QA_OPM2612Q0053.pdf

SOLICITATION #OPM2612Q0053 – QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

Q1. Referencing pg. 3 of the RFQ, how may bidders best demonstrate that their proposed instructors have “equivalent” certification or qualifications?

A1. If not certified by the Resiliency Center, the bidder may demonstrate equivalency by describing the intellectual and research-based foundations for the resiliency concepts that would be taught in the course, and how they meet the learning objectives. This could include texts that will form the basis of the course, a brief course outline, and any enabling objectives for the content.

Q2. May we submit alternate proposals that do not draw from Al Seibert’s The Resiliency Advantage? May we, in a single proposal response, suggest parallel incorporation of other primary texts in the “resiliency” field side by side with Al Seibert’s text The Resiliency Advantage while still meeting the RFQ’s direction for class content based on its core insights?

A2. Yes. Alternate proposals will be accepted as long as the primary/original requirements in the solicitation are also addressed.

Q3. Would OPM send this year’s bidders the agendas or other materials from previous, similar trainings?

A3. No. Previous courses have been based on content in The Resiliency Advantage as stated in the SOO. Please note the learning objectives provided in this solicitation.

Q4. Referencing pg. 3 of the RFQ, would the Contracting Officer send bidders the “course evaluation tool”?

A4. OPM uses Knowledge Advisors’ “Metrics That Matter” for all course evaluations.

Q5. Referencing pg. 4 of the RFQ and deliverable 6.2, would the Contracting Officer please define “camera-ready”, regarding the participant materials in electronic format?

A5. Materials must be ready to be copied, free of any errors.

Q6. Referencing pg. 4 of the RFQ and deliverable 6.3, would the Contracting Officer elaborate on how many hours of instruction and the timeline intended with the phrase “two days of instruction (over a three day period)”?

A6. The actual instructional hours total 16. Currently the course begins on the afternoon of Day 1 and concludes at noon on Day 3. The actual dates of the courses are set at this time.

Q7. Referencing pg. 19-20 of the RFQ, what information does the Contracting Officer want about LOE or “level of involvement”—number of contracts, contract value, number of personnel, frequency/pace of training and course rollout?

A7. Please refer back to statement on pg 19, “The information presented shall be in sufficient detail to describe the previous experience and effectiveness of the offeror in similar or closely related work, and to demonstrate the offeror’s current ability to accomplish the tasking in this solicitation.

Q8. Are past performance tables (such as those requested on pg. 20 of the RFQ) and the title page included in 25 page limit for the Technical Proposal?

A8. That information is part of the Technical Proposal and should be counted in the total. OPM will increase the maximum page number to 35 for this solicitation.

Q9. Referencing pg. 21 of the RFQ, part (c), does each “volume” mean the technical and price “volumes”/proposals, or does this division starting at the tops of pages and restarting numbering occur between part (a), the technical approach, and part (b), corporate experience?

A9. Technical and Pricing proposals must be separate documents. Please note this statement found at the top of pg. 19: “If the technical and price proposals are not submitted in two separate files, the proposal will be considered non-responsive.”

Q10. Referencing pg. 21 of the RFQ, may bidders submit “sample course materials” or supplemental materials that are in video or voice-over-powerpoint format? How would the Contracting Officer prefer to receive this media? We could do any of the following, with a & being most representative:

a. by CD-ROM

b. in an compressed file format attached in the proposal submission email

c. embedded/linked in a Microsoft Word file (.doc) in the technical narrative;

or

d. broken down from a video format and rather with a few screen shots and quotes from the video in the technical narrative.

A10. Proposals may only be submitted by email as described in the solicitation.

Q11. Would {a vendor} be able to schedule around conflicts with {delivery dates}? Would it be appropriate to propose the same approach that {any member of key personnel} could deliver?

A11. The bidder should propose the dates they are available and the dates they are not available.

The schedule is published and cannot be changed. It is appropriate to propose the same approach with more than one qualified presenter listed as key personnel.