Industry Question and Answer.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 20 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- PAN40925P000_002015
About this file
This file is an Industry Question and Answer document for a competitive non-personal services contract for Army Community Support (ACS) and Family Advocacy Program (FAP) services at the United States Army Garrison (USAG) Wiesbaden, Germany. The contract is a fixed-price solicitation with a 12-month base period and two 12-month option periods, expected to start around 01 June 2025. The procurement consolidates services previously performed under contracts held by BFRENCH CONSULTING LLC and LADGOV CORP, with an estimated workforce of 7 full-time equivalents across various service areas including FAP Admin Services, FAP Support, Cultural Adaptation, Relocation, and Reception/Admin Services.
Key evaluation details include a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) methodology, where technical submissions will be rated only "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable" and past performance is not considered. Contractors must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) database, comply with German labor laws, and provide personnel capable of meeting specific performance requirements. Pricing will be evaluated by individual Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs), and contractors must propose a staffing model that meets the Performance Work Statement (PWS) requirements. The contract will be awarded by the Department of the Army Materiel Command Army Contracting Command, with services to be performed in Wiesbaden, Germany.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Number | Document | Section | Question | Government Response |
| 1 | RFQ | Is this a new requirement or is this a follow-on? | All requirements for this procurement have been performed on former / currently existing contracts. This procurement consolidates those services and provides for minor revisions to the requirements of the contracts approaching end of life. | |
| 2 | RFQ | If this is a follow-on, can you provide the current contract number and incumbent? | This new contract includes services previously provided under contracts W912CM-22-P-0024 (BFRENCH CONSULTING LLC), W912CM-21-P-0010 (BFRENCH CONSULTING LLC), and W912CM-23-P-0002 (LADGOV CORP) | |
| 3 | RFQ | If new, can you provide the latest contract number that has performed this service of similar? | REF response to Q2. | |
| 4 | PWS | 5.1 - 5.3 | Can the Government clarify the expected number of full-time equivalents (FTEs) required to support each service area—FAP Admin Services (CLIN 0003), FAP Support (CLIN 0002), Cultural Adaptation (CLIN 0004), Relocation (CLIN 0005), and Reception/Admin Services (CLIN 0006)? | Historical workload information for each function is provided in the revised PWS under Amendment 1 of this RFQ. Historical CME/FTEs are as follows: |
FAP Admin Services (W912CM22P0024) = 1 FTE FAP Support Services (W912CM21P0010) = 1 FTE ACS Support Serviced(W912CM23P0002) = 5 FTE.
However, this procurement is performance-based. Therefore, the Government will only be evaluating the Contractor's capabilities to meet the PWS requirements. Contractor may propose staffing model they believe meets the requirements outlined in the PWS.
| 5 | PWS | 5.1 - 5.3 | Will the Government provide historical workload data (e.g., average number of FAP cases, relocation classes, host nation tours, or front desk traffic) to assist with accurate staffing and pricing assumptions per CLIN? | REF response to Q4. |
| 6 | RFQ | Is there an incumbent currently providing these services? If so, can the Government share the contractor’s name, contract number, and any performance-related lessons learned? | REF response to Q2. No additional information will be provided in regards to this question. | |
| 7 | PWS | 5.2.2 | For the FAP on-call requirement under CLIN 0002, is the expectation that one person covers 50% of on-call duty, or may it be split among multiple contractor staff? | Yes, one person covers 50% of on-call duty. Due to the qualification requirements of that position, it may not be split amongst multiple Contractor personnel. |
| 8 | PWS | 1.6, 5.0 | Are there any limitations on the total number of contractor personnel, or may offerors propose a staffing model optimized for performance and compliance with PWS and CLIN requirements? | No limitations. Contractor may propose staffing model they believe meets the requirements outlined in the PWS. Supporting information will need to be provided for the Government to evaluate if the solution is acceptable or not. |
| 9 | PWS | 5.4.3.3 | Will the Government facilitate or fund contractor credentialing through the National Advocate Credentialing Program? | No. |
| 10 | PWS | 1.24 | Will the Government sponsor the contractor for SOFA status and provide necessary documents (e.g., confirmation letters, memos) for TESA/DOCPER applications? | No. SOFA is not authorized for this requirement, as such, TESA/DOCPER applications will not be processed. |
| 11 | PWS | 1.24 | Does the Government have a list of pre-approved documentation or a point of contact to support contractor engagement with German authorities? | Not Applicable. |
| 12 | PWS | 1.24 | Will the contractor be responsible for initiating DOCPER/TESA submissions, or will the Government act as the formal sponsor and submit on behalf of the contractor? | REF response to Q10. |
| 13 | PWS | 3.2 - 3.4 | Will contractor personnel under all CLINs be provided dedicated workspaces, phones, internet access, and computers within ACS facilities? | Yes. |
| 14 | PWS | 5.1.4, 3.4 | Will contractor staff be granted access to required systems (e.g., CTS, VADATS, SharePoint), or should alternative data management solutions be proposed? | Yes. |
| 15 | PWS | 3.1.2 | Will Government-Owned Vehicles (GOVs) be available for mission-related transportation (e.g., relocation tours), or should contractors budget for local travel under CLINs 0004–0006? | No access to GOVs will provided. |
Contractors should include local travel in their proposed prices. There will not be a separate CLIN to cover these costs.
| 16 | PWS | 1.20, CLIN 0001 | Will the Government define the exact duration and expectations of the two-week Phase-In period? What deliverables are expected during this time? | Two weeks. Requirement is IAW PWS Section 1.20. Deliverables during Phase-In period would be anything needed for granting accesses to systems and the installation, to include training certificates. |
| 17 | PWS | 1.23, 1.24 | If delays occur due to CAC issuance, SOFA, or DOCPER processing, will the Government authorize a delayed or remote start for specific CLINs or labor categories? | No. |
REF response to Q10. Delays in CAC issuance, or any other delays as a result of the Government's action (or in actions), shall be addressed Post Award.
| 18 | RFQ | 52.212-2 | Can the Government confirm that the evaluation will follow an LPTA (Lowest Price Technically Acceptable) methodology, and that technical submissions will be rated only “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”? Please clarify the evaluation methodology? | REF Addenda to RFQ Attachment, specifically Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 (page 9 Addenda to RFQ Attachment). |
| 19 | RFQ | Will past performance be considered in any capacity, or is technical acceptability strictly limited to certifications, experience, subcontracting information, and SPRS score? | No, Past Performance is not considered as an evaluation factor for this solicitation. REF Q18 response for Technical Acceptability. | |
| 20 | RFQ Price Book | Since each service area has a separate CLIN, is the Government expecting individual pricing by CLIN and labor category, or is an overall blended rate acceptable? | The award will align with the Price Book and individual pricing by CLIN will be used. A blended rate is not acceptable. | |
| 21 | RFQ Price Book | Should travel (e.g., outreach, training TDYs), onboarding, and other direct costs be priced separately per CLIN or built into the fully burdened labor rates? | Any ODCs should be built into the FFP pricing proposed IAW the Price Book. No Separately priced CLIN will be provided for ODCs. | |
| 22 | PWS | 1.8 | Are meetings in person, virtually or both? | Both |
| 23 | PWS | 1.1 | Do key personnel (Contract Manager/Alternate Contract Manager) need to be assigned in Germany? | See revised PWS. Contract Manager does not have to be on site where the services are being performed, however, must be available to address matters relating to the daily operation of this contract during the days and local times required by the PWS. |
| 24 | PWS | 1.1 | Can Key personnel also be assigned other duties such as FAP Services? | REF response to Q7. Key Personnel requirements are listed in PWS Section 1.10 (Sections 1.10 through 1.10.3.2). |
| 25 | PWS | 1.14 | Will contractors be authorized on-base housing or DODEA school for dependents? | As this procurement utilizes contracted employees, on-base housing or DODEA access for dependents are not authorized. |
| 26 | RFQ | We respectfully request that the Contracting Officer consider reassigning the solicitation’s primary NAICS code to 541611 – Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services, which carries a $24.5 million size standard. This request is made in accordance with FAR 19.303(c)(1) – A prospective offeror may request a review of the NAICS code designation by the contracting officer before the closing date for receipt of proposals. |
The responsibilities reflected in the contract are more consistent with program support, professional services, and general management consulting than with direct social services as defined in NAICS 624190.
Adopting NAICS 541611 ($24.5M) would:
| • | Align the procurement with the actual labor categories and deliverables outlined in the PWS. |
| • | Promote fair and open competition by allowing small businesses operating at slightly higher revenue thresholds to compete, consistent with SBA intent. |
| • | Reflect industry standard practices for similar government service contracts across DoD and other federal agencies. |
| We respectfully request your office consider updating the solicitation to reflect NAICS 541611 and its corresponding $24.5M size standard to ensure that the most appropriate and competitive pool of small businesses is eligible to respond. | This action is not a small business set aside. Since the procurement is OCONUS, Small Business requirements do not apply. NAICS code alignment in regards to this aspect are not a factor in NAICS code selection. Then the goal is to best align to the most relevant NAICS code. After reviewing the requested NAICS code change, the Contracting Officer has determined that the existing NAICS code selected is the most relevant NAICS code for the required services. | |||||
| 27 | PWS | 1.5.1 | Does the Government want a management structure physically located in Europe? | REF response to Q23. The Contractor must comply with Key Personnel requirements listed in PWS Section 1.10 and provide required services as stated in the PWS. Any other "management structures" of the Contractor are up to the Contractor to determine. | ||
| 28 | RFQ | Technical Factor | ||||
| Element A | Are resumes required with proposal submission for all positions or just the 2 FAP positions? | Resumes are required for all positions. The Addenda to RFQ Attachment has been updated to reflect this change | ||||
| 29 | PWS | 1.5.4.3 | Can the Gov’t confirm this requirement applies only to the FAP Services position? | No. This requirement is for all Contractor personnel providing services identified in this PWS. | ||
| 30 | PWS | 1.10.3.1 | Are the German/English language and host nation knowledge requirements applicable to the relocation readiness technician? | Requirements for German/English language and host nation knowledge requirements only applies to the Cultural Adaptation personnel. The Addenda to RFQ Attachment has been updated to reflect this change | ||
| 31 | Is it the government's expectation and intent for the contractor to control the services provided by the personnel provided (i.e. to control what will be done and how it will be done)? | The services requested in the PWS are not personal services. The Contractor shall provide personnel that provide services as outlined in the PWS. The Government has regulations, policies, procedures, and curriculum requirements that must be adhered to, however, the Contractor is responsible to ensure the services are provided by their personnel IAW the PWS. | ||||
| 32 | Is the government able to share the equivalent GS-levels for the various positions? | No. These positions were not previously held by Government employees under the General Schedule system. | ||||
| 33 | RFQ | How is the government evaluating the price for reasonableness considering that it is a LPTA evaluation criteria? | REF Addenda to RFQ Attachment, specifically Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 (pages 10-11 Addenda to RFQ Attachment). | |||
| 34 | How does the government ensure compliance with US and Host Nation labor law (i.e. 1099 employments being illegal as per the IRS and Host Nation law). | This is the responsibility of the Contractor. If noncompliance is discovered or brought to the Government's attention post award, then it will be handled accordingly at that time. | ||||
| 35 | RFQ | The CLIN structure has a phase in period (CLIN 0001) that is NSP. Is this phase in period to commence at the beginning of the new contract or will there be a 2 week turnover period with the incumbent contractor? | REF response to Q16. | |||
| 36 | This appears to be a consolidation of multiple contracts. Please provide the incumbent contract number(s). | REF response to Q2 | ||||
| 37 | Are all positions currently filled? | REF response to Q4 | ||||
| 38 | RFQ | Attachment 2 | Will the Government accept a copy of offerors' reps & certs out of sam.gov in lieu of Attachment 2? | Yes. Attachment 2 or a SAM.gov printout is acceptable to supplement the attachment (not all information requirements are addressed in a SAM.gov printout). | ||
| 39 | RFQ | Addenda Element A | For non-native English speakers, what documentation of English proficiency is acceptable? | REF Addenda to RFQ Attachment, specifically Factor 1 Technical. Affirmative attestation is acceptable for evaluation purposes. | ||
| 40 | RFQ | Addenda Element A | Does the Government require a copy of candidate's driver's license with the proposal? | No, an affirmative attestation that the proposed personnel meet the minimum requirements of the PWS is sufficient. | ||
| 41 | RFQ | Addenda Element B | Will the Government accept candidate and/or employee experience demonstrating the required 2 years of relevant experience, or must this be company experience? | Factor 1 Technical Element B Experience is company experience executing/administering a recent contract of a similar size/scope as this procurement. | ||
| 42 | RFQ | The solicitation indicates that award will be made on a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) basis, provided that the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) is determined to be fair and reasonable. In recent OCONUS solicitations, there have been instances where awardees submitted significantly low bids and subsequently staffed the contract with freelance personnel who do not meet the legal criteria for independent contractors under host nation or US labor laws. This practice may undermine compliance with labor regulations and create an uneven playing field for compliant offerors. Could the Government please clarify what measures will be taken to ensure that proposed prices are both fair and reasonable, and that offerors are in compliance with applicable labor laws regarding employment classification? | The Government cannot comment on prior solicitations or awards. It is the responsibility of the Contractor to be aware of, and be in compliance with, any applicable labor laws, as specified in PWS para. 1.24. The Government's fair and reasonable determination shall be in accordance with FAR 13.106-3. | |||
| 43 | RFQ | The solicitation notes that price realism will not be evaluated. In the OCONUS environment, particularly in Germany, there is increasing evidence of abnormally low bids that do not account for required employer tax obligations or compliance with local labor laws. These bids can result in non-compliant staffing models (e.g., misclassification of employees as independent contractors), which pose significant performance, legal, and reputational risks to the Government. In the absence of a price realism evaluation, how will the Government ensure that offers are not artificially low in ways that could lead to labor law violations, performance issues, or post-award contract instability? | REF response to Q42. | |||
| 44 | RFQ | Attachment 3 | The Reference Information Sheet contains block 6, asking what experience is demonstrated. However, the available selections are not relevant to the solicitation. Will the Government provide an updated Attachment 3 or should this be handled in a different manner? | Attachment 3 has been updated | ||
| 45 | PWS | Estimated Workload | How many FTEs currently support the existing contract(s)? How many FTEs does the Government expect to support the solicitation contract? | REF response to Q4 and Q8 | ||
| 46 | PWS | Can the Government identify if this is a recompete or consolidation of existing work? If so, can the Government provide the relevant contract holders and contract numbers? | REF response to Q1 and Q2 | |||
| 47 | PWS | The pricing template does not list a separate CLIN for program management services that would incorporate the two required onsite management positions. Can the Government confirm what CLIN these positions should be associated with or are these positions expected to be provided at no cost? | REF response to Q23. The Government is not seeking a dedicated contract manager just to this contract, but that one be available by the Contractor to address any day-to-day personnel or performance issues, and can speak on behalf of the Contractor. | |||
| 48 | PWS | 4.4 | Please confirm that individual providers employed by the contractor, shall be able to use their personal vehicles to perform transportation services referenced in PWS? | Yes. Personal vehicles can be used | ||
| 49 | PWS | 5.3.1.1.2 | Please confirm that costs associated with lunch coordination will be billable to the Government under Other Direct Costs? If not, can you provide the historical average volume of attendees for lunch events for forecasting purposes? | The average number of attendees for the Host Nation Orientation is 35 participants weekly. | ||
| 50 | PWS | 5.4 | Will the Government allow for alternate/reserve staff members to be cleared so that the vendor can meet these requirements for absences in where back-fills are required in two-working days? Without pre-cleared resources, it would be extremely unlikely that a vendor could meet these requirements. | The Government recognizes the concern and will be addressed at post-award. | ||
| 51 | RFQ | Element A.1 | Can the Government confirm the number of resumes required? Are letters of commitments required with resume submission? |
For item B, will an affirmative statement from the vendor that the candidate has received a degree from a US institution and meets the minimum equivalent to level 3 in English proficiency satisfy this requirement, or is the government requiring a specific training certificate?
Are we required to provide German driver's license copies for each candidate or will an affirmative statement that candidates are authorized to drive in Germany sufficient? REF response to Q28 for resumes. Letters of commitment are not required but are appreciated.
Technical statements, CV, etc. can be used for documentation submission. See updated Addenda to RFQ regarding what documentation is to be submitted for proposed personnel.
A physical driver's license may but is not required to be sent. An affirmative attestation is sufficient. Please note the PWS does not specify a Germany driver's license is required, just that the proposed personnel have the ability to operate vehicles legally within Germany.
52 RFQ Element A.3 Can the Government confirm if this is a requirement of the company to have this experience in the last two years or the proposed candidate resumes? The proposed candidate should have the requested experience listed under Factor 1 Element A.3. Any reference to the Experience (Element B) is in reference to the Contractor's experience in executing/administering a recent contract of a similar size/scope.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .