RFP_Amendment__1.docx

National Institutes of Health (NIH)

Office of Acquisitions National Library of Medicine 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 105 Bethesda, MD 20892-5488

To all Vendors: The purpose of this Amendment is to respond to vendor questions to date.

VENDOR QUESTIONS

Question #1: The RFP it states: “Vendors shall submit a list and description of the last five contracts completed during the past three years and all contracts currently in process. Offerors shall be evaluated on (1) record of conforming to specifications and to standards of good workmanship; (2) adherence to contract schedules, including the administrative aspects of performance; (3) reputation for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and (4) businesslike concern for the interests of the customer.”

We would like clarification on the level of detail and scope of this request, as we have many contracts and I want to ensure we are preparing the material appropriately. Do we need to report on all of our federal contracts, or simply DHHS or NIH contracts? Should this list include our commercial contracts, which often have non-disclosure agreements, and we cannot therefore disclose who the customer is. If we need to report on commercial contracts, is submitting information about the project without listing the customer sufficient? Lastly, how long should the descriptions be, and is it expected that they specifically highlight points 1-4 in the paragraph above?

Answer #1: Vendors should submit a list and descriptions of (up to) five contracts completed in the last three years or currently in process. The vendor should select the five contracts from their portfolio that are most appropriate to the description of the work covered in the current requirement. The descriptions should be brief, but sufficient to describe the performance of the vendor in fulfilling the needs of similar projects or contracts.

Question #2: Regarding the budget, should we budget for travel funds to attend a kickoff or final review meeting with the program manager?

Answer #2: There is no kickoff or final review meeting planned by NLM. No budget for travel funds to such a meeting is required.

Question #3: Considering the geographical constraint of personally reviewing the document, I request you to provide us the following details before we buy the document:

Answer #3:

• List of Items, Schedule of Requirements, Scope of Work, Terms of Reference, Bill of Materials required. Answer: There is no list of items, schedule of requirements, nor terms of reference. SimpleITK is online and downloadable, free to the public. The Scope of Work is an attachment 1 of the RFP.

• Soft Copy of the Tender Document through email. Answer: NLM is unclear of this question however, if the “Tender Document” refers to SimpleITK, it is available online. If the “Tender Document” refers to the RFP, it is available online “soft copy” via FedBizOpps.

• Names of countries that will be eligible to participate in this tender. Answer: The National Library of Medicine will consider International vendors however; all vendors must be registered in www.SAM.gov to be eligible for government contracts.

• Information about the Tendering Procedure and Guidelines. Answer: All information is included in this solicitation.

Question #4: Is there any extension of bidding deadline?

Answer #4: There is no extension of the proposal deadline for this solicitation. All proposals are due Spetember 8, 2015 no later than 12:00 PM EST

Question #5: Is the $100,000 limit on direct costs, or combined direct+indirect?

Answer #5: Individual ITK development projects under this procurement should not exceed $100,000 in cost.

Question #6: Can you estimate the number of awards that will be made (or total $$ allocated for this program) to help us gauge the cost/benefit ratio of preparing more than one application?

Answer #6: The National Library of Medicine (NLM) anticipates awarding 3-4 awards in the amount of $100,000.00 for each award.

Question #7: Is the letter indicating commitment to open source principles required for institutions that have previously contributed to ITK, or is prior contribution enough to demonstrate institutional support?

Answer #7: Previous contribution to ITK will be considered sufficient demonstration of institutional commitment to open source software initiatives of this type.

Question #8: Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number RFP_NIHLM2015597KB contain requirements similar to a current contract? If possible, please provide the current contract number. Or, is this a new requirement for the government?

Answer #8: There is no current contract that is directly related to work with SimpleITK support as described in this requirement. However, since SimpleITK is a programming layer on top of the Insight Toolkit (ITK), there is a maintenance contract for ITK: “Help Desk and Information Technology Support for the Insight Toolkit (ITK-v4)”, NLM award number: HHSN276201300003I.

Question #9: Once logged into the NLM eCPS, there are no active solicitations listed to select and submit to. Could you please provide guidance on how we should submit our proposals?

Answer #9: Once logged into the NLM eCPS system at https://ecps.nih.gov/nlm, all proposals should be submitted under solicitation number RFP_ NIHLM2015597KB.

Question #10: The RFP calls for a firm fixed price budget. Is there a specific format or level of detail the you would like included for the budget in our business proposal?

Answer #10: Since the total cost of each award is limited to $100,000, the amount of work that can be proposed and achieved in any award can vary dramatically as indirect and overhead costs vary from institution to institution. These considerations are part of the business proposal and not the technical evaluation.

You should partition your proposal, placing budget information and indirect justification, university information and any legal language required by your institution in the business proposal. If you are working with two universities or institutions, Memoranda of Understanding or subcontracting information should be included in the business portion.

By contrast for instance, the cost of a graduate assistant including stipend and/or tuition assistance at your university should be presented in the business proposal.

Question #11: [We] are somewhat confused about the requirement of the proposal to include both a technical portion and a business portion. While we understand the requirements imposed by the technical portion, we are not clear as to what the business portion would entail and more importantly, if it’s even applicable in our case, considering that we belong to an academic institution of higher education and the proposed work would entail the dissemination, utilization and integration of open source tools.

Answer #11: Typically in our reviews, a panel called a Technical Evaluation Group (TEG) will review the technical proposals on their merits and responsiveness to the funding call. The criteria for this review is published. The TEG does not routinely review the administrative or business aspects, salaries, overhead, or other issues surrounding the proposal.

After the TEG completes their assessment and proposals are scored and rated as competitive or non-competitive, the contracting team along with the technical Contracting Officer Representatives will review the business portions of the proposal.

Since the total cost of each award is limited to $100,000, the amount of work that can be proposed and achieved in any award can vary dramatically as indirect and overhead costs vary from institution to institution. These considerations are part of the business proposal and not the technical evaluation.

You should partition your proposal, placing budget information and indirect justification, university information and any legal language required by your institution in the business proposal. If you are working with two universities or institutions, Memoranda of Understanding or subcontracting information should be included in the business portion.

The technical proposal should contain the material that will be covered by the scoring rubric that is published with the RFP. Staffing considerations are certainly appropriate for the technical proposal (see the criteria) along with expected commitment of time. By contrast for instance, the cost of a graduate assistant including stipend and/or tuition assistance at your university should be presented in the business proposal.

image1.png