractor be “ARES Corporation” or “Astro

Aerospace (Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems)”?

A. Astro Aerospace (Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems).

49. Q. For Task Order 03, will the audit cover the indirect costs and indirect cost rates on the ICP only?

A. Yes. The audit will over the indirect costs and indirect cost rates on the ICP only.

50. Q. For Task Order 03, does NASA require a separate audit report for each contract year?

A. No. NASA does not require a separate audit report for each contract year.

51. Q. For Task Order 03, will the audit be expected to cover an audit of the corporation allocated costs (i.e. an audit of the Home Corporate Office)?

A. Yes. The audit will be expected to cover an audit of the corporation allocated costs (i.e. an audit of the Home Corporate Office).

52. Q. For Task Order 03, does it mean there are 6 Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts on each year of the ICP?

A. Yes. For Task Order 03, there are 6 Cost Plus Fixed Fee contracts on each year of the ICP.

53. Q. For each of the Task Orders listed in the Price Proposal will the audit firm be expected to physically travel to any of the locations of the main NASA contracts or just the location of where the accounting records are located?

A. The Government expects the work to be performed at the Offeror’s site;

however the Government does recognize that travel may be required to perform the work.

54. Q. Can NASA provide an editable WORD version of the Past Performance

Questionnaire so that we can complete Blocks 1-4 as the space provided is very small on the pdf copy included in the solicitation?

A. No. A word version shall not be released.

55. Q. Addendum to Solicitation Provisions, Section A: Proposal Format and

Organization (page 27 of 53): FAR 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (FEB 1993), and the proposal instructions require that offerors submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits for the professional employees who will work under the contract. Would the Government please clarify if it requires a compensation plan from each of the offeror’s subcontractors?

A. Yes. The offeror must submit the compensation plan for each of its subcontractors.

56. Q. If subcontractor plans are required and if personnel are to be proposed at the IDIQ and task order levels, would the Government please confirm that subcontractors may submit their compensation plans, including detailed personnel salary and fringe benefit information, directly to the Contracting Officer for the procurement, given the proprietary and confidential nature of the data?

A. The plans must be submitted with the proposal.

57. Q. Would the Government please consider extending the due date for proposals to

August 31, 2016?

A. No. There will be no extension.

58. Q. Given the wide range of tasks within the Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) solicitation, the varying levels of effort associated with each task area, and the duration of the IDIQ (i.e., base plus four option years), would the Government consider expanding the task order types to include Time and Materials (T&M) and Labor Hour (LH)?

This would offer the Government the greatest flexibility when soliciting responses to task orders.

A. Orders will be placed on a fixed-price basis.

59. Q. Has the Government taken into account recent publications related to the use of

Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable (LPTA) for the acquisition of the types of professional services included in the Statement of Work (SOW)? Given this information, would the Government consider updating the ordering procedures to best value?

A. The Government has been determined that LPTA is better suited for evaluations at the order level.

60. Q. Please clarify whether an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan is to be provided along with the offerors’ response to this solicitation, or is this only a requirement at the task order level? If so, please clarify in which volume this information should be included and whether it is excluded from page count. If the offeror deems there to be no actual or potential OCI in performing the requirements of this solicitation, is the offeror required to address OCI in their proposal?

A. OCI mitigation plans are required at the order level. If an offeror is submitting an OCI plan with its proposal it shall be included in Volume II.

61. Q. Upon visiting the provided link for the NASA Annual Procurement Report, the latest reported year was 2014. Would the Government please provide the report referenced for 2015?

A. The 2014 report should be used until the 2015 report is posted.

62. Q. This section states, “All proposals shall be tabbed for each of the evaluation factors.” However, hard copies of the proposal are not required. Please clarify how Offerors should tab their electronic proposals.

A. PDF files can be tabbed.

63. Q. The solicitation states, “Proposals must be submitted on one (1) compact disk

(CD).” However, the solicitation does not include instructions regarding proposal delivery. Please clarify the following: To which address should proposals should be delivered? May proposals be delivered via commercial carrier? May proposals be delivered via hand delivery? If so, are there any special security requirements regarding visitors at the Government’s location?

A. Compact disks shall be sent to:

Attn: Justin D. Dudenhefer Bldg 1111, Jerry Hlass Rd.

Stennis Space Center, MS 39529

Proposals may be delivered via commercial carrier or hand delivered. If hand delivered, visitors must obtain a pass before proceeding on-site.

64. Q. This section states, “A page is defined as one side of a sheet …” However, the

Government requires electronic copies of proposals. Please clarify.

A. Proposals must be submitted in a PDF format. If the PDF file was printed, one side of a sheet is one page.

65. Q. A list is provided for items that are excluded from page limitation. There are no page limitations provided for either volume other than the 2-page maximum for past performance narrative. Please clarify. “vi. Letter Confirming Availability of Parent/Affiliate Resources (if applicable)” is included; however, it is not explained in the instructions or evaluation. Please clarify what is to be provided in order to meet this requirement. “vii. Letters of Commitment of Key Subcontractors” is included;

however, it is not explained in the instructions or evaluation. Please clarify what is to be provided in order to meet this requirement.

A. That is correct. Only the past performance narrative has a page limit. The letters described above are letters from that company on their letterhead which states they are committed to work on this contract as a subcontractor, or certain resources are available.

66. Q. A list is provided for items to be included in Volume II. “Submissions required by FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees” is included;

however, it is not explained in the instructions or evaluation, and no staffing plan or resumes are required. Would the Government please clarify what should be provided in order to meet this requirement, as well as how it is to be evaluated?

A. This is a requirement of the Service Contract Act. Professional employees are considered exempt employees under 29 CFR 541. Offerors shall provide the information required by the clause, for professional labor categories. The evaluation is to ensure that the compensation is compliant with the 29 CFR 541.

67. Q. Would the Government please provide additional information about the past performance/price tradeoff process, especially information regarding how much more the Government is willing to pay for each incremental increase in the evaluated past performance?

A. Price and past performance are of equal importance.

68. Q. This section states, “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of

Contents.” Please confirm that the price breakdown (submitted as an Excel spreadsheet) does not need a Table of Contents.

A. The spreadsheet does not require a table of contents.

69. Q. How does “relevancy” (Table B-1) differ from “pertinent” in Table B-2? In Table

B-2, the degree of pertinence (e.g., highly pertinent, somewhat pertinent) is an element of each rating level. Unless the two words (relevancy and pertinent) cover different things, it appears that the same aspect of past performance will be considered twice, effectively causing the relevancy/pertinence element of past performance to carry much more weight than the “how well” element of past performance. If the Government agrees that the two words cover the same thing, would it please delete the duplicate coverage from the evaluation factors?

A. No. The Government does not agree.

70. Q. This section states, “Offerors shall provide a narrative of no more than two (2) pages that demonstrates the submitted work product samples are relevant to the scope, complexity and magnitude of the orders in the solicitation.” Will the Government confirm the work product samples/audit plans provided must be related to the same projects discussed in the Past Performance section? Are two (2) pages of narrative allowed for each work product sample past performance? Are the required items (a–f) required for each work product sample? Given that only two work product samples with audit plans are required, how should additional past performance information be conveyed to the Government?

A. Will the Government confirm the work product samples/audit plans provided must be related to the same projects discussed in the Past Performance section? Yes. The work product samples/audit plans provided must be related to the same projects discussed in the Past Performance section.

B. Are two (2) pages of narrative allowed for each work product sample past performance? No. Two (2) pages of narrative are allowed for each work product sample past performance

C. Are the required items (a–f) required for each work product sample? No.

Items (a–f) are not required for each work product sample.

D. Given that only two work product samples with audit plans are required, how should additional past performance information be conveyed to the Government? Past performance information shall be conveyed in accordance with the solicitation.

71. Q. Please confirm the Government only requires the first page of the Past

Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) from the offeror and the completed PPQ may provided by the client.

A. The Government prefers completed PPQs be sent. However, the offeror may complete and submit the first page if there are issues having the client complete their portion of the PPQ.

72. Q. The requested product work samples are typically limited distribution reports and not publically available due to the sensitive, proprietary information contained therein.

Accordingly, these reports may not be released to any parties not previously identified during the course of the engagement. Would the Government consider accepting reporting templates produced for executing these engagements with other Federal agencies in lieu of the reports? Templates would provide the Government with additional information on how the reports would be affected by the various engagement results (e.g., different opinions, scope limitations).

A. No. The name and address of the audited entity may be redacted, but no other information will be redacted as to allow the Government to assess the accuracy and quality of the work.

73. Q. Given the variety of other tasks contained in the SOW, would the Government consider expanding the list of sample work products and programs, including: Home Office Allocation Audits, Pre Award Contract Price Proposal Audits, Agreed Upon Procedures related to Cost Reporting, or Incurred Costs Performance Audits related to Incurred Costs or Contract Compliance.

A. No. NASA has determined that the list of sample work products stipulated in the solicitation are the minimum required to determine an offeror’s quality of work.

74. Q. Throughout the solicitation, and specific to the requested Product Work Samples, NASA references the use of Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), audits, examinations, etc. GAGAS encompasses financial audits, attestation engagements, and performance audits. Please confirm all types of assurance engagements align to all audit like tasks within the SOW (i.e., Task Areas 01, 02, and

03) to provide the greatest flexibility to the Government.

A. Incurred cost audits are considered performance audits.

75. Q. Evaluation for Price notes the Offeror is to refer to Attachment A when completing the Pricing Schedule. The Instructions for Attachment A state, “The Offeror shall review the requirements in each Task Order…to price each task order. The offeror shall prepare and submit an audit program for each task order identified in this solicitation.” Please confirm the instructions and task order SOWs included in Attachment A are to be used for pricing purposes only, and the offeror does not need to prepare/submit an audit program for each task order. If an audit program is required for each task order, will that be evaluated and, if so, how and where?

A. Please see the “FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED” section and the “RFP

SUBMITTALS REQUIREMENTS” section of the solicitation.

76. Q. The Task Order Executive Summaries refer to a “revenue/cost split.” Can the Government provide information on this? For example, does it imply a cost-sharing contract or a fee adjustment formula for a Cost-Plus-Incentive Fee (CPIF) contract?

What revenues are split between the Government and contractor (i.e., is there some revenue sharing in the contract to be audited)?

A. The “Revenue/Cost Split” means the revenue or cost split between a contractor’s Federal Government business volume vs. commercial business.

77. Q. Travel is to be separately priced (Attachment A instructions) and will be “reimbursed at actual costs” (per paragraph 7 of Task Order). Will this “cost reimbursable” portion of price be evaluated differently than the fixed price portion of the task order? Will the Government also evaluate the realism of the proposed travel cost?

A. A detailed breakdown of travel is required to ensure compliance with the FTR.

78. Q. Does the Government intend to award Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 as a result of this solicitation, or are they for price evaluation purposes only?

A. Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 will be awarded from this solicitation. The price for Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 will also be used for evaluation purposes.

79. Q. If for price evaluation purposes only, how will the Government ensure an offeror has not submitted unrealistically low prices for these task orders?

A. Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 will be awarded from this solicitation. The price for Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 will also be used for evaluation purposes.

80. Q. Additionally, how will the Government ensure offerors submit task order prices consistent with how it plans to price future task orders?

A. Future task orders will be priced in a competitive environment amongst the IDIQ contract holders.

81. Q. The solicitation states, “The offeror shall prepare and submit and audit program for each task order identified in this solicitation.” Would the Government please clarify this requirement, as the technical volume is only requiring product work samples and past performance? Is the Government requesting a technical approach at the task order level as well? If so, would the Government please provide specific instructions on the content and format anticipated? If these audit programs are required, how will they be evaluated?

A. Please see the section “FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED” of the solicitation.

82. Q. Please confirm the Audit Objective includes procedures to opine on incurred costs rates in addition to the direct and indirect costs.

A. Confirmed. The Audit Objective includes procedures to opine on incurred costs rates in addition to the direct and indirect costs.

83. Q. The Executive Summaries for Task Orders 02 and 03 each show Corporate

Allocation, or home office costs, that have not been audited by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA). Does NASA intend to procure home office assist audits as part of the IDIQ in instances where NASA is the cognizant agency? If so, under which Task Area? Alternatively, can NASA confirm those costs should be considered part of the scope of these task orders and therefore its proposed price? If in the scope of these task orders, does NASA expect a separate corporate shell/home office report?

A. For the award of Task Orders 01, 02, and 03, where the contractor is claiming home office costs, the audit effort should include these costs. A separate corporate shell/home office report is not expected.

84. Q. The Executive Summaries for Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 expressly exclude subcontractor costs from the scope of the audit. Does NASA intend to procure subcontractor-assisted audits as part of the IDIQ in instances where NASA is the cognizant agency? If so, under which Task Area? If not, is NASA willing to accept incurred cost audit reports with qualifications that the results are subject to pending subcontractor-assisted audits?

A. NASA intends to procure subcontractor-assisted audits as part of the IDIQ in instances where NASA is the cognizant agency. NASA is willing to accept incurred cost audit reports with qualifications that the results are subject to pending subcontractor-assisted audits

85. Q. Does NASA or its Contracting Officers (CO) perform any procedures or reviews of the Incurred Cost Proposals (ICP) for adequacy prior to the request for ICP audit support? For instance, the Executive Summary for Task Order 01 notes that DCAA assigned this contractor as low-risk. Does NASA perform risk assessments prior to requesting the audit? If so, we understand that due to the proprietary nature of the ICPs, NASA will not be able to provide the results of those procedures for the three task orders; however, could NASA provide details of the review procedures applied by NASA personnel? The level of pre-review would affect price.

A. No. Currently, NASA is not performing low-risk assessments.

86. Q. Section 6. Deliverables of each Task Order notes “Cost Incurred Audit

Report(s).” Can NASA confirm whether one report is acceptable to cover multiple fiscal years, or does NASA expect an individual report by contractor fiscal year?

A. Yes, one report is acceptable.

87. Q. Per Federal Acquisitions Regulations (FAR) Section 42.003, the cognizant

Federal agency normally will be the agency with the largest dollar amount of negotiated contracts. Further, as stated in FAR Appendix 9903.201-7, Cognizant Federal agency responsibilities, “The cognizant Federal agency should take the lead role in administering the requirements of part 9903 and coordinating CAS administrative actions with all affected Federal agencies. When multiple CAS-covered contracts or more than one Federal agency are involved, agencies should discourage Contracting Officers from individually administering CAS on a contract-by-contract basis.” Can NASA confirm whether or not the Government cost-type contracts in-scope are all held by NASA only, or do the contractors hold contracts with other Government agencies in addition to those with NASA? If contracts held by agencies other than NASA are considered in-scope, is there an expectation that vendors perform support services in coordination with other agencies? If contracts held by agencies other than NASA are considered not in-scope, is NASA willing to accept incurred cost audit reports with qualifications pending the results of audits for the non-NASA contracts?

Q. Can NASA confirm whether or not the Government cost-type contracts in-scope are all held by NASA only, or do the contractors hold contracts with other Government agencies in addition to those with NASA?

A. For Task Orders 01, 02 and 03, the contractors hold contracts with NASA and other Government agencies.

Q. If contracts held by agencies other than NASA are considered in-scope, is there an expectation that vendors perform support services in coordination with other agencies?

A. No. There is no expectation that vendors perform support services in coordination with other agencies

Q. If contracts held by agencies other than NASA are considered not in-scope, is NASA willing to accept incurred cost audit reports with qualifications pending the results of audits for the non-NASA contracts?

A. Yes. NASA is willing to accept incurred cost audit reports with qualifications pending the results of audits for the non-NASA contracts.

88. Q. Does Attachment B indicate that the Service Contract Act applies to the task order (and offerors should price their offers in compliance with that Act)? Alternatively, does it indicate that the Service Contract Act was applicable to the contract being audited, or both?

A. The Service Contract Act will be applied at the Task Order level and, therefore, Offerors should price their offers in compliance with the Act. Depending on the contract or contractor to be audited, the Service Contract Act may or may not be applicable.

89. Q. Would the Government please clarify whether a technical approach is required to address the SOW and the 15 task areas identified within it? If so, please provide specific instructions on the required content and format anticipated for this response.

A. No. A technical approach is not required to address the SOW and the 15 task areas identified within it.

90. Q. Per Page 11 of the solicitation, since these services are commercially available COTS products, could NASA please clarify the reason for checking the 52.222-54 Employment Eligibility Verification?

A. This contract is for services not supplies, therefore the clause is applicable.

91. Q. Per Page 19 – Section 3.0 – is NASA’s intent to issue the initial IDIQ awards, and then award the three task orders noted in the solicitation? Or, is NASA’s intent to issue three task orders as the initial awards? Page 33 – “Factor 3: Price” of the solicitation states “The total evaluated price will be the sum of all prices in the Task Orders 01, 02, and 03.” However, this statement appears to contradict the information on Pages 19 and 29. Could NASA please clarify if it intends to issue one IDIQ contract and then the task orders would be issued individually? Or, is NASA’s intent to issue three task orders combined into the initial IDIQ award?

A. The Government contemplates awarding multiple IDIQ contracts, with provisions for issuing fixed price orders, resulting from this solicitation. The Task Orders will awarded competitively to one, two, or three IDIQ contract holders.

92. Q. Per Page 29 – Step 4 of the solicitation, is it NASA’s intent to award the three task orders to three different contract holders depending upon the ratings by the SSA rather than bundle them into one?

A. The Task Orders will awarded competitively to one, two, or three IDIQ contract holders.

93. Q. Per the second paragraph on Page 35, does NASA expect the offeror to copy Justin Dudenhefer on the PPQ initial emails to request the PPQ? Or, is the respondent expected to email Mr. Dudenhefer the completed PPQ?

A. No. Do not copy Mr. Dudenhefer on the initial emails. The respondent is expected to email Mr. Dudenhefer the completed PPQ.

94. Q. Per Task Order 02, could NASA confirm the calculation of ADV of $48,201,804? By adding all costs minus subcontractor costs, the ADV calculated is $90,348,116 which is a significant difference.

A. The “Combined Auditable Dollar Value” and the “Summary of Auditable Costs

Claimed By Element” will not match because indirect expenses for non-NASA contracts are included in the latter.

95. Q. Per Task Order 03, could NASA please confirm the calculation of ADV of $39,472,497? By adding all costs minus subcontractor costs, the ADV calculated is $69,197,453 or, alternatively, $61,187,453 if the cost of corporate allocations should be included in indirect expenses.

96. Q. As noted in all Task Orders, subcontractors will not be audited and are, therefore, excluded from the ADV calculation. Could NASA please clarify if it expects the offeror to perform steps to audit subcontractor costs that are normally included in an ICE audit? More specifically, subcontractor costs generally are included in ADV because incurred cost audit testing procedures includes a test of agreements, test of billings back to subcontract agreements, testing for existence, occurrence, allocability and allowability. Is NASA stating they do not want any audit procedures performed over subcontracts by which we would qualify our report as to subcontract costs? Or, alternatively, is NASA stating we should perform the standard procedures over direct subcontract costs, however, NASA does not intend on having the auditor perform separate incurred cost audits over subcontractors which may have been awarded flexibly priced contracts by the prime?

A. Please see the note at the bottom of each executive summary: Subcontractor costs will not be audited as part of the scope of this audit. Therefore, they have been excluded from the ADV calculation above.

97. Q. Question 5 (d) of Attachment E – “Past Performance Questionnaire” – asks the question “Is the Contractor’s accounting system adequate for management and tracking of costs?” The answers to choose from are “Yes” or “No.” Because the respondent may not know the status of the offeror accounting system since this type of work is, for the most part, under commercial pricing GSA schedules and, therefore, the auditor is not subjected to the business system rule. Could NASA please consider changing the applicable answers to “Yes,” “No” or “N/A?” As the options currently read, the respondent will not be able to respond accurately.

A. “N/A” is an option. The updated PPQ page 3 is attached.

98. Q. Attachment A notes that the offeror shall prepare and submit an audit program for each task order – 1, 2, and 3 - identified in the solicitation. All three task orders are incurred cost submissions, so the audit program would be the same until the incurred cost submission is received and the work program modification and risk assessment begins.

Do we need to submit three separate, identical work programs?

A. The Offeror shall prepare and submit an audit program tailored for each task order identified in this solicitation.

99. Q. Section 4.1 of each task order SOW states “In addition, the auditor must determine whether the accounting system remains adequate for subsequent cost determinations which may be required for current or future contracts.” Could NASA please clarify that, if we become aware of deficiencies in the internal controls of the accounting system, we are expected to note them in the report, or, if we are to audit the accounting system in accordance with the 18 criteria prescribed in DFARS 252?

A. Yes, if during the course of an audit, you become aware of deficiencies in the internal controls of the accounting system, you are expected to note them in the report. Note that DFARS does not apply to this procurement.

100. Q. Per Task Area 12, Pre-Award Survey SF 1408, the solicitation notes we are to “opine as to whether the design of the contractor’s system is acceptable for the award of a cost-type contract.” Since this work is performed under the attestation standards of the AICPA as a review rather than an audit, could NASA please clarify its use of the word “opine” in this particular context?

A. We are procuring Task Orders 01, 02, and 03 which fall under Task Area 1:

Incurred Cost Audits.

101. Q. Page 33 Section F of the solicitation requires Peer Review Letters of the offeror and proposed subcontractors or teaming partners. AICPA Peer Review is performed over the firm issuing the audit reports; therefore, some potential subcontractors and teaming partners are not subject to peer review nor would they have a peer review report. Will NASA accept a Peer Review Report from the Offeror only as they are responsible for signing and issuing the reports?

A. The Offeror shall provide a copy of its most current AICPA Peer Review. If the

Offeror identifies any proposed subcontractors or teaming partners, the Offeror shall also provide copies of their most recent AICPA Peer Review.

102. Q. Will the government reconsider its requirement for an incurred cost audit report, and instead allow bidders to include work products which they believe best show their knowledge of, and experience with, the applicable requirements?

A. No.

103. Q. Page 31 of 53 - Will the government reconsider its past performance evaluation criteria to provide higher scoring for knowledge of, and experience with, the applicable standards?

A. No. The Government will not be changing its past performance evaluation criteria.

104. Q. Will the government consider awarding the contract to include both Firm Fixed Price AND Time and Materials (T&M) type orders? Further, will the government consider awarding the initial three orders on a T&M basis to allow successful vendors to gain requisite knowledge about scope and level of effort to inform future bids?

A. No. The Government has determined that the task orders will be issued on a Firm Fixed Price basis.

105. Q. Will the government allow for both LPTA as well as best value evaluations of future task orders?

A. No. All task order RFPs shall be evaluated utilizing Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA). The method of evaluation shall be specified in the task order solicitation.

106. Q. Please confirm a font size smaller than 11-point type Arial is acceptable for…