Questions 191NLE23Q0012.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 51 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Narcotics Incinerator Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 191NLE23Q0012
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Solicitation No 191NLE23Q0012 Narcotics Incinerator Questions 3.pdf | ||
| Solicitation No 191NLE23Q0012 Narcotics Incinerator Questions 2.pdf | ||
| Solicitation No 191NLE23Q0012 Narcotics Incinerator Answers.pdf | ||
| 191NLE23Q0012.pdf | ||
| Narcotics Incinerator SOW.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Questions and Clarifications
| Identifier | Technical, Cost, or Admin | RFP Section and Page Reference | Question or Clarification Request | Offeror Recommendation (if any) | Government Response to Question | ||
| *Note: Answers must be complete, well-written, and address all aspects of the question or clarification request. The goal is to provide adequate information so an additional round of Q&A results in few or no follow-up questions. | Change to RFQ? If so, where? | ||||||
| 1 | Technical | E.1.4.b, Information to Vendors/Offerors, Staffing Approach (Volume 1) | The RFQ states "The Offeror shall describe the roles and responsibilities for the personnel proposed. May this be done in Section B-1 versus in the one page CVs? | We recommend allowing Offerors the flexibility to include this information in Volume 1, Section B-1 to allow for more robust information and justification of their staffing plans. | Yes, offerors are now to include this information in Volume 1, Section B-1 to allow for more robust information and justification of their staffing plans. | Yes - E.1.4.b has been updated | |
| 2 | Technical (Volume 1) and Cost | E.1.4.b, Information to Vendors/Offerors, Staffing Approach (Volume 1) | The RFQ states" Offeror shall also provide a signed employment agreement./contingent hire agreement for an individual who's [sic] CV are [sic] presented and who are [sic] not currently employed by the Offeror or one of its subcontractors. The contingent agreement shall specify position and negotiated salary range." Please clarify: 1) given the intermittent nature of the work involved, are Offerors required to hire project personnel as employees or may they hire personnel through short-term contracts as is customary? 2) Should the required agreements and/or cost information (negotiated salary range or daily rate) be included in Technical, Volume 1, Section B Staffing Approach, B-1 Staffing Plan, or B-2 Personnel, and/or in Volume 3, Price Quote (Cost)? 3) May these agreements be included as an attachment, and if they must be provided in Volume 1, do they count toward the page limit of Section B? | 1) The Offeror is free to choose the hiring mechanism that they believe is the best fit for this requirement. The Government will not dictate to offerors what type of employer/employee relationship is necessary. 2) The requirement to submit the negotiated salary range has been deleted. The recent signed employee agreement/contingent hire agreement can be included behind the CV and will not be included in the overall page count. | Yes - E.1.4.b has been updated | ||
| 3 | E.1.4.c Information to Vendors/Offerors Relevant Experience and Past Performance (Volume 2) and Attachment 2, Section D | Section E.1.4.c states "The offeror shall only cite experiences that have occurred … within the past 36 months prior to the issuance of this RFQ. The Offeror shall also map its recent and relevant experience to the specific government requirements being procured under this RFQ and shall demonstrate how its past and present performance validates that it will provide superior performance under this contract. Please clarify: 1) whether it is mandatory to present a current/present contract for relevant experience/performance or offerors maypresent two past relevant/experiences performance to satisfy the RFQ requirements; 2) In what section of the offer, an Offeror should "map its recent and relevant experience, and if only past experience/performance is allowed how/in what section an Offeror should "demonstrate how its past and present performance validates that it will provide superior performance under this contract." | The past performance cited in the Relevant Experience Questionnaires need to be either: 1) existing/active contracts; or 2) work that has been performed within the past 36 months prior to the issuance of this RFQ. The mapping shall occur within the Relevant Experience Questionnaire | Yes - E.1.4.c has been updated | |||
| 4 | Technical (Volume 2) | E.1.4.c Information to Vendors/Offerors Relevant Experience and Past Performance (Volume 2) and Attachment 2, Section D | Section E.1.3.c states " The offeror shall provide a maximum of two pertinent examples to substantiate its current and recent experience in performing work that directly supports activities identified in the RFQ." Attachment 2, Section D states: "Note: Section D (Blocks 10-15) will need to be completed for Relevant Experience project. Therefore, the Offeror will submit a maximum of six (6) completed Section D forms." Please clarify how many projects/Section D forms may be submitted. | The language referencing a maximum of six (6) projects in Attachment 2 has been deleted. | Yes - Attachment 2 | ||
| 5 | Technical (Volume 2) | E.1.4.c Information to Vendors/Offerors Relevant Experience and Past Performance (Volume 2) and Attachment 2, Section D | Under Past Performance, the RFQ states that "The Offeror shall distribute a copy of the attached Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3), to its past performance references." On the following page, the RFQ states, "All Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer by the quote submission date identified in FedBizOpps. Offerors need to make every effort to provide either a CPARS report and PPQ in order for the Government to verify the quality of past performance being references." However, Attachment 2, Section D, Block 14 says "Circle whether a CPAR print-out or Past Performance Questionnaire is provided to the Government to evaluate the quality of this project." May Offerors submit a CPAR print out in lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire? | Given the short timeline for responses to this RFQ, and the lead time typically expected by CORs to fill out performance questionnaires (PPQs), we respectfully recommended that CPARs, if available, be accepted in lieu of PPQs. This would significantly reduce the burden on Offerors and their CORs. | In order to verify the quality of past performance being referenced, it is the responsibility of the Offeror to provide the Government with either a completed PPQ or a report from CPARS. The language in the RFQ has been updated | Yes - E.1.4.c has been updated | |
| 6 | Technical, Cost | E.2 Quote Evaluation | The RFQ includes the following evaluation factors: 1) "Overall Technical Approach;" 2) "Staffing Plan and Proposed Personnel;" 3) Relevant Experience and Past Performance;" and 4) "Price." However, the following sentence states "For this RFQ, technical and past performance, when combined, are more important than price." This statement is somewhat confusing because it does not explain the relative importance of each of the four evaluation factors and seems to suggest that the first two factors will be weighed collectively with the third factor against cost without explaining the relative weight of each of these three factors. Please clarify how the evaluation factors will be applied and what the relative importance of each factor is. | In accordance with provision 52.212-2, the evaluation factors have been listed in descending order of importance. As this requirement has been solicited as a commercial item (FAR Part 12) under simplified acquisition procedures (FAR 13.5), the Contracting Officer is not required to describe the relative importance of evaluation factors. | No | ||
| 7 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work (SOW), Program Background, Section VI, Program Requirements | The SOW states "the primary goal of the training is to professionalize and enhance the practice of criminal financial forensic accounting within law enforcement/criminal justice sector, assist in the building of specific real time cases, and develop and facilitate sustainable bilateral U.S.-Bahamas law enforcement relationships to address immediate challenges at the operational level." Under Section VI, Forensic Accounting is one of a long list of subjects to be covered in the training program, and states "The Contractor shall provide experts that will be responsible for training and mentoring on the topics listed below, focusing on instructional techniques and developing a high level of knowledge in intelligence analysis, as wel as investigation and case preparation using real life examples." Would INL please provide additional information on 1) the relative importance of the various training topics in relation to forensic accounting; 2) the expected level of proficiency and knowledge of participants from each participant category in at least forensic accounting; and INL's definition of "high level of knowledge." Is it correct to assume that INL seeks to instill not only a high level of knowledge but all high level competency/proficiency in applying that knowledge to cases independently following the completion of the training program? | The relative importance of each subject would be helpful because, while the RFQ provides extensive information on instructor requirements and process with respect to curriculum development, there is minimal information regarding the specific knowledge and skills development objectives and expectations for the each topical area. | Yes, it is correct to assume that INL seeks to instill not only a high level of knowledge but all high level competency/proficiency in applying that knowledge to cases independently following the completion of the training program. |
| The Government has provided more than ample information regarding the background and requirements associated with this procurement and we are looking for a qualified partner who understands the same. | No | ||||||
| 8 | 5 | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Section II, Section V, Place of Performance, and Section VI Program Requirements (Deliverables) | The SOW states that the Contractor "will provide four (4) professional grade laptop computers, four (4) professional grade desktop computers, four (4) monitors, and two (2) portable scanners, all of which will be donated to RBFP at the conclusion of the training. Under Section VII, Deliverables, the Scope of Work includes as a deliverable that "The desktop and laptop computers (with installed software), monitors, scanners, printer, and server will arrive in Nassau and be ready for use in the classroom." Will the RBFP be responsible for securing this equipment during the period of training when it is still the property of the USG? | Yes, the RBPF will be responsible for securing the equipment after the initial donation is made for the first of the courses. | No | ||
| 9 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Program Requirements, Section 2. Reporting Requirements | The SOW requires an action report after each training, which must include "Names of students completing the course; Names of students not completing course (not meeting 90% attendance rule, behavioral issues, etc.)." Does INL have a list of rules for course completion such as the 90% attendance rule, or will the Contractor be expected to define completion standards? | The contractor wlil define completion standards. | No | ||
| 10 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Program Requirements, Section 2. Reporting Requirements | The SOW states that the out brief with INL should discuss the "pre-test (baseline and final test to gauge participants shall be presented to INL personnel," as well as "a course critique that was distributed to all student participants at the completion of training." Could INL please confirm that the Contractor shall present 1) copies of the pre-test and post-completion test forms and a copy of the course critique questionnaire; 2) a summary and statistical data with analysis, findings, and conclusions of the results of the tests/critiques completed by participants; and/or copies of each test form and critique completed by each student. | Yes, this will be required. | No | ||
| 11 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Section VII | The second paragraph under staffing requirements states "The curriculum developer/writer will also serves as one of the instructors. The lead instructor will develop the curriculum and the lessons plans, and the non-lead instructors will prepare individual sections and conduct the necessary advanced investigative work." Following this paragraph, there is a list of Curriculum Developer Writer Requirements that describes a "curriculum development team," including a requirement that the team include subject matter experts on the subjects of The Bahamas and the Caribbean and in the UK Justice System. Please clarify whether all three instructors must be part of the curriculum development team and whether the curriculum development team should include subject matter experts beyond those hired as instructors. | The Offeror shall determine the composition of the curriculum development and instructor team(s). | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | ||
| 12 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Section VII, Staffing Requirements | The solicitation requires litigation experience in the Caribbean or Bahamas, knowledge of the UK Justice System and states that instructors must have 10 years experience working for U.S. or UK law enforcement. The solicitation also states that all instructors must have U.S. security clearances. Please clarify whether individuals, who have worked for UK law enforcement or prosecutorial systems must have U.S. security clearances. | We recommend that INL allow at least SMEs and curriculum developers who have worked for UK law enforcement but are not US citizens or permanent residents to work on the project without clearances even if specific limitations on their scope of activity are imposed. | Under this contract, the USG will not be granting access to classified information; however, Contractor personnel will have access to sensitive Bahamian case information, which may have international implications. The USG seeks a Contractor whose personnel have demonstrated experience in dealing carefully and discreetly, with highly visible, highly sensitive cases, in order to allow for proper, successfully prosecuted outcomes. | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | |
| 13 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Section VII, Staffing Requirements | The Staffing Requirements include a multitude of requirements that appear overlapping. Further, the requirements for different categories of personnel (instructors, curriculum developers and SMEs) are mixed together. In some instances, the RFQ references "this knowledge," but it is unclear from the preceding text to exactly "what knowledge" the RFQ is referring. The RFQ reads as though every individual must have every element of the required knowledge and experience stated. 1) Would it be possible for INL either to segregate the qualifications requirements by personnel category (instructors, curriculum developers, and SMEs) and then by sub-category (lead-instructor, instructor, lead curriculum developer, curriculum developer, etc.) and/or to provide this information in a chart to ensure that the requirements are clear to offerors? 2) Would INL please clarify for each requirement the extent to which individual labor category/sub-category personnel must possess experience or knowledge of every item listed and whether a) the experience in each area must have been in the Bahamas and/or the region; b) the knowledge must be specific to the Bahamas and/or the region. | We recommend that the requirements be applied to the team of instructors collectively so that highly specialized experts, best able to teach individual topics, be presented to participants but that as a whole the team possess all subject matter requirements. We also recommend that the curriculum development team as a whole, including developers/writers and SME, meet the requirements so that the best experts can be attracted for each topic to be covered and subject matter experts in the Bahamas and Caribbean can be brought in to provide further guidance. | We agree that the requirements can be applied to the team of instructors collectively so that highly specialized experts, best able to teach individual topics, be presented to participants but that as a whole the team possess all subject matter requirements. | Yes - SOW, Section VII (Staffing Requirements) has been updated to reflect "Curriculum Development Team" | |
| 14 | Technical | Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Section VII, Staffing Requirements | The first element of the stated goal of the Activity is "to professionalize and enhance the practice of criminal financial forensic accounting within law enforcement/criminal justice sector," and one of the required course topics is forensic accounting. However, the RFQ does not require that a single SME, instructor, or curriculum developer have education or experience in forensic accounting. Is this perhaps an oversight? | Forensic Accounting has been added to the subject matter expertise of the SME team. | Yes - Section VII (Staffing Requirements) has been updated. | ||
| 15 | Technical | SOW Section II. Scope of Work, Section VI, Program Requirements | Under section II, SOW states "Delivery of the training/mentoring/case preparation program (hereinafter referred to as the training session) will be provided in three-week increments, three (3) times per year during the yearlong period of performance. Each training session will consist of (1) week of contractor-developed training, one (1) week of in-person mentoring, and (1) week of assistance with case preparation based on actual cases awaiting adjudication. While the essential framework of the curriculum will be consistent (that is, one training course shall be developed), it will be updated/improved as necessary, based on an assessment of the efficacy of course session outcomes. Furthermore, the curriculum may be adjusted to accommodate the actual cases being used." Under Section VI Program Requirements, Sub-section 1. "Curriculum Development Requirements (3 training sessions, each 1 week long; 3 weeks of mentoring, each 1 week long; 3 weeks case preparation for each course, each 1 week). (continued on next row) Please clarify: 1) Will the same 15 students participate in each cycle (i.e. 15 students will receive in-depth training over the course of one year through a curriculum of 3 sequential 3-week training/mentoring/assistance sessions OR 45 participants will be trained in 3 groups through 3 separate 3-week sessions -- with any needed adjustments to improve the effectiveness of delivery -- using a curriculum designed to cover all topics within 3 weeks of training, mentoring and assistance). 2) If 3 different/separate groups will participate in separate 3-week courses will the makeup of each group of students be mixed (students from each of RBPF, DPP and FIU) or will there be one session for each target audience separately. 3) Could INL identify the specific categories of professional, who will participate as students and provide preliminary information about their overall level of education, certifications and/or experience and/or the minimum job qualifications and requirements for their positions to Offerors? | 1) They will likely be the same 15 students, with 1 or 2 added or dropped as needed for schedules. 2) The group will be mixed between RBPF anticorruption unit and financial investigation unit officers with Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) and prosecutors possible in the course. 3) No. | No | ||
| 16 | Administrative | Solicatation Provisions, E.1.3 | Would INL consider extending the submission deadline so that Offers have adequate time to respond to clarifications with respect to the technical approach and staffing requirements? | We recommend an extension of 10 days. | Yes - the deadline has been extended to May 1, 2019. | Yes | |
| 17 | Admin | Is there an incumbent currently performing this work? If so, can you provide their contract number or title? | No. | No | |||
| 18 | Technical/Cost | SOW Pg.2 | Based on the government's proposed three training sessions is Nassau, The Bahama, Miami, Florida, and a thrid session in either location, what specifically determines which location the government uses for the third training? | It will depend on cost of either location and ease for the students. | No | ||
| 19 | Technical/Cost | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | Should offerors provide pricing for both instances in which two sessions are taught in The Bahammas and two sessions are taught in Miami? | Would recommend the government coordinate the exact location for the third to limit price discrepancies between vendors | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables has been revised to provide a "plug" for travel and to include instructions for development of pricing for each CLIN. | Yes - Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | |
| 20 | Technical/Cost | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | Would the government consider adding a cost narrative to describe and explain pricing that is provided into the pricing attachment? | Yes. Please see response to item 19. | Yes - Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | ||
| 21 | Cost | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | Will the government provide a travel plug number for proposal purposes? A plug ensures contractors are evaluated on a fair position. | Provide a plug for travel costs | Yes. Please see response to item 19. | Yes - Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | |
| 22 | Cost | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables | Where would the government like contractors to place larger program management costs for the program in its entirety (i.e. program manager)? | New CLIN for Program Management | Yes - Attachment 4 Pricing Tables and Attachment 1 - SOW Section VII. Staffing Requirements have been updated. | ||
| 23 | Cost | Attachment 4 Pricing Tables - SOW Pg.13 - Section X. | Can the government provide a plug number or cost summary for the diplomatic cargo carrier requirement? | The cost for carrier shipping from Miami to Nassau will be handled outside the contract and does not need to be submitted as part of an offeror's price proposal. | No | ||
| 24 | Technical | SOW Pg. 2 - Section IV | "Contractor will donate the equipment to the Bahamian government at the conclusion of this contract" Is that at the end of the 1st year or the 2 additional option years? Is the contractor responsible and liable until the donation at that time? | Upon on delivery in Nassau, the contractor should donate equipment and it should become RBPF property. | Per Section II (Scope of Work), the equipment will be donated to the RBPF at the conclusion of the first training. The Contractor is responsible and liable for the equipment until the time of donation. The offeror shall specify the warranty of the equipment in the proposal. | Yes - Section 5 (Warranty) has been updated as well as Section E.1.4.a | |
| 25 | Technical | SOW Pg. 2 - Section IV | Will the contractor be required to provide duplicate equipment for training in Nassau then in Miami, or is the only equipment being used in Miami the 4 laptops? | With so much government specificed equipment to support the course would the government not be better served by doing all training in Nassau? | No, there will be elements of the training that might be better provided in the United States. The laptops will be the only tool needed for travel. Travel to the States is helpful because the students will be unable to do other work while they are in the U.S. | No | |
| 26 | Technical | SOW Pg. 2 - Section IV | Confirm that Bahamian police are responsible for importing equipment to Miami for training? | No, INL will assist with customs duties upon arrival, the contractor is responsible for sending the items to Miami. | No | ||
| 27 | Technical | SOW Pg. 2 - Section IV | Is the contractor required to move and store equipment between training sessions? If so, is it expected to be stored in Nassau or Miami? | No. The RBPF is responsible for the equipment after the first course. | No | ||
| 28 | Technical | SOW Pg. 1 - Section II | Will all three training sessions be done consecutively or with time in between each? | No, the trainings will be spaced over a year with the contractor consulting with INL and RBPF for the timing. | No | ||
| 29 | If there are significant breaks between each training session, how many weeks or months in between are anticipated? | Either provide specific timeframes for instruction (i.e. Q3 2019 for first two trainings and Q4 for the third) or allow instructor to propose a timeline as a part of their offerors. | The timing of the courses will depend on the needs of the RBPF with work load. We need contractors that are flexible and can accommodate the requirement with proper notice. |
The Government will provide 60 calendar day notice.
| Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW) and RFQ - Period of Performance | |||||||
| 30 | Technical | SOW Pg.2 - Section IV. | Can the govenrment confirm that 4 laptops and 4 desktops meet the requirements for 15 trainees attending the course? | Yes, the 4 laptops and 4 desktops meet the needs. | No | ||
| 31 | Technical | SOW Pg.3 - Section IV. | Bank Scan - what type of remote management is needed for computers with this software? Can the government confirm that the Royal Bahamian Police Force (RBPF) is responsible for set up and management ? | RBPF will be responsible for management of bank scan. Contractor is responsible for the set up. | Yes - RFQ Section E.4.1.a. and Attachment 6 - Equipment has been added with updated information. | ||
| 32 | Admin | Can the government clarify if the government is responsible for obtaining the Bank-Scan Licenses, or is it the Government’s intent to have the contractor obtain them? | The Contractor will obtain the licenses. | Yes - Attachment 6 - Equipment has been added. Section 3 (Software Installation) has been updated | |||
| 33 | Technical | SOW Pg. 3 - Section IV. | File Server - Does the server not require any type of operating system? Can the government confirm that the RBFP is responsible for set up and management? | The RBPF will be responsible for the management of the server. We recommend the contractor assits with set up. | No | ||
| 34 | Technical | SOW Pg.3 - Section IV. | File Server - can the government clarify that they require a "Xeon" chip processor instead of a "Zeon" chip? | Yes, it's Xeon chip processor. | Yes - Attachment 6 (Equipment) has been added with, Section 5 (File Server) has been updated | ||
| 35 | Technical | SOW Pg. 3 - Section IV. | File Server - because the product type is listed as "barebone" so can the government confirm that this means no software weill be installed? | The Contractor will be required to install basic software and operating system on the server. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section 5 (File Server), updated | ||
| 36 | Technical | SOW Pg. 3 - Section IV. | What version of JAVA is required? | Java SE8 | Yes - Attachment 6 - Equipment, Section 3 (Software Installation) has been updated | ||
| 37 | Technical | SOW Pg. 3 - Section IV. | Is the government responsible for managing licensing and renewals on the server, laptops, and desktops | Yes, the RBPF will be responsible for renewals after the intial install; however, the contractor must provide all license information necessary to make the process easy. | This should be called "Plotter" printer | ||
| 38 | Technical | SOW Pg. 4 - Section IV. | Doppler printer paper - Can the government clarify that the paper is supposed to be 60 inches by 250 feet? | No, this should be 2 rolls of 60'' x 100' | Yes - Attachment 6 (Equipment), Section 6 (Doppler Printer) has been updated | ||
| 39 | Technical | SOW Pg. 4 - Section IV. | Doppler Printer Paper - Does the government want a particular kind of paper (i.e. gloss, satin, instant-dry)? | Satin photo paper | Yes - Attachment 6 (Equipment), Section 6 (Doppler Printer) has been updated | ||
| 40 | Technical | SOW Pg.7 - Section VI. | What is the government's anticipated timeline for providing current case files before curriculum deliverables? | Three weeks prior to the course development week. One month prior to course. | No | ||
| 41 | Technical | SOW Pg. 14 - Section X. | "Vendors will be responsible for shipping materials for Freeport and Abaco from Nassau" | ||||
| What materials are being shipped to Freeport and Abaco, and for what purpose? | None. This language has been removed. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section X (Shipping Instructions) has been updated | |||||
| 42 | Technical | SOW Pg. 14 - Section X. | Clairify who are the "vendors"? If the Contractor/Offeror is the "vendor" what materials are being shipped? How often are the shipments taking place? Are the shipments being shipped through Diplomatic Cargo shipments as well? | This information was included, eroneously. These items, as well as references to shipments to FPO and Abaco have been removed. | Yes - Attachment 1 SOW - Section X. | ||
| 43 | Technical | SOW Pg. 14 - Section X. | What is the cost for Diplomatic Cargo shipments from Miami to Nassau? | The Offeror is responsible for shipping the equipment to Miami, but is not responsible for the shipment from Miami to Nassau. The USG use freight forwarding companies for this leg of transportation. The diplomatic piece is only the customs and duty free importation. | Yes - Attachment 1 SOW - Section X. | ||
| 44 | Technical | SOW VI.1 - Section Deliverables and SOW X | What is the timeline for the equipment shipment (Deliverable NLT 60 days to arrive in Nassau; but same 60 days to arrive in Miami)? | Shipments of equipment are to be sent to Miami, to a freight forwarder. Once they are consigned at Miami, it takes about one week. Offeror should account for this week in their scheduling. | Yes - Attachment 6 (Equipment) added with updated information. | ||
| 45 | Technical | SOW Pg. 14 - Section X. | What is the timeline for shipments to leave Miami in Diplomatic Cargo and arrive in Nassau? | Refer to Question #44. | Yes - Attachment 6 (Equipment) added with updated information. | ||
| 46 | Technical | Are instructor's equipment and printed material also shipping through Diplomatic Cargo as well or is Contractor/Offeror resposible for DS 1504 and ITAR regulations? | Instructor equipment and materials are not diplomatic cargo and may be shipped by any means the offeror chooses. The Offeror is responsible to ensure shipments of contractor-owned equipment and materials comply with all applicable regulations and are accompanied by appropriate documentation, as necessary for international shipments. | No | |||
| 47 | Technical | SOW Pg. 14 - Section X. | Why are materials being shipped to these locations? Is training being conducted at these locations? | Refer to Question #41. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section X (Shipping Instructions) has been updated | ||
| 48 | Technical | SOW Pg. 11 - Section VIII. | Can the government clarify which airport in the Bahamas are trainers supposed to arrive at? | Nassu, LPIA | No | ||
| 49 | Technical | SOW Pg. 11 - Section VIII. | Can the government provide a specific location for training in the Bahamas? | Near Nassau Street, Nassau | No | ||
| 50 | Technical | SOW Pg 12. - Section IX. | "No more than three deliverables for review per review cycle should be provided" | ||||
| Because the first 5 deliverables are due within 30 to 45 days from contract award, this requirement does not follow the deliverable schedule. | Remove the requirement to accept deliverables based on the delivery schedule | This language has been removed. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section IX (Deliverable Matrix) has been updated | ||||
| 51 | Technical | SOW Pg 12. - Section IX. | The first deliverable, due NLT 30 days from contract award, is the Course Curriculum. Is this deliverable POIs or is it the Government's intent to have all course curriculum (test, activities, powerpoints, etc.) submitted as the first deliverable? | The Course Curriculum is the POI, hereafter referred to as the syllabus. Curriculum related deliverables have been adjusted to add a Needs Assessment as the first deliverable, with the course curriculum syllabus added as the second, followed by all other course materials. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW) Section IX has been updated. | ||
| 52 | Technical | SOW Pg 12. - Section IX. | Can you clairify what is a "review cycle"? Are there priority levels to the deliverables if the Government is only receiving three deliverables per review cycle? | This language has been removed. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section IX (Deliverable Matrix) has been updated | ||
| 53 | Technical | SOW | Can the government provide hours and days of operations/training for this contract (i.e. Monday through Friday 0800 - 1600)? | Monday-Friday 09:00-5:30 with a break for lunch | No | ||
| 54 | Admin | Solicitation Document - Section E.1.4 | "Offeror shall provide an electronic copy containing all required volumes of the written quotes." Can the government confirm that all volumes are to be on one single document? Also, does the government have any specification for the file name? | Volumes 1 and 2 should be one file. Volume 3 must be a separate file as it contains pricing information. No pricing information is to be included in Volumes 1 or 2. | No | ||
| 55 | Admin | Solicitation Document - Section E.1.4 | Does the government have specific requirements for font size for text, graphics, headers/footers, cover pages or tables? Speficially for the technical approach, staffing apporach, and past performance sections? | New language has been inserted into Section E.1.4 | Yes - The RFQ at Section E.1.4 has been updated | ||
| 56 | Admin | Solicitation Document - Section E.1.4 | In regards to page count, do table of contents, cover pages, cross reference matrices and other administrative documents count against the page count? | No, these do not count. | Yes - RFQ Section E.4.1. has been added with updated information. | ||
| 57 | Admin | Solicitation Document - Section E.1.4 | Attachment 2 - Relevant Experience Questionnaire; can the contractor alter the document to remove unneccessary rows and columns? Can the government confirm that narrative is to be 2 pages total while the first box does not count? | Yes, offerors can alter the document to remove unnecessary rows and columns. Each Relevant Experience Questionnaire shall not exceed two pages, total | No | ||
| 58 | Admin | Attachment 2 - Block 14 | "Indicate the scope, size, cost, principal elements, and special features of this contract." | ||||
| For ongoing programs, should contractors provide ceiling costs, awarded costs, or current costs accrued? | The Government prefers to have all of the information requested in the question. | No | |||||
| 59 | Technical | SOW Pg 11 - Section VII. | In accordance with Clearance requirements, if Bahamian trainees do not having secret clearances, is there an assumption that documents will be marked sensitive instead of secret or is it the government’s intention to hold classes in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)? | The Bahamians will not have clearances nor access to U.S. classified information. No classified discussions will be held with individuals from The Bahamas. Please also note that the security clearance requirement has been removed. Please see response to question 12. | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | ||
| 60 | Technical | SOW Pg. 11 - Section VII. | Are the documents going to be classified at the secret level? Therefore is that the reason instructors are required to have secret security clearances? | If not, we suggest you remove secret security clearance, and require documents be marked sensitive classification/For Official Use Only/ Law Enforcement Sensitive Information. | Yes. Please see response to question 12. | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | |
| 61 | Admin | Is there going to be a DD254 form released for this effort? | No. Please see response to question 12. | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | |||
| 62 | Technical | If the requirement is reminaing for Secret clearances, what system does the individuals clearance need to be housed (JPAS or Scattered Castles)? | Please see response to question 12. | Yes - Attachment 1, Section VII - Staffing Requirements has been updated | |||
| 63 | Technical | Can the government confirm that the RBPF Nassau training facility has both WiFI and Local Area Network supported internet service? | Yes, confirmed. | No | |||
| 64 | Technical | Will internet connection be required for instruction? | It wil be available if the course requires it. | No | |||
| 65 | Technical | SOW Pg.2 - Section IV. | “The Contractor will provide computer workstation equipment for the courses, as well as laptops to be used by the analysts when courses are outside Nassau. The Contractor will donate the equipment to The Bahamian government at the conclusion of this contract.” | ||||
| Is it the goverment's intent for the contractor to be responsible for only purchasing the desktop and laptop comuters as referenced in Section IV. Equipment, or does the government intend for the contractor to purchase all of the hardware and software? | View responses to previous, similar questions. The Government intends for the contractor to purchase all the hardware and software except for the IBM i2 licenses, which wlil be provided by INL. | No | |||||
| 66 | Technical | SOW Section II. Scope of Work, Page 1 | In the SOW, it states that the delivery of the training/mentoring/case preparation program will be provided in three-week increments. Does the government intend for the three-week increment (training session) to be back-to-back weeks, or can the training session be spread out over non-consecutive weeks? | If the training week, mentoring week, and case preparation week are spread out over a longer period of time, this will enable more comprehensive investigative assistance to include evidence gathering and analysis and will increase the overall comprehension and prosecutorial success potential. | The training week, mentoring week, and case preparation week need not be consecutive weeks if it will enable more comprehensive investigative assistance to include evidence gathering and analysis and will increase the overall comprehension and prosecutorial success potential. The Offeror may recommend a schedule deemed to garner the most beneficial outcomes, occurring within the period of performance. | No | |
| 67 | Technical | SOW Section VI Program Requirements Page 8 Deliverables | In the SOW, Section VI Program Requirements under Deliverable Page 8 it states a due date NLT 60 days from the contract award date the desktop and laptop computers (with installed software), monitors, scanners, printer, and server will arrive in Nassau and be ready for use in the classroom. Is it the government's intention for the contractor to install and connect the equipment, or will the task of installation and connection be completed by RBPF personnel? | Yes - the Contractor will be responsible for installation and connection of the equipment. | No | ||
| 68 | Technical | SOW Section V.1 Cirriculum Development Requirements | This section requires the contractor to deliver complete training packages for three one-week long training courses to INL NLT 30 days after contract award. Due to the volume of material requested and the extensive preparation required to deliver that amount of material, would the government consider extending that time to 180 days after contract award? | Deliverables, Due Date: NLT 180 Days from contract award. | Please refer to question #51. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW) Section IX has been updated. | |
| 69 | Technical | SOW Section VII. Staffing Requirements, Page 10, Curriculum Developer Writer Requirements 2nd & 3rd bullets | In this section under the 2nd bullet it requires the curriculum development team shall include subject matter experts (SME) on the subjects of The Bahamas and the Caribbean including personalities, banks and financial organizations, and financial routes and modus operandi and the 3rd bullet requires the curriculum team shall include SMEs with experience with UK Justice System so that cases developed during the course of the training shall be admissible within the Bahamian court system. Based upon the offeror's curriculum development team's resumes and extensive experience in delivering similar training to a number of different countries, would the government allow this similar experience in lieu of the Bahamas and UK Justice System requirement? | No. Substitutionary experience is not permitted. | No | ||
| 70 | Technical | SOW Section II. Scope of Work, Page 1, first paragraph | Delivery of training/mentoring/case preparation program will be provided in three-week increments. Would the government consider adding an additional week to conduct a Needs Assessment to determine the critical needs that can then be built into the course curriculum? | In order for the contractor to develop and deliver a course curriculum that will be tailored to the needs of The Bahamas, a Needs Assessment should be conducted at the beginning before the course curriculum is developed. Alteratively, if a Needs Assessment has already been conducted, it is recommended that the government share that GFI with the awarded contractor. | Yes, in order for the contractor to develop and deliver a course curriculum that will be tailored to the needs of The Bahamas, a Needs Assessment should be conducted at the beginning before the course curriculum is developed. This has been added to the Statement of Work. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW) Section II. Has been updated. | |
| 71 | Past Performance | SF 1449 Section e E.1.4 c. | Would the Government identify where the CPARS reports are to be included in the submission | Recommend that CPARS be appended to each Relevant Experience Questionnaire | Clarifying language has been provided in Section E.1.4. | Yes - RFQ, Section E.1.4. | |
| 72 | Cost | SF1449 B.1 b) | If a bidder does not currently have provisional indirect cost rates would the Government allow calculated indirect cost rates to be used? | Yes | No | ||
| 73 | Admin. | SF1449 Section c DOSAR 652.242-73 (a) | Would the Government allow the winning bidder acquire required licenses upon award of the contract? | Yes - but the timelines identified in the SOW remain the same. | No | ||
| 74 | Admin. | SOW Section X | Would the Government clarify to which address the computer and IT equipment is to be shipped? Delivery direct to INL Nassau, or delivery to INL Nassau via Department of State, U.S. Dispatch in Miami? | Refer to responses in previously-answered, relevant questions. | No | ||
| 75 | Admin. | SOW Section X | Would the Government identify what items are to be shipped to Freeport and Abaco from Nassau, when the items are to be shipped, and to what address they are to be shipped? | Refer to Question #41. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section X (Shipping Instructions) has been updated | ||
| 76 | Admin. | Is there an incumbent to this program or is this new work? | New work. | No | |||
| 77 | Admin. | SF1449 E.1.4 | Would the Government extend the delivery date on a day-by-day basis until answers to questions are received? | The Government has provided an extension. | No | ||
| 78 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | Please confirm that each of the 3-week sessions will each include 15 students, and that a different 15 students will attend each session. | Please see response to question #15. | No | ||
| 79 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | What is the difference between the “one week of in-person mentoring” and the “one week of assistance with case preparation based on actual cases”? That is, what will be the subject of the “mentoring” in the second week if not the “assistance with case preparation” that is the subject of the third week? | It will depend on the needs identified during the training. | No | ||
| 80 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | In the first week of instruction, will the contractor use the actual case examples that will be provided in the post-award conference call, or will those actual cases not be part of the instruction until the second and third weeks? | The actual cases will be used for all three weeks. | No | ||
| 81 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | If the provided actual cases are not to become part of the instruction until the second (or third) week, is the contractor responsible for developing a hypothetical case study to use for the “contractor-developed training” in the first week? If so, what is the meaning of the requirement that the contractor shall use “current examples from actual on-going investigations (to be shared upon award) as the focus of the training courses? | The actual cases will be used for all three weeks. | No | ||
| 82 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | If the provided actual cases are to be used for the first week of instruction as well in the second and third weeks, explain the requirement that the instruction develop nine different cases – that is, three cases per three-week session? Why would not the same actual cases be used in the first week of each session? | We would like to see 9 actual cases completed during the Base Year of this contract. | No | ||
| 83 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | Alternatively, does the SOW envision the Contractor’s developing 9 different cases for the first week instructional courses, and then using different, RBPF-provided cases during the Weeks 2 Mentoring and Weeks 3 Case Assistance? | The SOW envisions three cases/ 3 week training event. With the same 15 students, so that by the end of year one, there are 9 completed cases. | No | ||
| 84 | Technical | SOW VII. | Clarify whether the training team should include persons with experience as prosecutors as opposed to just investigators and financial analysts. | Recommend that the investigators/financial analysts have a view to prosecutorial requirements or can call about another SME for issues as they arise. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW), Section VII. Staffing Requirements | ||
| 85 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | Clarify whether it is expected that the training team for each session will comprise two or three people who will remain on-site for the full three weeks, or if the team may consist of a rotating set of trainers | We would have one team for the three weeks, unless skills sets dictated otherwise, but it's important for offerors and the resulting contractor to keep in mind that relationships are important here. | No | ||
| 86 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | What materials will be provided to the contractor regarding the actual cases they want to become part of the curriculum? For example, will they include written summaries, actual raw documents, telephone of email correspondence with case agents? | It will vary from case to case. | No | ||
| 87 | Technical | SOW VI. 1 | Regarding the computers and software, is it expected that the contractor will prepare computer-based training modules with data installed on the computers in advance, or are the computers and the specified software tools intended to be provided in off-the-shelf status with no customized programming? That is, are the hardware and software requirements intended only to provide the trainees with the tools needed to conduct investigations, or is the intent to require that the training itself be designed in a computer-based format? | There should be a combination of computer based and theory based training provided. | Yes - Attachment 1 (SOW) VI.1. Curriculum Development Requirements has been updated. | ||
| 88 | Technical | RFQ E.1.4 c. Relevant Experience | Please clarify the maximum number of pertinent examples. E.1.4 c. indicates a maximum of two examples, but the Page Count Limitation table at E.1.4 identifies a maximum of three past performance examples. | Maximum of two. | Yes - RFQ, Section E.1.4. | ||
| 89 | Admin | E.1.3 Questions and Clarifications, page 21 of Solicitation | As questions will not be available to the DOS acquisition group for review and comment until after 5 PM on April 4th, there will remain only 9 business days remaining prior to the required submission. Accordingly, we feel will be inadequate time for the inclusion of changes associated with the questions in a well structured response; therefore we request a two week extension for submission of proposals. | A two week extension of the submission date to May 1, 2019. | The Government has provided an extension. | No | |
| 90 | Admin | Attachment 1 – Statement of Work (SOW), II. Scope of Work, Statement of Work, page 1 | Have similar efforts for the INL been completed in the past in the same geographical area? If so, could you provide information on or references to the similar projects? | Provide background or references for similar projects awarded by INL. | Not in The Bahamas. | No | |
| 91 | Cost | section (b) - 1449 continuation, B.1 Type of Contract, Solicitation, page 6 | We understand the project to be a combination of firm-fixed-price and cost type contract; however, no budgeted amount or ceiling cost estimate has been provided in either the Solicitation or the 1449. Is there a projected DOS budget or an anticipated ceiling amount for the requested efforts? | Provide a projected budget amount or desired ceiling amount for the project costs. | Based on a combination of the RFP-specified ODC figure for travel, and the offeror's proposed figure for all other ODCs, the Government will establish a ceiling for the cost type portion of the contract at type of award. For all other activities conducted under the firm-fixed-price contract type, the firm-fixed-price funcitons as the ceiling amount. | No | |
| 92 | Admin | Attachment 1 – Statement of Work (SOW), I. Program Background, Statement of Work, page 1 | Is there an incumbent contractor? If so, please identify the incumbent and the contract number and duration. Is the incumbent eligible to bid on this procurement? How many FTEs performed the incumbent contract? | Request information on possible incumbent. | There is not an incumbent contractor. This is new work | No | |
| 93 | Admin/Technical | SF1449,Sec. E.1.4 and SOW Section D | Please confirm that the maximum of six projects specified in Section D of the SOW and the maximum of three past performances specified in Section E.1.4 of the SF 1449 are compatible. Is it intended that the past performance relate to three of the 6 Relevant Experience Designations? | Provide clarification of compatibility. | Maximum of two. | Yes - RFQ, Section E.1.4 and Relevant Experience Questonnaire have been updated | |
| 94 | Admin | 2. Reporting Requirements, SOW, page 9 | Will there be any coordination between contractor and DOS/INL personnel during and/or after training with the objective of providing liaison for the students after the instruction has been completed? | Provide clarification of compatibility. | Yes, ideally, there would be close coordination between the contractor, INL, and unit head in setting up training, determining class composition, and course content, as well as scheduling. | Yes - Attachment 1, Sction VI.2 has been updated. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .