RFI Questions and Answers for SAM.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 60 KB Posted
- Attached to
- RFI - Executive, Administrative and Professional Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- Not on record
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) for Executive, Administrative and Professional Support Services issued by the United States Marshals Service (USMS). The RFI seeks market research for a potential Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) covering approximately 30 labor categories across multiple locations nationwide, with the majority of positions located in Arlington, VA. The current incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. with an existing contract valued around $190 million over 5 years, and USMS is exploring options including potentially maintaining a small business set-aside, determining final NAICS codes, and considering contract vehicles like GSA MAS.
Key requirements include providing personnel with varying security clearance levels (primarily public trust, with some Secret, Top Secret, and TS-SCI positions), supporting all USMS divisions, and potentially offering flexible work arrangements with an expectation of primarily in-office work. The RFI indicates the new requirement will likely exceed 300 total positions (full-time and part-time) and will support functions across the agency, including administrative, financial, procurement, intelligence, and technical roles. The government is seeking vendor feedback on contract structure, past performance requirements, staffing models, and potential innovations in service delivery, with a potential solicitation anticipated in FY26.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFI Appendix-A Labor Category Descriptions.pdf | ||
| RFI PWS for Posting.pdf | ||
| RFI Posting.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
Sheet1
| Executive, Admin and Proessional Services Questions and Answers | |||
| Question # | Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Is this a new requirement? If not who is the incumbent and what is the contract number? | This is not a new requirement. The incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. and the contract number is 15M10421AA4700042. | |
| 2 | Will these be full-time positions? Will they be paid on an hourly basis? | This is to be determined based on the market research results and the contract type; however, it is safe to assume that the requirement will be a mix of full-time and part-time support depending on the needs of the Government. Payment will depend on the contract type selected (FFP, LH, T&M etc...). | |
| 3 | Will the BPA be awarded as a single-award or multi-award vehicle? | This is to be determined. As the current BPA is single award, USMS is considering a single award; however, results of this RFI may change that determination. | |
| 4 | What is the anticipated geographic distribution of personnel (HQ vs. regional)? | The majority of the positions will be located in the Arlington, VA area; however, services could be required anywhere in the US. Some locations include Glynco, GA; Springfield, VA; Pineville, LA; Kansas City, MO; and Oklahoma City, OK. | |
| 5 | Will GSA MAS Pricing serve as the baseline for call orders? | The USMS has not determined which, or if, a contract vehicle will be utilized for this requirement. If GSA MAS is utilized then pricing would be based on the GSA MAS pricing. Should GSA MAS pricing be utilized, the Government will request discounts. | |
| 6 | Are incumbents required to be offered first right of refusal per PWS 2.71? | This is no longer required as the law has changed; however, USMS highly encourages the right of first refusal to the incumbents. | |
| 7 | The description of the RFI indicates this is a new contract award. Could you please confirm and provide any details on an incumbent contract, if applicable? | See answer to question #1. | |
| 8 | What will be the contract value for this opportunity? | The “new” contract value has not been determined at this point; however, the RFI Posting pdf provides guidance concerning the size of past performance history. | |
| 9 | Will the government sponsor a company for a Top Secret Facility Clearance upon contract award who presently holds a Secret Facility Clearance and has held a Top Secret Facility Clearance in the past? | This is still be determined and will be provided as part of the solicitation. This is not needed to respond to the RFI. | |
| 10 | 1. | RFI: Page 2. Government states “Describe your company’s experience in managing an administrative and professional services contract spanning the U.S., consisting of over 30 labor categories and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years. | |
| a. | As currently worded, a BPA with a ceiling value of $200M and a 5-year PoP would be ineligible to reference in response to the information request for two reasons (1) a BPA is not a contract (2) its ceiling value does not *exceed* $200M. This would exclude the incumbent contractor on the current USMS Administrative Management BPA from citing its own work on the existing BPA. | ||
| b. | Please confirm that when the government states “describe your company’s experience in managing … services contract” that “contract” as used by the government is inclusive of BPAs as well as actual contract vehicles such as IDIQs. | 1(a)(1): Yes, the existing vehicle is a BPA and not a contract. We are exploring different vehicles for the new requirement. |
1(a)(2): We realize what the size of the existing BPA is; however, we are interested in experience that exceeds the $200M threshold.
1(b): Yes, please include experience managing any contract vehicle type including BPAs, IDIQs, FFP, LH, T&M, etc. that exceeds $200M.
| 11 | Prime TS FCL requirement: If the Prime must hold TS FCL at award, may we submit two configurations and allow USMS to select the preferred structure without altering our technical approach? | Yes |
| 12 | PSC preference: Confirm R799 for the omnibus vs. R707 when acquisition LCATs dominate. | USMS will determine the PSC when issuing the solicitation. It is still being determined at this time. The current PSC for the current requirement is: R699 |
| 13 | LCAT crosswalks: May we submit a MAS↔PWS LCAT crosswalk where titles differ but quals meet/exceed PWS? | Yes this is acceptable. |
| 14 | Telework parameters: Will role-based telework eligibility be defined at the call-order level? | Yes, telework will be defined at the call order level and will vary from call order to call order. |
| 15 | Transition & ramp: Will USMS phase transition by office/location with expected ramp timelines per order? | Transition is still being determined and details will be provided in the solicitation. |
| 16 | QCP acceptance: Would USMS provide sample deliverable calendars and acceptance criteria to standardize across calls? | Details regarding this will be provided in the solicitation. |
| 17 | Can you share the number of FTEs aligned to each LCAT and their locations for the current award? If that is not possible to specify, could you provide any insight to the rough percentage of the workforce supporting the USMS HQs vs. the district offices? | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, USMS will not be sharing the number of FTEs aligned to each LCAT and their locations for the current award. We don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices; however, contractors may be required anywhere throughout the US. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. |
| 18 | Text reference: |
(RFI; "Responses" section; page 2): "Describe your company’s experience in managing an administrative and professional services contract spanning the United States, consisting of over 30 labor categories, and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years."
Question:
If the intent of this RFI is to gauge potential competition between Small Businesses or other potential socioeconomic set-aside categories, would the government consider lowering the qualifying standards from “…over 30 labor categories, and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years” to “...over 15 labor categories, and exceeding $100M in value over five (5) years,” to encourage Small Business participation? The questions is being asked for several reasons. The number of labor categories and value are similar to the requirement USMS has. Therefore, USMS is trying to determine if any business, large or small has the experience to handle our requirement. Being such a large requirement, we need to have a company who has experience handling a requirement of similar size and scope. It is also to gauge potential competition between Small Businesses.
As this is an RFI your submission would not be eliminated based on your response of only 15 LCATS and $100M. However, it would be noted that there is a significant difference in managing 15 LCATS and 30 LCATS. Granted the number of people may be similar, but USMS needs to see that vendors can handle our wide range of need for this requirement, along with large number of people.
I would still respond to the RFI but simply state you don’t have the experience of over 30 labor categories and exceeding $200M but here is what we have experience in. We are accepting all responses even if they don’t have the exact experience we mention.
| 19 | Can USMS clarify which labor categories will require Top Secret, Secret, or Public Trust clearances? Will USMS sponsor clearances for new personnel, or must all staff be pre-cleared at the time of award? | The majority of the positions will be public trust, but there will be some that require Secret, Top Secret or TS-SCI. These positions are still being addressed, but the Government expects the successful vendor(s) to provide cleared personnel. | |
| 20 | Is there an incumbent vendor? If so, do you expect to maintain the current scope, or is USMS anticipating an adjustment in the types of work supported on the new contract? | Yes, the incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. and the contract number is 15M10421AA4700042. There will be some adjustments, which are still being determined at this time. | |
| 21 | Would USMS consider awarding multiple vendors to the BPA to enable more competition at the task order level leading to more innovative solutions and lower pricing to the government? | USMS is considering this. That is part of why we are doing this RFI, is to gather information from vendors on their thoughts on this requirement. | |
| 22 | Will USMS provide a timeframe for past performance examples? Do they need to have been performed within a certain number of years? | There is no timeframe. And vendors will not be counted off or RFI not considered if they can’t meet. USMS is asking this information to help us determine if any business, large or small has the experience to handle our requirement. Being such a large requirement, we need to have a company who has experience handling a requirement of similar size and scope. It is also to gauge potential competition between Small Businesses. As this is an RFI your submission would not be eliminated based on your response of past experience. | |
| 23 | The RFI asks to describe experience in managing an administrative and professional services contract consisting of over 30 labor categories and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years; does the criteria provide an unfair advantage to the incumbent contractor? | See previous answer. This is an RFI and the information in the RFI is being used to help USMS determine the best way to solicit (small business set-aside, full and open, certain contract vehicle, etc.). | |
| 24 | If staff should be hired regionally based on district needs, can the USMS provide an estimate of work to be performed by district, state, or region, versus in the National Capital Region? | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, and USMS is still working to determine the number of positions needed, we are unable to share the estimates. We don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | |
| 25 | What are the current and anticipated policies regarding remote work, telework, and hybrid arrangements for contractor personnel? Are there specific positions or labor categories that must be performed onsite? | Remote, telework and hybrid arrangements are currently part of the contract and are expected to continue. This decision is made at the order level and is dependent on Agency/Division needs. While these arrangements are a possibilty, contractor personnel should have the expectation of an in-office requirement with the possibility of remote, telework or hybrid arrangements. Some specific positions may be required to be onsite and that information will be provided in the soliciation or at the call order level. | |
| 26 | Is there specific small business, SDVOSB, WOSB, 8(a), or HUBZone participation goals for this BPA? Will USMS require reporting on subcontracting or teaming arrangements? | USMS is using this RFI to determine how this requirement will be handled, small business set-aside, full and open, etc. The goals and subcontracting details will be provided in the solicitation. | |
| 27 | In the RFI instructions, it states: “All responses to this RFI should be submitted in either Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF format on company letterhead.” Are we to provide our 15-page response in a letter format, excluding the cover page and page 1, or would a logo on the cover page satisfy the ‘company letterhead’ requirement? | USMS will accept either method you mentioned. | |
| 28 | Projected Volume & Call Orders: | ||
| Does USMS anticipate a steady-state level of support across all 30+ labor categories at contract start, or will call orders be phased in over time as mission needs arise? | This is to be determined. As this time we anticipate a steady-state. However, additional needs may arise or due to budget there may be reductions. | ||
| 29 | Incumbency & Transition Timing: | ||
| Will there be an incumbent contractor, and if so, does USMS anticipate a transition period with incumbent staff eligible for consideration? What is the anticipated transition timeline (e.g. 15 days)? | The incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. and the contract number is 15M10421AA4700042. USMS does anticipate a transition period and that period will be provided in the solicitation. | ||
| 30 | Security Clearance Mix: | ||
| For labor categories requiring Moderate, High, or Top Secret clearance levels, does USMS have an estimated percentage of positions requiring each clearance level? | Details on clearance needs will be provided as part of the solicitation. | ||
| 31 | Telework vs. On-Site Ratios: | ||
| While the PWS allows telework, does USMS have expected on-site reporting levels at Headquarters versus district offices? | The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. While telework, remote and hybrid schedules may be offered, the majority of contractor personnel should have an expectation of an in-office requirement. Also see question and answer #25 for additional details. | ||
| 32 | Surge & Backfill Requirements: | ||
| Is there an established threshold for surge staffing, vacancy backfill timelines, or the maximum number of simultaneous vacancies allowable per call order? We would suggest fill time and vacancies be worked into a performance requirements summary in the final solicitation. | Details will be provided in the solicitation. | ||
| 33 | Quality Control Deliverables: | ||
| Should the Quality Control Plan be submitted at the BPA level only, or tailored and re-submitted at each individual call order? We believe a QCP should be part of the BPA proposal. | It will be required at the BPA level and part of the BPA proposal submission. | ||
| 34 | Preferred Vehicles: | ||
| Does USMS intend to award this requirement solely through GSA MAS, or is USMS considering other available contract vehicles? What other vehicles are being considered? | USMS is considering all contract vehicles at this time. That is one of the purposes of this RFI is to determine different contract vehicles available. | ||
| 35 | Past Performance Relevance: | ||
| Does USMS intend to prioritize prior support to federal law enforcement agencies when evaluating experience, or will civilian agency experience be equally weighted? We suggest allowing for both federal as well as state and local past performance for the final solicitation. | Should the soliciation require past performance, all relevant past performace will be equally reviewed and relied upon. | ||
| 36 | What clearance level (if any) is required across labor categories? | The majority of the LCATS will be public trust, but a few will be secret, top secret or TS-SCI. Once a solicitation is issued more exact details on clearance needs will be provided. | |
| 37 | Does USMS anticipate centralized staffing or multiple geographic deployments? | The majority of the positions will be located in the Arlington, VA location. However, services could be needed anywhere in the US. Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, Kansas City, MO, Oklahoma City, OK are all locations that have recently had personnel as part of the current contract. | |
| 38 | Would the USMS consider a hybrid contract model (T&M + FFP) for specialized labor? | Yes, USMS is seeking feedback in this RFI and at this time considering all contract types. | |
| 39 | What onboarding timelines are expected from time of award to staff start date? | This is to be determined and will be provided in the solicitation. | |
| 40 | Will subcontractor participation count toward socioeconomic goals (e.g., SDVOSB)? | Yes | |
| 41 | Is there an estimated ceiling value or anticipated annual spend for the BPA? | This is still TBD for the new requirement and will be provided as part of the soliciation. | |
| 42 | Are any positions from Appendix A considered Key Personnel? | Not at this time; however, this may change prior to the issuance of the solicitation. | |
| 43 | Is there an incumbent contractor? If yes, do you prefer to retain specific incumbent staff fulfilling the requirements? | The incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. and the contract number is 15M10421AA4700042. USMS will highly encourage right of first refusal for all positions. | |
| 44 | Will this contract be SCA applicable? If so, could you please provide the mapping to the SCA labor category and level for the SCA-applicable labor categories? | There are several LCATS that will be subject to the SCA. Those LCATs will be identified in the solicitation. | |
| 45 | Does the Government anticipate any positions requiring SCI access? | Yes and details will be provided at time of solicitation. | |
| 46 | Is substitution of equivalent qualifications (education/experience) acceptable under Appendix A - Individual Labor Categories? | This will be address in the solicitation phase | |
| 47 | Can the Government clarify expectations for “fully vetted resumes within five (5) working days” (Section 2.7.1) — does this apply to all positions or only key personnel? | While the Government will not exercise control of contractor hiring, the USMS request resumes be submitted for all positions so that the USMS can provide feedback on potential contractor personnel assigned to a USMS requirement. This will be fully discussed in the solicitation. | |
| 48 | Is the Top Secret Facility Clearance requirement applicable to the prime contractor only, or do all subcontractors also need this clearance? | See answer to question #9. | |
| 49 | Are remote or hybrid work arrangements permitted for cleared personnel when security conditions allow? | Yes, however this will be dependent upon the requirements of the Division they support. Although this is a possibility, all contractor personnel should have an expectation of in-office work. Also see question and answer #25 for additional details. | |
| 50 | Can the Government confirm that it will provide workspace and equipment for on-site staff? | Yes, an onsite workspace and required GFE will be provided. | |
| 51 | In Section 3.0 List of Documents, Exhibits, and Attachments, the government lists Attachment B – Evaluation Factors. Can the Government provide a list of the Evaluation Factors for the PWS? | This is still being determined and will be provided as part of the solicitation. This is not needed to respond to the RFI. | |
| 52 | Will oral presentations or capability briefings be part of the evaluation process? | This is still being determined but most likely oral presentations will be part of the evaluation process. | |
| 53 | In the draft PWS in Section 2.2 Scope, USMS references support services needed “…at HQ, nationwide districts, and other USMS locations.” Can the Government provide a listing of all locations including city/state, and number of full-time employees per office location by labor category? | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, and USMS is still working to determine the number of positions needed and the locations needs so we are unable to share the information at this time. Further, we don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | |
| 54 | In the draft PWS in Section 2.4 PWS Labor Categories, USMS references a “Senior Program Consultant”; however, that labor category is not referenced in Appendix A. Can the Government please provide the duties for this role, the required security clearance level, and the experience needed? | Specifc duties and clearance requirements will be provided as part of the solicitation. The LCATs are still being finalized and more could be added or some removed. The list was provided to give potential contractors an idea of the size of the requirement. | |
| 55 | Does the current contract GS10F0280Y with Mayvin Consulting Group require the same number of positions as are reflected in Appendix A of the current RFI? If not please specify which positions have been added or deleted. | This is still being determined and should not impact your response to this RFI. | |
| 56 | If the current requirement has all of the same positions as the RFI, please tell me if all the positions are currently filled? | ||
| Please specify the number of FTEs required for each position and the number of FTEs actual in each of the required positions. | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, and USMS is still working to determine the number of positions needed, we are unable to share the estimates. We don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | ||
| 57 | In the course of the current requirement has there been significant turnover of staff? | Not in the opinion of the Government | |
| 58 | What is the current number of USMS training hours required for new hire staff? | Training requirements vary by Order, but some USMS specific training will be required. | |
| 59 | What is the current number of USMS annual training hours required for existing staff? | Training requirements vary by Order, but some USMS specific training will be required. | |
| 60 | Please provide the breakout of positions and FTEs at each of the locations the USMS will require in the upcoming solicitation. | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, and USMS is still working to determine the number of positions needed and the locations needs so we are unable to share the information at this time. Further, we don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | |
| 61 | Are there currently any Collective Bargaining Agreements in place for the incumbent contract? | No | |
| 62 | Some of the labor category duty descriptions include tasks that appear to potentially present an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) in accordance with FAR 9.5. Examples of the specific Contract Specialist duties of concern are: |
• Review solicitation packages for completeness.
• Advise and provide program offices with examples of documents to be contained in a solicitation package.
• Assist contract specialists with Pre and Post award conferences.
| These duties, among other Contract Specialist duties, have the potential for OCI due to Unequal Access to Information that is non-public information. This access to non-public information could include, for example, other vendors’ proprietary and/or sensitive information, competitor rate information, technical solutions, non-public award information, independent government estimates, source selection strategy, etc. Will the Government require an OCI mitigation plan for these positions to reduce the conflict to acceptable levels or consider removing these duties from this solicitation to avoid the real or perceived conflict altogether? | Individiuals who occupy these positions are required to complete a nondisclosure agreement. Further, indviduals who occupy these positions will not have access to this solicitation and will not be involved in any aspect of this recompete. The positions will remain a part of the requirement and USMS will be ensuring all OCI is mitigated. | ||
| 63 | In reference to the request that respondents “describe experience in managing an administrative and professional services contract spanning the United States, consisting of over 30 labor categories, and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years,” would the Government consider allowing respondents to present aggregate past performance that reflects the combined experience of the proposed team, including the managing partner, Joint Venture members, and key subcontractors? | As this is an RFI your submission would not be eliminated based on your response and presenting aggregate past performance that reflects combined experience. USMS is still determining the evaluation factors for the solicitation, and any expereince requirements will be fully outlined if required in the solicitation. | |
| 64 | Allowing the proposed team’s collective experience to satisfy this criterion would promote fair and equitable competition, particularly among highly qualified small businesses, Mentor-Protégé Joint Ventures, and socioeconomic program participants who may not individually hold contracts of that magnitude but have demonstrated comparable scope and complexity through cumulative past performance. | See Answer #63 | |
| 65 | Would the Government please clarify the facility clearance requirements applicable to the prime contractor? Specifically, does the requirement apply to the legal entity submitting the proposal (i.e., the “Offeror”), or may a Joint Venture (JV) offeror rely on one of its managing partners’ existing facility clearance to meet the solicitation requirement? For example, if the JV itself does not currently possess a facility clearance, but one of the JV’s managing members holds an active Top Secret facility clearance and is capable of sponsoring the JV, would this arrangement satisfy the Government’s facility clearance requirement for the prime contractor? | All entities must have the required facility clearance prior to award; however, the USMS may consider allowing this scenario assuming the managing member is sponsoring the JV. Details on if this would be allowed would be included in the solicitation. | |
| 66 | Would the Government confirm that small businesses may propose as the prime contractor with large business subcontractors, or as part of a Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture (MPJV), in accordance with 13 CFR 125.9 and 13 CFR 125.8, and that such JV arrangements will be evaluated as a single offeror? | This will be discussed in the soliciation as USMS is still determining how to solicit this requirement which could impact the answer to this question. | |
| 67 | Given that the RFI references over 30 labor categories across multiple locations nationwide, would the Government consider multiple-award or regionalized awards to allow small businesses to effectively compete and perform within specific geographic regions? | The purpose of the RFI is to collect opinion(s) from industry on how to proceed with this requirement. At this time all options are being considered as long as they can be justified. | |
| 68 | Will there be any requirement for the organization to have a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF)? | Contractors are not required to have a SCIF; however, some LCATs will be required to perform duties in a USMS, or other Government SCIF. Appropriate security clearances will be required for those contractor personnel. | |
| 69 | Who is the incumbent contractor? | See answer to question #1. | |
| 70 | What is the value of the incumbent contract? | It is a BPA with an estimated value of $190 Million over 5 years. | |
| 71 | How many personnel (FTEs) are anticipated across all 30+ labor categories? | Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | |
| 72 | Are there any geographic regions or priority programs (e.g., headquarters vs. field operations) that will receive a greater percentage of staffing? | The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. | |
| 73 | Can the government provide an estimated labor mix or historical utilization across labor categories? | USMS will provide details on the labor mix as part of the solicitation. Historically the utiliziation has widely varied across orders and USMS is not able to provide this information at this time. | |
| 74 | Are these positions to be priced at standard GS-equivalent levels or market-based rates? | They will be priced a market -based rates. | |
| 75 | Can the Government provide an Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE)? | Not at this time. USMS is still working to determine the final needs. | |
| 76 | Is the government considering awarding this as a single-award or multi-award vehicle? | The expectation is that a single award will be made; however, this could change based on the market research results. | |
| 77 | Is there an anticipated funding ceiling? | USMS is still working to determine the final needs. | |
| 78 | Are there existing contract vehicles that the Government is considering using for this solicitation? | One of the purposes of this RFI is to determine what existing contract vehicles are available to utilize. We are considering all options at this time. | |
| 79 | Is the USMS funding this from agency-wide operations and maintenance or from specific program offices? | Funding will vary. Exact funding is not yet determined. | |
| 80 | What is the expected timeline (days/month to close requisition) to fill each role for the listed labor categories, including clearance requirements? | This will be provided within the solicitation is not something that is relevant to this request for information. | |
| 81 | Which business function (e.g., HR, Research and Development, Operations, Information and Technology, etc.) would each of these labor categories be supporting? | It is anticipated that all Division within the USMS will utilize this requirement so all functions will be supported. | |
| 82 | Section 2.14.5 Collateral duties specify that Contract Personnel shall work 40 productive labor hours per week only in support of USMS. Will all personnel on this contract have full-time work year-round, or does it vary by labor category? | It will vary based on the need of the agency; however, it is anticipated that there will be a mix of full and part-time positions. | |
| 83 | Will these roles operate full-time, part-time, or surge/on-call? | Most roles will be full-time but there will be a few part-time. Rare to have surge/on-call, but not out of the question. | |
| 84 | Section 2.12 states that “work will mainly be performed at the USMS HQ” or “other facilities in the National Capital Region,” while section 2.14.2 states “USMS encourages telework.” Could you please clarify the work location requirements? | The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. While the majority of the work is located at these locations, the USMS may need personnel in any location within the US. We also have a few remote contractors. | |
| 85 | In bullet “G,” government-furnished equipment (GFE) is mentioned. Will contracted employees under this contract be provided with GFE, or will the contractor be responsible for supplying the necessary equipment (e.g., laptops) to perform the work? | They will be provided with GFE. | |
| 86 | Who is the current incumbent, and will the current incumbent be eligible to respond to this opportunity as a PRIME CONTRACTOR? | The incumbent is Mayvin, Inc. and the contract number is 15M10421AA4700042. Depending on how USMS decides to solicit and if the incumbent can qualify based on the soliciation they may be able to submit a proposal. The RFI does not limit who can respond. | |
| 87 | If there is an incumbent, are they eligible to submit a proposal? Can the government provide a contract number? | See previous answer. | |
| 88 | Will past experience be evaluated on a per-past experience basis, where each past experience will be expected to meet past experience criteria (i.e., consisting of over 30 labor categories)? Or will the government review past experience in totality, where all together, the past experience meets the government’s requirements? | This is still being determined and not something required to have available to respond to this RFI. | |
| 89 | Will the government favor offerors who submit more than one past experience higher than an offeror who submits 1 past experience with the same rating? | Not during the RFI process. USMS is still determining the evaluation factors for the solicitation, and any expereince requirements will be fully outlined if required in the solicitation. | |
| 90 | The RFI states there are 30 different labor categories. As such, can the government provide a breakout of the total number of actual positions, the quantity for each labor category, the USMS division to be supported, and the location of each FTE? | As this is an RFI and not a solicitation, and USMS is still working to determine the number of positions needed and the locations needs so we are unable to share the information at this time. Further, we don’t feel this is something that needs to be provided for a vendor to respond to the RFI. The majority of the LCATS are located in the Arlington, VA location, with some also located in Austin, TX, Glynco, GA, Springfield, VA, Pineville, LA, and a few other offices. We also have a few remote contractors. Currently there are around 280 LCATS on various BPA calls. | |
| 91 | The RFI is asking respondents to, “Describe your company’s experience in managing an administrative and professional services contract spanning the United States, consisting of over 30 labor categories, and exceeding $200M in value over five (5) years.” Can the government clarify that this will be an actual past performance requirement in the 2025 solicitation? If so, the dollar value $200M over 5 years = $40M on average, would exceed the current sealing of $24.5M under the stated SIN Code: 541611 – Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services with a size standard of $24.5M. Will the government consider lowering the total dollar value over 5 years to $120M or lower for both this RFI and the 2025 solicitation? | Not at this time; however, this could change based on the initial market research results. Further, USMS is still determining the evaluation factors for the solicitation, and any expereince requirements will be fully outlined if required in the solicitation. | |
| 92 | Can a CPARS for performing past similar services be provided under this RFI? | Contractors can submit a CPARs if they choose. | |
| 93 | For the upcoming solicitation, can a CPARS be submitted in lieu of a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ)? | USMS is still determining the evaluation factors for the solicitation, and any expereince requirements will be fully outlined if required in the solicitation. | |
| 94 | Will the position(s) on this contract be SCA? If so, can the government please provide the occupation code, title, and minimum pay based on applicable Wage Determination for EACH labor category? | LCATs that are subject to the SCA will be identified in solicitation. | |
| 95 | Will any of the positions on this contract be subject to the Service Contract Act (SCA)? | See previous answer. | |
| 96 | If so, can the government please identify which specific positions or labor categories are covered under the SCA? | LCATs that are subject to the SCA will be identified in solicitation. | |
| 97 | For each SCA-covered labor category, can the government provide the corresponding SCA occupation code? | LCATs that are subject to the SCA will be identified in solicitation. | |
| 98 | For each SCA-covered labor category, can the government provide the official SCA labor title? | LCATs that are subject to the SCA will be identified in solicitation. | |
| 99 | For each SCA-covered labor category, can the government provide the applicable minimum pay rate in accordance with the relevant wage determination? | LCATS subject to SCA wil be identified in the solicitation - the rate will be determined by SCA Wage Determination specific to that location. | |
| 100 | Will the government favor small business teaming arrangements over small business prime contractors with NO subcontractors? | No | |
| 101 | The Senior Program Consultant labor category description is not included in Appendix A. Will the government add the labor category description to Appendix A? | Specifc duties and clearance requirements will be provided as part of the solicitation. The LCATs are still being finalized and more could be added or some removed. The list was provided to give potential contractors an idea of the size of the requirement. | |
| 102 | Can the government provide the total number of positions (FTEs) associated with this requirement? | The total number will be revelaed in the solicitation, but the number is expected to exceed 300. This will be a mixture of full-time and part-time, and all positions may not be filled at all times. | |
| 103 | Can the government provide the quantity of positions associated with each labor category? | This will be provided as part of the solicitation | |
| 104 | Can the government identify which USMS division each labor category or position will support? | It is anticipated that all Divisions within the USMS will utilize this requirement. Further, USMS will provide details on the the positions and labor categories as part of the solicitation. | |
| 105 | Can the government provide the physical location(s) where each FTE will be assigned or perform work? | This will be provided in the solicitation; however, the majority of the positions will be located in Arlington, VA; Glynco, GA; Springfield, VA; Pineville, LA and Austin, TX. | |
| 106 | PWS Section 1.1, page 4 of 64, indicates that the BPA for this requirement will be awarded under GSA PSS Category 874-7. It is our understanding that GSA is no longer using these category numbers. Would the government please confirm that the correct category should be SIN 541611? | This is the PWS for the current requirement. The PWS for the recompete is still being finalized, however USMS wanted potential offerors to have a general idea of the requirement. The Government is considering all contract vehicles, SINs and NAICS codes. Part of this RFI is for vendors to recommend the ones they feel best to utilize for this requirement. | |
| 107 | RFI Instructions, page 2 of 3, requests that respondents provide a list of contract vehicles that could be utilized for this requirement. We understand that entities without a fully capable GSA Schedule (i.e. having labor categories that can map to all 31 positions for this requirement) may form CTAs with other schedule holders to meet all requirements. We also understand that there are inherent risks to awarding a contract to a CTA given the lack of regulatory guidance. As such, does the government prefer a single entity prime contractor with fully capable GSA Schedule over a Contract Teaming Agreement (CTA)? | We are considering all vendors as part of this RFI. The soliciation will have further specifications on who can submit proposals. | |
| 108 | RFI Instructions, page 2 of 3, requests that respondents provide experience in managing a services contract of 30+ labor categories and of value that exceeds $200M. This threshold appears inconsistent with the scale of typical small business experience and could inadvertently restrict competition to other than SBs or ANCs with experienced affiliates. Will the Government consider revising or clarifying this language to better align with small business past performance expectations consistent with SBA size standards for NAICS 541611? | This experience level is being asked because the number of labor categories and value are similar to the requirement USMS has. Therefore, USMS is trying to determine if any business, large or small has the experience to handle our requirement. Being such a large requirement, we need to have a company who has experience handling a requirement of similar size and scope. It is also to gauge potential competition between Small Businesses. |
As this is an RFI your submission would not be eliminated based on your response and if you did not have that experience. I would respond to the RFI but simply state you don’t have the experience of over 30 labor categories and exceeding $200M but here is what we have experience in. We are accepting all responses even if they don’t have the exact experience we mention.
109 With over $150M obligated to the current contract, we understand the rationale for the government to ask for experience in managing contracts exceeding $200M. We also understand that work of this magnitude is typically supported by a team of contractors. As such, will the government consider as relevant experience $200M+ contracts supported by the prospective offeror as a subcontractor? USMS is trying to determine if any business, large or small has the experience to handle our requirement. Being such a large requirement, we need to have a company who has experience handling a requirement of similar size and scope. It is also to gauge potential competition between Small Businesses.
As this is an RFI your submission would not be eliminated based on your response and if you did not have that experience. I would respond to the RFI but simply state you don’t have the experience of over 30 labor categories and exceeding $200M but here is what we have experience in to include your subcontracting work. We are accepting all responses even if they don’t have the exact experience we mention.
110 Appendix A – Labor Category Descriptions, beginning on page 6 of 26, indicate the potential need for Contract Specialists. In addition, the draft PWS references contractor support for acquisition and procurement functions. Would the Government please clarify whether these tasks will include pre-award or source selection support, or if the contractor’s role will be limited to administrative and documentation support for Contracting Officers and CORs? This clarification will help offerors determine whether such work could present an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) risk and whether a firewalled teammate with distinct duties would be required to perform those functions. The Government intends to fill acquisition support roles via this requirement; however, existing contractor support will not have a role in the procurement of this requirement. Acquisition support under the contract will include processing modifications and performing closeouts. All contractor support activities will be overseen and approved by a USMS warranted Contracting Officer.
| 111 | Would the Government confirm whether the current requirement is a recompete of the existing USMS Executive, Administrative, and Professional Support BPA (previously awarded to Mayvin, Inc.), and whether this recompete will remain a small business set-aside under NAICS 541611? | This is still being determined. One of the reasons for the RFI is to help us determine if the current NAICS code is still appropriate and if this can be set aside for small business. |
| 112 | Will the government provide historical workload data (e.g., number of cases, investigations, budget actions, procurement actions, data calls, audits) for each USMS Division to better estimate staffing levels and surge capacity requirements? | If this data is able to be shared (may not due to law enforcement sensitivity) and easily available USMS will share as part of the solicitation. |
| 113 | Does USMS anticipate any upcoming organizational changes (e.g., BIC expansion, modernization initiatives, audit remediation efforts) that would affect contractor staffing or functional duties? | At this time we do not anticipate any changes to affect the staffing or duties. |
| 114 | Are the labor categories in Appendix A final, or should industry expect updated/additional categories before the RFP release? | They are not final, and the updated categories will be provided as part of the RFP release. |
| 115 | Does USMS expect contractors to support multiple Divisions simultaneously, or will labor categories be aligned to a single Division? | Will be required to support all USMS Divisions as part of this requirement; however, contractor personnel will be assigned to a single order. |
| 116 | Will the government provide baseline performance metrics for Division operations (e.g., audit backlog, budget cycle times, procurement cycle times) to inform the technical approach? | This will be part of the solicitation. The Government is working on what items will be released to assist contractors in preparation of their response to a solicitation. Some items are considered law enforcement sensitive and must be adequately reviewed prior to being provided. |
| 117 | Will the RFP require offerors to propose staff already holding Moderate, High-Risk Public Trust, or TS/SCI clearances, or will interim clearances be accepted? | At this time, the Government anticipates accepting interim clearances; however, this could change prior to the solicitation phase. |
| 118 | What is the expected onboarding and clearance processing timeline for Moderate, High-Risk, or TS/SCI positions? | This will be provided as part of the solicitation. |
| 119 | Are there mandatory on-site staffing minimums for Divisions that previously relied on telework? | Some Divisions have eliminated telework as an option and now require in-office work. Based on their requirements, some Division may allow telework. Specific details will be provided as part of the solicitation. |
| 120 | Will USMS permit remote or hybrid staffing models when work does not require on-site classified or sensitive handling? | While it has previoulsy been the poisition of the USMS to encourage the maximum use of telework, this is no longer the case. Contractors should consider positions to be in-office with the possibliity of telework. Also see question and answer #25 for additional details. |
| 121 | For roles requiring TS/SCI, will the RFP require access to SCIF environments and/or contractor facility clearances? | A facility clearance will be required. Additionally, the USMS has several SCIF environments to which contractor personnel may be assigned. These personnel will be required to have the necessary security clearance (TS-SCI). Additional details regarding this will be provided in the solicitaiton. |
| 122 | Will USMS provide a complete list of systems, platforms, and databases contractor personnel must be proficient in? | A list of generic systems that all contractor personnel must be experienced in will be provided in the solicitation. Specific LCATs may required specialized proficiency in special programs. This information will be made available to the successful contractor. |
| 123 | Will USMS provide user-level or advanced training for specialized systems beyond what is described in Appendix A? | Contractor personnel requiring USMS specific training will be provided that training by the USMS. |
| 124 | For positions requiring analytics or modeling, will USMS specify approved tools (Python, R, SAS, Tableau, Power BI, ESRI)? | Yes. |
| 125 | Does USMS anticipate system modernization efforts that may require updated contractor skillsets during the BPA period? | Not at this time; however, this is subject to change based on the needs of the Agency. |
| 126 | Will the RFP define performance metrics or KPIs for financial management, procurement, records management, or intelligence tasks? | Yes |
| 127 | Will deliverables be standardized across Divisions, or will each Division require customized deliverables? | Deliverables will be specific to the individual orders which they fall under. |
| 128 | Will USMS require contractor support for internal control testing, audit remediation, or OMB Circular A-123 compliance? | This is still being determined and will be provided as part of the solicitation. This is not needed to respond to the RFI. |
| 129 | Will USMS provide templates for recurring reports (e.g., weekly accomplishment reports, tracking logs, suspense reports)? | The USMS will work with the successful vendor on report format and submission. |
| 130 | Will contractors be expected to develop new SOPs, dashboards, training materials, or SharePoint enhancements? | Some LCATs may specifically help with these tasks. If that is the case it will be clearly annotated on the labor description. |
| 131 | Is USMS planning increased acquisition workload driven by new initiatives, mandates, or surge cycles? | Not at this time, but this is subject to change based on the needs of the Agency / Government. |
| 132 | Will the RFP provide workload estimates for procurement (e.g., number of files, D&Fs, purchase requests)? | No this information is not readily available and USMS does not feel it is something that would be needed as part of the solicitation. |
| 133 | Does USMS anticipate requiring financial statement audit readiness, A-136 reporting, or GAO/OIG support? | This is still being determined and will be provided as part of the solicitation. This is not needed to respond to the RFI. |
| 134 | Will USMS provide funding profiles, budget execution calendars, or prior-year spend plans to support Budget Analyst duties? | Information will be supplied to contractors filling those LCATs as needed |
| 135 | For TOG/intelligence units, will offerors need to show law enforcement or intelligence past performance? | This is likely, but the final LCAT description will clarify this. |
| 136 | Will technical surveillance or intelligence roles require certifications (e.g., surveillance tech, data exploitation tools)? | This is to be determined and any information on this will be provided at time of the solicitation. |
| 137 | Will contractors be required to follow DOJ/USMS surveillance and technical policies, and will such materials be released pre-RFP? | Yes, as applicable. |
| 138 | Will USMS provide its current file plans, retention schedules, and NARA disposition guidance for Records Management tasks? | Information will be supplied to contractors filling those LCATs as needed |
| 139 | Will contractor support be needed for electronic records modernization (ECM migration, digitization, SharePoint redesign)? | Some LCATs may specifically help with these tasks. If that is the case it will be clearly annotated on the labor description. |
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 .