Questions and Answers Table - Amendment 0004.pdf

No. Question RFP Page RFP Para Reference (if applicable)

Government Response

Given that the specificity of the resume requirements in a remote area and this late in the proposal cycle, the change heavily favors the incumbent contractor by significantly impeding competition. Multiple vendors have already expended significant resources and this significant of a requirements change, weighted towards the incumbent, does not leave sufficient time for vendors to recruit for the positions limiting the possibility of viable competition. Given the significant impact this change requires would the Government consider removing the PM resume and LOI requirements and return to the original requirements that limited key to the Senior PM?

The requirement will not be changed. However, the Government is extending the current proposal due date an additional two weeks (in addition to the three weeks provided in Amendment 0002 when this requirement was incorporated ) to allow Offerors additional time for this change.

Can the Govt. please clarify whether the Quoter is required to include the percentage of total dollar threshold and/or man-hour effort each major subcontractor will provide? If required, is it acceptable for the Quoter to state the percentages in Volume II Past Performance Proposal or do you require us to submit copies of Teaming Agreements?

(4/9 Revision)

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 4

The RFP has been updated to provide a table for the Offerors to complete.

Can the Government please clarify how the Govt. will weigh past performance references relative to the percentage of the effort provided? In trying to understand the aggregate evaluation and weighting guidance versus the past performances we are considering submitting, can the government please clarify the following: If an offeror provides five past performances, two from the prime, two from major subcontractors each having 20% workshare and one from another subcontractor, is it correct that the total past performance evaluation will based on multiplying the two prime past performances by .6 (60%,) and the past performance of the major subcontractors by .2 (20%) and not evaluate the other subcontractor? If not any clarifying information would be very helpful.

(4/9 Revision)

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 4

As stated in the previous Q&A response, the references will be evaluated in aggregate. The relevancy ratings assigned will be in accordance with the DoD Source Selection Guide. The Government cannot provide feedback on a theoretical question of evaluation ratings/relevancy.

RFP SP3300-20-R-0001

Amendment 0004 - Questions and Answers Table