Amendment 006 Questions Responses.pdf

Amendment 006 Solicitation SB1341-12-RP-0019

The purposes of this amendment are as follows:

1. To provide responses to questions posed by potential Offerors. The official responses to the questions are posted below; and

2. To amend Sections B.1, B.2, C.1 and L.4 of the RFP based on the responses given to certain sections of the RFP as detailed below. The attached document entitled “Amendment 006 RFP” includes the changes made. The attached document shall be used as the official RFP from the date of issuance of this modification.

Questions & Responses

Question #: 1 Section of RFP: B.2 Schedule of Labor Categories Page of RFP Referenced: 8 Paragraph of Page: 1 Description of Question: Education and experience may be substituted with 3 educational levels Bachelor’s Degree, Ph.D. or Master’s Degree, and no degree. Does this substitute for both the Minimum/General Experience requirements (page 7, paragraph 2) and PMP requirement listed as the sole Minimum Education Requirement (Page 7 paragraph 4)?

Response: The wording should state, “2 years general project management and 2 years IT experience. It is missing the words “project management” from the description. Regarding the Ph. D or Masters degree, the word ‘additional’ is missing from the description in that it should state, ‘can be substituted for 1 additional year general project management and 1 additional year IT experience managing IT projects.

This is meant to say that it can be substituted for 1 additional year less than the minimum requirement.

Question #:2 Section of RFP: B.2. Schedule of Labor Categories Page of RFP Referenced:8 Paragraph of Page:1 Description of Question: The Bachelor’s Degree is substituted for 2 years or general experience and 2 years IT experience (i.e. 10-2=8 years of general project management and 5-2 =3 years of IT experience), yet the Ph.D or Master’s degree substitutes for only 1 year of general experience and 1 year of IT experience. Can you confirm the Ph.D. or Master’s degree substitutes for less years?

Response: See answer to above question.

Question #: 3 Section of RFP: Section L – Instructions to Offerors Page of RFP Referenced: 114 Paragraph of Page: b.1.a Description of Question: Can you clarify the instruction stating “The plan shall describe their technical approach to complete each of the eleven tasks detailed in the IDIQ PWS.” Per page 28 paragraph 7, these are “types of tasks” and specific requirements will be detailed in task orders. Is this asking for the general approach to accomplishing these types of work for NIST? We presume an approach to “complete” a task must address specific completion criteria and deliverables not available for each of the eleven types of tasks in the IDIQ PWS.

Response: The intent here is for the Offeror to provide a generalized technical approach for completion of the broad eleven tasks in the IDIQ PWS. It is understood that a more detailed technical approach would be possible for tasks detailed in task order Performance Work Statements. However, the Offeror’s technical approach for these eleven tasks listed in the IDIQ PWS should be sufficient to demonstrate a feasible and suitable approach to completion of these general tasks and should sufficiently demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements and knowledge of applicable documentary standards.

Question #: 4 Section of RFP: Section L – Instructions to Offerors Page of RFP Referenced: 116 Paragraph of Page: d Description of Question: Are we to follow the same guidelines in this paragraph for submitting past performance references for subcontractors?

Question #: 1 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: 2nd item Technical Approach for Task Order 1 pg 115 of 127 Description of Question: Is this a mock task order or will this be the first task order awarded under the

IDIQ?’

Response: This is not a mock task order. NIST intends on awarding this task order upon award of the base IDIQ contract.

Question #: 5 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: 2nd item Technical Approach for Task Order 1 pg 115 of 127 Description of Question: Is there an incumbent currently performing the requirements of task order #1?

Response: As previously stated in earlier amendments, Booz Allen Hamilton is the incumbent contractor for the general work preformed across the IDIQ PWS. However, much of the work that will be performed under task order 1 is currently being performed by the small business, G2 Inc.

Question #: 6 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: 3nd item Key Personnel for Task Order 1 pg 115 of 127 Description of Question: Instructions note that the Offeror may provide a one-page description of their Key Personnel and resumes may be submitted as an attachment to the Technical Volume. If resumes are submitted as an attachment, will they be count against the 15 page limit for the Technical Approach for the Task Order 1?

Response: No, resumes will not be counted against the page limit, as described in previous amendments.

Question #: 7 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: 3nd item Program Manager for IDIQ Contract pg 114 of 127 Description of Question: Instructions note that resumes may be submitted as an attachment. If resumes are submitted as an attachment, will they be count against the 10 page limit for the contract management plan or the 15 Page limit of the Recruitment and Retention Plan? Or, will they be excluded from page count?

Response: See Response to question above. Resumes will not count against the page limits.

Question #: 8

Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: Past Performance pg 116 of 127 Description of Question: Is there a minimum or maximum number of Past Performance Questionnaires the Government is requesting?

Response: No.

Question #: 9 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: Past Performance pg 116 of 127 Description of Question: If the Offeror has an identified teaming partner (subcontractor) that will be submitting PPQ, how would the Government like this information to be represented in the PPQ ( i.e., modify the PPQ template or add a description in the Past Performance section)?

Response: The template for the Past Performance Questionnaire should not be modified. Offerors should use Part I of the questionnaire to indicate which one is for their teaming partner or subcontractor.

However, if an Offeror has identified whether the company being evaluated on the questionnaire is a prime or sub in a different way and has already submitted their past performance questionnaires to their references, there is no need to resubmit the questionnaires.

Question #: 10 Section of RFP: L Paragraph of Page: Last paragraph, 1st and 3rd sentences, pg 115 of 127 Description of Question: RFP directs Offerors to describe experience related to “the tasks described in the base IDIQ PWS” while noting that Offerors should “demonstrate the degree of relevance” of the experience related to the “base IDIQ contract and the first task order.” May Offerors describe experience related to the first task order in addition to the base IDIQ to facilitate NIST’s evaluation of the degree of relevance of this experience?

Response: Because the requirements of task order 1 are within the scope of the base IDIQ contract, this question is somewhat a moot point. However, yes, Offerors may delineate in their Specialized Experience section whether their experience pertains more to task order 1 or a different area of the base IDIQ contract.

Question #: 11 Section of RFP: B Page of RFP Referenced: 25 of 127 Paragraph of Page: 1 – Minimum and Maximum Contract Amounts Description of Question: Is it the Government intention to place orders in each of the consecutive performance periods?

Response: The government cannot answer this question at this time.

Question #: 12 Section of RFP: L Page of RFP Referenced: 115 of 127 Paragraph of Page: 3 – Key Personnel for Task Order Description of Question: Would the offeror’s be allowed to replace Key Personnel at any time during the execution of the Task Order 1?

Response: Please see the requirements detailed in the Key Personnel clause on page 50 of the RFP document.

Question #: 13 Section of RFP: L Page of RFP Referenced: 116 of 127 Paragraph of Page: 2 – Volume II – Business Volume Description of Question: Is there a page limitation for the Business Volume?

Response: There is no page limit to the Business Volume, as the information required in the Business Volume is quite specific and limited.

Question #: 14 Section of RFP: L Page of RFP Referenced: 116 of 127 Paragraph of Page: Volume II Business Volume - Base Contract Pricing Paragraph 3 Description of Question: Is it the Government expectation that the offeror’s rates remain constant or level for the all performance periods by elimination or reduction of escalation? Would some minimal escalation be acceptable to the Government?

Response: As stated in the RFP, The Offeror’s fully burdened hourly labor rates must reflect the current market labor rates with any discounts provided. Current significant budgetary constraints demand that the impact of these constraints and ownership of the solution be shared throughout the public sector including its contractors. Offerors are asked to consider reduction or elimination of costs/pricing of the escalation of labor hour rates during the performance period of this contract.

The Government is requesting any and all reduction or elimination of escalation of hourly labor rates during the performance period of the contract that is possible.

Question #: 15 Section of RFP: M Page of RFP Referenced: 126 of 127 Paragraph of Page: 2 – Factor E – Price Description of Question: Would the elimination or reduction of escalation be considered in evaluating the offeror’s labor rates in Factor E Price?

Response: Eliminating or reducing escalation in rates would result in lower rates throughout the resulting contract’s period of performance, which would mean that the rates will be more competitive. The Offeror’s proposed labor rates will be considered in the evaluation of Factor E Price.

Question #: 16 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 114 - 115 Paragraph of Page: A, B, C Description of Question:

Section L.4 instructions for Technical Volume I provide page limitations for each subsection with the clause “excluding diagrams, tables and graphics” in each instance. Two questions:

a. Can we assume that a diagram, table or graphic that takes a full page may be numbered outside of the subsection page count, for example as page i, ii, etc.?

b. How should we calculate the page numbering for pages that are only partially filled by a diagram, table or graphic?

Response: To Question “a,” Offerors may use this paging method if they choose to do so. To Question “b,” please see the Government’s response to Question # 12 in the previous Amendment 004.

Question #: 17 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 116 Paragraph of Page: D Description of Question:

Section L.4 for Technical Volume I, Section D contains instructions for Past Performance information.

Please verify the following assumptions:

a. The pages for Section D, consisting of our response to the Section J questionnaire Part I, are unlimited with regard to any page count.

b. The pages for Section D are to be included in the printed volume as an attachment at the end of our response to Section B, so that Section D itself will not contain any pages or content other than a short reference to the Section B attachment.

Response: Your interpretation is correct for both parts a and b here.

Question #: 18 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 113 Paragraph of Page: 9 Description of Question:

Section L.4 instructions stipulate a font type of Times New Roman, minimum size 11, for the entire proposal response. For diagrams and graphics, will the government allow a sans serif font such as Arial, with a font size no smaller than 9 as long as it’s readable?

Response: Because diagrams, tables and graphics are not included in the page count, the text for these is not limited to Times New Roman minimum of size 11, so long as the text in tables/graphics is readable.

Question #:19 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 114 Paragraph of Page: 11 Description of Question: The Government specified Times New Roman, 11 point font. Does this apply to text only; may the offeror use other font types and sizes for graphics? For tables?

Response: See response to Question 18 above.

Question #: 20 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 113 Paragraph of Page: Last Description of Question: May graphics and tables be a font other than Times New Roman font?

Response: See response to Question 18 above.

Question #: 21 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 113

Paragraph of Page: Last Description of Question: May tables and graphics be 9 or 10 point instead of 11 point?

Response: See response to Question 18 above.

Question #: 22 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 115 Paragraph of Page: #2 Description of Question: Are tables included in the page limit for the Technical Approach for Task Order 1?

Response: No, this page limit excludes diagrams, tables and graphics.

Question #: 23 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 115 Paragraph of Page: Last Description of Question: Are tables included or excluded from the page limitation for the Specialized Experience Section?

Response: The page limit for the Specialized Experience section excludes diagrams, tables and graphics.

Question #: 24 Section of RFP: I. 50 52.212-5 CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO

IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR EXECUTIVE ORDERS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (MAR 2012)

Page of RFP Referenced: 70-73 Paragraph of Page: All Description of Question: Many of the subsections of I.50 have an “xx” to the left of the citation. Do those “xx” marking mean that only the marked parts of the clause apply? If not, what does the “xx” marking mean?

Response: Many FAR clauses have “subsections” or “fill-ins” that are to be marked if applicable. In the case of FAR 52.212-5, which is in Section I.50 of the RFP, the clauses contained within this clause that are marked by an “xx” are the ones that are applicable.

Question #: 25 Section of RFP: Section L, ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-:PROPOSAL

PREPARATION/SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

Page of RFP Referenced: Section L p. 116 Paragraph of Page: Volume II A Description of Question: The section states that the Offeror shall assume for price proposal preparation purposes that the contract will begin on September 15, 2012.... may be different than listed below: Base Period: September 21, 2012 – September 20, 2013. Also elsewhere in the proposal it states that the periods of performance are TBD, and the hours in Task Order 1 suggest that the Base year is half of the duration of the Option Years. And Section L instructions for the Task Order 1 state that the work starts on September 20, 2012. Question: Will the Government please clarify exactly what the periods of performance are and the start and end dates?

Response: On page 116 of the RFP, in Section A Base Contract Pricing, we state that the Offerors shall assume the start date of September 15, 2012 for the base contract, but then we give estimated period of performance dates for the base contract that begin on September 21, 2012. The estimated start date for the base contract is September 21, 2012, not the 15th. This correction is noted in Section L.3 (which was previously Section L.4 in the original RFP) of the attached document “Amendment 006 RFP.” However, the actual period of performance of the base contract is in fact TBD because those dates given on page 116 are only an estimation given for Offeror’s proposal preparation purposes. The start date of the IDIQ contract depends on the award date of the contract, which ultimately depends on the number of proposals the Government receives and the length of the evaluation process.

For task order 1, the base period of the task order is only for six months, compared to each of the option periods of the task order being for one year. Again, the estimated start date of the task order 1 period of performance is also September 21, 2012, but the actual period of performance is TBD.

Question #: 26 Section of RFP: Section B.2., SCHEDULE OF LABOR RATES Page of RFP Referenced: pp 22, 23 Paragraph of Page: Table Description of Question: While Section G.5.f. specifies that each task order will specify details including the place of performance, and Task Order 1 indicates that the “Contractor shall be able to provide both onsite and remote resources to support this tasking”, the RFP does not specifically request contractor site rates. Should the Schedule of Labor Rates include separate onsite and offsite rates?

Response: Yes, offerors need to propose both on- and off-site rates. Please see the changes made to Sections B.1, B.2, and L.4 to reflect this change in the attached document entitled “Amendment 006

RFP.”

Question #: 27 Section of RFP: L.4, Volume II Page of RFP Referenced: 116 - All Paragraph of Page: 3 Description of Question: The RFP asks for “fixed fully burdened hourly rates”. Does the Government require the offeror to show the components of these rates, such as: the direct labor rates, indirect rates, and fee?

Response: The referenced paragraph has been amended to clarify that the Government is requesting ceiling fully burdened hourly labor rates, not fixed fully burdened hourly labor rates. This change can be seen in the attached document entitled “Amendment 006 RFP.”

The Offeror is not required to include each component of these rates in their proposal. However, Offerors can voluntarily provide the breakdown of their proposed rates.

Question #: 28 Section of RFP: n/a Page of RFP Referenced: n/a Paragraph of Page: n/a Description of Question: Is it permissible for the offeror to reference figures or tables from within the same volume but a different section (e.g., reference a diagram in Section A from Section B.) This may impact how the Government divides the work between the people who evaluate the proposal.

Response: Yes, this is permissible.

Question #: 29

Section of RFP: C.1 Page of RFP Referenced: 28 Paragraph of Page: 2 and 7 Description of Question: In the IDIQ PWS there appears to be two sections labeled Roman numeral II.

Will the Government please renumber these sections?

Response: The roman numerals in the IDIQ PWS have been updated in the attached document entitled “Amendment 006 RFP.”

Question #: 30 Section of RFP: B.1 Schedule of Labor Categories Page of RFP Referenced: 7-22 Paragraph of Page: 3 Description of Question: The offeror is requesting clarification regarding the minimum number of years of education and experience for certain Labor Categories. In all of these instances, the minimum degree and number of years experience requirements do not seem to match the equivalent degree substitutions or non-degree years of experience requirements. These Labor Categories are:

A. Technical Subject Matter Specialist (Senior) B. Technical Subject Matter Specialist (Intermediate) C. Lead Vulnerability Analysis Specialist D. Analysis Specialist

Response: For these four labor categories, NIST has corrected the confusing language by removing certain elements of the labor category descriptions. Please see the attached Amendment 006 RFP for the changes that have been made.

Question #: 31 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 113 Paragraph of Page: 11 Description of Question: The Government describes specifications for pages such as number, font size, point size, and margins. However, the Government does not specify page sizes and their appropriate use (such as 8.5 x 11, 11 x 17, etc.) Will the Government provide guidance for page sizes and their appropriate use (for instance does an 11x17 page count as one page or two)? Should the paper be printed on one side or two, and how does this relate to the page count requirement?

Response: One page is considered to be one 8.5 x 11 in. page. Offerors are encouraged to use double-sided printing, and if they do so, one 8.5 x 11 in. piece of paper with two sides used would count as two pages.

Question #: 32 Section of RFP: L.4 Page of RFP Referenced: 114 Paragraph of Page: Sec. B.1.c, Paragraph 1 Description of Question: The instruction states, “The plan shall describe the Offeror’s understanding of the technical subject matters listed in the IDIQ PWS and as published at csrc.nist.gov; including the workflow to produce and maintain these documentary standards.” What does the phrase “and as published at crsc.nist.gov” mean in the context of the statement? This statement could be interpreted as requiring a plan that addresses all of the items described at crsc.nist.gov, but not explicitly called out within the PWS. Could the Government please clarify the statement? And since the data at this web site is dynamic, what is the date upon which this requirement applies? If that date is in the past and the web site has since changed, will the Government provide access to an archive or provide the data that was published on the required date?

Response: The CSRC website provides both a current and historical reference to the ongoing work at NIST. Some of these documents require updates due to changing technologies and trends while other published works represent the latest word on a given topic. Offerors are encouraged to demonstrate understanding of NIST work. Some ideas include demonstrating competency in the technical subject areas, identify necessary updates to dated documents, identify missing topics regarding the NIST’s charter and the technology trend, etc. This is an opportunity for the Offeror to demonstrate both completeness and forward thinking regarding NIST CSD business.

Question #: 33 Section of RFP: M.1 FACTOR E - PRICE Page of RFP Referenced: 126 Paragraph of Page: 2 Description of Question: Also reference L.4 VOLUME II – BUSINESS VOLUME A Base Contract Pricing. What method will the Government use to evaluate the Base Contract Pricing rates proposed or to compare rates among offerors? For instance will the average of all rates be evaluated, or the average of the differences between rates, or the most significant differences? Similarly, are some categories more important than others, or will weighting factors be used?

Response: The evaluation of Factor E for the IDIQ contract and Task Order 1will focus on whether the proposed rates are fair and reasonable and consistent with the Offeror’s technical and management approaches.

Question #: 34 Section of RFP: L.4 VOLUME II – BUSINESS VOLUME A Base Contract Pricing Page of RFP Referenced: 116 Paragraph of Page: 7 Description of Question: Also reference L.4 VOLUME I – TECHNICAL VOLUME B.d “Offerors may propose additional labor categories…” What method will the Government use to compare the prices of these additional labor categories among different offerors?

Response: As stated in the Evaluation Factors for Award (page 125, Factor B (1)(d)), the Government will only evaluate the required labor categories. Therefore, Offerors may propose additional labor categories for the contract, but Offerors will only be evaluated on the rates that they propose for the required labor categories from Section B.

Question #: 35 Section of RFP: II Requirements Page of RFP Referenced: pages 28 through 31 Paragraph of Page: the first paragraph of the section and the listing of the tasks 1 through 11, especially task 2 about training Description of Question: -- Aside from being IDIQ task order, is this requirement partially a Time and Material one, especially in the area of training?

Response: The specific tasks required of the contractor under this IDIQ contract will be detailed in individual task orders. Section III Requirements (what used to be labeled Section II Requirements) in the IDIQ PWS on pages 28-31 of the RFP provides information on the types of tasks that the contractor will be required to perform. The contract type of individual task orders will either be firm fixed price or labor hour, and the contract type of a given task order will be identified in that specific task order. The tasks described in the IDIQ PWS are not assigned one specific contract type.

Question #: 36 Section of RFP: II Requirements Page of RFP Referenced: pages 28 through 31 Paragraph of Page: the first paragraph of the section and the listing of the tasks 1 through 11, especially task 2 about training Description of Question: -- If so, would you kindly specify which core task areas can be priced as T & M --- security data analysis and testing, code development and software engineering support and documentation support; sub-tasks are business process models, software development and modeling, training, data models and databases, credentialing, reports and project tracking meeting and health information technology security and privacy?

Response: NIST is not asking Offerors to provide “prices” for the tasks 1-11 listed in the IDIQ PWS.

Please review Section L.3 in Amendment 006 RFP for a detailed description of the pricing information that Offerors are required to provide.