Tab_26_Amendment_3.pdf

SP4702-20-R-0013 – AMENDMENT 3

Introductory Note: This solicitation amendment has three parts. Part 1 updates specific Paragraphs of the solicitation and amendment documents. Part 2 updates SP4702-20-R-0013 Attachment 2 – Performance Work Statement (PWS). Part 3 answers vendor questions.

Part 1 Note: This solicitation amendment updates specific Paragraphs from the solicitation and subsequent amendments. Any Section from the solicitation that had an update made is mentioned, followed by the Paragraph number being updated. If a Section, or Paragraph, isn’t shown there is no update to that Section or Paragraph made by this amendment. If an entire Paragraph is being updated to replace the original Paragraph in its entirety (as is the case with Section L, Paragraph 2(b)(2)), that is also noted.

Part 2 Note: An update is made to SP4702-20-R-0013 Attachment 2 – Performance Work Statement by reference. This update will be incorporated into the final PWS document attached to the award document.

Solicitation closing date and time remains unchanged.

Highlights of this solicitation amendment include:

1. Section L, Paragraph 2(b)(1)(c) is updated to correct a typo. Language mistakenly referred to “past performance” rather than “prior experience.” This has been corrected.

2. Section L, Paragraph 2(b)(2) is updated and replaced in full due to several minor updates being made throughout the Paragraph. These updates are made to correct two conflicts in the proposal submittal instructions.

a. This Paragraph, as currently worded, states both that contracts must have been completed in the past 4 years and the past 5 years. This update states conclusively that the 5 year timeframe applies. Please see the specific update below.

b. Additionally, the Paragraph both states that referenced contracts can be “currently ongoing or completed”, and that the referenced contracts must be “previously awarded, and completed”. This update states conclusively that referenced contracts may be currently ongoing or completed, and establishes specific criteria for a referenced contract to meet recency requirements under both situations. Please see the specific update below.

3. SP4702-20-R-0013 Attachment 2 – Performance Work Statement Paragraph 4 (G) is updated and replaced in its entirety. This update deletes any mention of interpreters arriving 30 minutes in advance.

SP4702-20-R-0013

Amendment 3

SP4702-20-R-0013 Amendment 3

PART 1 – SOLICITATION UPDATES:

SECTION L – INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS.

2. DOCUMENTS TO SUBMIT

The documents to be included with the proposal submitted by the offeror shall include:

b. DOCUMENTATION OF TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY.

Proposals received in response to this solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with procedures outlined in Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 15.101-2 for the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) Offer. The evaluation factors for this solicitation are Technical Qualifications, Past Performance, and Price.

1) FACTOR 1: Technical Qualifications In order to be technically acceptable, Contractors shall propose personnel/staffing that demonstrates that it will meet all requirements of the PWS. This shall be demonstrated by ensuring the requirements as described in Subfactor 1, Subfactor 2, and Subfactor 3 below are clearly met.

c. SUBFACTOR 3 – PRIOR EXPERIENCE: The vendor shall provide information demonstrating that it has a record of prior experience with requirements similar to this solicitation’s size, complexity, and scope.

In order to evaluate the vendor’s prior experience, the vendor’s proposal shall identify no less than THREE (3), and no more than FIVE (5), previously awarded contracts of similar scope, size, and complexity to the current requirement. In order to fulfill this requirement, a vendor may submit either completed contracts (as defined below), active contracts (as defined below), or any combination of completed and active contracts.

- When Referencing A Completed Contract: If a vendor references a completed contract, the contract shall have been completed within 5 years of this solicitation’s (SP4702-20-R-0013) proposal submittal date (May 6th, 2020) in order to meet recency requirements for this solicitation.

- When Referencing An Active Contract: If a vendor references a contract which has been awarded but has not yet been completed, the vendor must have performed on that contract for a minimum of 6 months from this solicitation’s (SP4702-20-R-0013) proposal submittal date (May 6th, 2020). Active contracts submitted as examples to fulfill this requirement that do not have a minimum of 6 months of performance as of this proposal submittal date will be determined to not meet recency requirements for this solicitation.

For each of the submitted prior experience examples, the following information is required:

SP4702-20-R-0013

• The name of the project and the contract ID number,

• The name of the contracting agency or organization the contract was awarded by,

• The date of the contract award and the contract award amount in dollars,

• The date of the contract completion (if applicable),

• A brief description of the scope of work for the sign language interpreting services contract in question, and

• Identification of at least one point-of-contact at the organization that awarded the submitted contract, including: the name of the point-of-contact; their current mailing address; phone number; and email address (if applicable).

In investigating a vendor’s [START AMENDMENT 3 UPDATE - prior experience

- END AMENDMENT 3 UPDATE], the Government shall compare the size, scope, and complexity of the contracts provided by the vendor in its proposal to the size, scope, and complexity of the instant requirement in this solicitation. For this Subfactor, relevant experience is being measured rather than quality of past performance. Evaluation of this Subfactor will necessarily be subjective, but will focus on elements such as:

i. Contract scope (e.g., sign language interpreting),

ii. Contract size

iii. Contract complexity (e.g, irregular demand involving various communication modes for sign language interpreting services)

NOTE: Failure to provide any of the information for SUBFACTOR 3 mandated above shall result in an Unacceptable rating.

2) FACTOR 2: Past Performance [Amendment 3 Note – This Amendment updates and replaces this Paragraph in full]

In order to be technically acceptable, Contractors shall provide information demonstrating that it has a record of successful past performance. The required information supporting the contractor’s past performance as described below must by supplied along with the contractor’s proposal.

The past performance factor will be evaluated to determine the quality of the contractor’s past performance, including the past performance of proposed critical team members or subcontractors on contracts that are either directly related or similar in scope, magnitude, and complexity to that which is detailed in the PWS.

In order to evaluate the contractor’s past performance, the contractor’s proposal shall identify no less than THREE (3), and no more than FIVE (5), contracts of similar scope, size, and complexity to the current requirement. In order to fulfill this requirement, a vendor may submit either completed contracts (as defined below), active contracts (as defined below), or any combination of completed and active contracts.

SP4702-20-R-0013

- When Referencing A Completed Contract: If a vendor references a completed contract, the contract shall have been completed within 5 years of this solicitation’s (SP4702-20-R-0013) proposal submittal date (May 6th, 2020) in order to be deemed to meet recency requirements for this solicitation.

- When Referencing An Active Contract: If a vendor references a contract which has been awarded but has not yet been completed, the vendor must have performed on that contract for a minimum of 6 months from this solicitation’s (SP4702-20-R-0013) proposal submittal date (May 6th, 2020). Active contracts submitted as examples to fulfill this requirement that do not have a minimum of 6 months of performance as of this proposal submittal date will be deemed to not meet recency requirements for this solicitation.

For each of the submitted past performance examples, the following information is required:

• The name of the project and the contract ID number,

• The name of the contracting agency or organization the contract was awarded by,

• The date of the contract award and the contract award amount in dollars,

• The date of the contract completion (if applicable)

• A brief description of the scope of work for the sign language interpreting services contract in question,

• Identification of at least one point-of-contact at the organization that awarded the submitted contract, including: the name of the point-of-contact; their current mailing address; phone number; and email address (if applicable).

In investigating a contractor’s past performance, the Government may consider information in the contractor’s proposal and information obtained from other sources, including but not limited to: Past and present customers and their employees; other government agencies, including state and local agencies; consumer protection organizations and better business bureaus; former subcontractors; and others who may have useful information.

Failure by the contractor to provide evidence of performance on contracts of a similar nature in terms of period of performance and complexities of the services provided will result in the Government evaluating past performance as having no relevant history. In the case where a contractor states in their proposal that they lack adequate relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Government will evaluate past performance as neutral/unknown confidence in accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv).

Evaluation of neutral/unknown confidence will not eliminate the contractor from the overall review and evaluation of their proposal for this RFP.

NOTE: Failure to respond at all to the Past Performance evaluation factor will result in an Unacceptable rating.

SP4702-20-R-0013

PART 2 – SP4702-20-R-0013 ATTACHMENT 2 – PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT (PWS) UPDATE:

PWS Paragraph 4 (G): This PWS sub-paragraph is updated and replaced in full as shown below:

[START AMENDMENT 3 UPDATE - Prior to the scheduled interpreting assignment, the vendor or the assigned interpreter should coordinate with the COR and/or designated EEO Office Point of Contact on details such as facility and building access, schedule, and other relevant assignment details. – END

AMENDMENT 3 UPDATE].

The contract award document will include a PWS document updated to reflect the above change.

SP4702-20-R-0013

PART 3 – VENDOR QUESTIONS:

QUESTION 1: Who are the current incumbents? What are their rates?

RESPONSE: This information may be obtained through public information requests or open source forums and accordingly will not be provided directly.

QUESTION 2: It is industry standard for on-site ASL interpreters to be secured a 2 hour minimum per assignment. Can this solicitation be adjusted to allow 2 hour minimums per assignment?

RESPONSE: This question is similar to Amendment 2’s Question 7. That question’s answer stated:

Nothing in solicitation establishes a minimum time for Pool Interpreter appointments; and Shift Interpreter hours are on a pre-determined, set schedule.

However, please refer to FAR Subpart 52.212-1 - Instructions to Offerors – Commercial, Paragraph (e) Multiple Offers: “Offerors are encouraged to submit multiple offers presenting alternative terms and conditions, including alternative line items (provided that the alternative line items are consistent with subpart 4.10 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation), or alternative commercial items for satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. Each offer submitted will be evaluated separately.”

This solicitation is being processed using FAR Part 12 procedures, as it has been determined that we are procuring a commercial service. Therefore, a vendor may choose to submit multiple proposals which present alternative terms and conditions. Any vendor that chooses to submit multiple proposals is strongly encouraged to also submit an offer which fully complies with all terms and conditions set forth in the solicitation. The vendor then should indicate what differences exist in the alternative proposal and provide a brief rationale for why the alternative proposal would be advantageous. These proposals shall be evaluated separately, on a lowest priced technically acceptable basis, and the Government is under no obligation to accept a vendor’s alternative proposal.

QUESTION 3: Solicitation, page 3, Annual training- Are interpreters compensated for the time to complete training?

RESPONSE: No. Vendors should propose Section B CLINs to be inclusive of all costs and profit. It is up to the vendor on how to specifically break out costs between CLINs when proposing.

QUESTION 4: Solicitation, page 58- Scheduling coordinator must be available daily. How are these hours compensated or billed back to the government?

RESPONSE: Vendors should propose Section B CLINs to be inclusive of all costs and profit. It is up to the vendor on how to specifically break out costs between CLINs when proposing.

SP4702-20-R-0013

QUESTION 5: Attachment 2, G- Interpreter must arrive 30 minutes prior to shift. Interpreters bill for their time in 15 minute increments. Is this time billable?

RESPONSE: This solicitation amendment updates the paragraph in question to delete the language requiring interpreters arrive 30 minutes in advance of an appointment. It will be the responsibility of the successful awardee to ensure that interpreters arrive to their scheduled appointments on time.

QUESTION 6: Who is the incumbent?

RESPONSE: Please see the response to Question 1, above.

SP4702-20-R-0013