The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
SUBJECT: Response to Questions FROM: Robert Coyle, Contracting Officer
DATE: 09/10/2015
The following questions were provided by interested parties concerning the ServiceNow Support requirement. The Contracting Officer’s Response is as below:
| Q1 |
| In the RFP, it states that this solicitation is done through simplified acquisition procedure. Does that mean the value of the contract is less than $150k? |
| A1 |
| Simplified acquisition procedures may be used for actions above 150k subject to certain discretions and Agency based determinations. The Government will not specify the value. |
| Q2 |
| Based on the requirements, it appears that the personnel should be performing more than one role (architect, developer and administrator). Would government consider multiple team members to support required services or does it have to be one person performing all three roles? |
| A2 |
| The Government is neither restricting nor endorsing a particular ‘team’ make up. The Government has instead provided an estimated level of effort which it believes suitable. If a prospective offeror feels that the requirement is unrealistic or that it can be more effectively or efficiently addressed utilizing a different composition, they are welcome to quote such. |
| Q3 |
| Does the government anticipate to have the vendor propose two different personnel for CPOC and Qualified Personnel as stated in section 1.3.3 and 1.3.4 respectively? |
| A3 |
| No. The CPOC is a designation utilized to provide a coordinating point of contact for all actions under this contract – it is not a labor category in and of itself, just a designation for a senior employee to enable ease of communication between the government and the contractor. If only one person is proposed, said person could likewise be made the CPOC. |
| Q4 |
| Section 1.7 states that contractor is not allowed at the NTIS facility while is section 1.6, it states that the place of performance is NTIS’s facility in Alexandria. Should we assume that personnel supporting this effort will be working remotely or at the government site? |
| A4 |
| 1.6 contained a fragment that has now been deleted. The contractor would perform work on site. |
| Q5 |
| Does personnel require any active clearance or can they obtain clearance if needed after the start date of the work? |
| A5 |
| Personnel serving on this contract must have, at minimum, a current Moderate Risk Background Investigation (MBI). |
| Q6 |
| Section 3 Government Furnished Equipment: References are made in this section as if this is a task order. Please update it so that services are procured under PWS but not as an IDIQ or task order |
| A6 |
| As noted in prior questions and answers, this is not an IDIQ. The ‘word’ task has been deleted. It now just states ‘order’. |
| Q7 |
| Section 5.2.1 Process Configuration: In the last sentence, it states that ‘the expected results of the contractor effort for this task includes’ – but it doesn’t show what’s included. Please add |
| A7 |
| Section 5.2.1 has been updated to incorporate the following: |
· Update project documentation to reflect requirements changes, workflow processes, and proposed changes to system configuration, as applicable
· Update templates and system configurations to implement improved processes
· Develop process user guide. This may be one part of a larger project document.
| Q8 |
| How many users does the current system supporting? |
| Q9 |
| How many staging and test instances of ServiceNow exist within the NTIS? |
| A9 |
| NTIS is currently utilizing a single test environment. |
| Q10 |
| Section 6.1 System documentation states that “Product documentation may include, but is not limited to, software/system specifications, plans, procedures, guides, and other manuals, working papers, engineering notes, and architectures and policies. Copies of all documentation should be submitted to the COR no later than the 10th day of the month”. This seems like an overkill to produce so much documentation every month. Would government consider changing this requirement as well as the timeline so that it can be directly worked out with COR after the award? |
| A10 |
| If there are no updates to documentation, no new documentation generated, and/or no revisions are needed, then there would be no need to submit revised documentation every month. Documentation is listed as ‘may include’, to encompass the broad range of documentation that might be generated over the course of the project, and with a fixed date of the 10th in order to provide a regular date for the submission of any documents that were worked on during the prior month, including drafts. Due dates for final deliverables will be established with the COR after award and incorporated into the project plan. |
Section 6.1 has been updated: “Copies of all documentation should be submitted to the COR no later than the 10th day of the month.” has been changed to “Current versions of all documentation developed or amended in the reporting period, including drafts, must be submitted to the COR no later than the 10th day of the month.”
| Q11 |
| Section 6.1 system documentation – in order to generate the required documentation as stated in the PWS, we may need to propose a technical writer in addition to the key personnel which will increase the overall cost. Could you please update this requirement or remove it? |
| A11 |
| As noted in the response to question 2, the Government is not restricting possible approaches – interested parties may submit as they see best. As noted in question 10, it is not anticipated that documentation be provided/updated every month, only that when it is necessary, it be provided. |
| Q12 |
| In the PPQ, item 6 – it states that “Based on this Contractor’s overall performance, would you award this Contractor another Government Contract? “. What if we are submitting one of the past performances from commercial sector. How should we treat this? |
| A12 |
| They may considered ‘government contract’ to be ‘commercial contract’. |
| Q13 |
| Would government consider making this a T&M contract? |
| Q14 |
| Would government consider extending the RFP response date by 10 days? |
| A14 |
| The solicitation period will be extended through September 11th. |
Response to Questions image1.png