SBResponses.pdf

Alliant SB Solicitation TQ2006MCB0002 Government Responses to Questions

November 2, 2006

ALLIANT SB EMAILBOX AND WEBCAST

SOLICITATION TQ2006MCB0002

GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

GENERAL

Question 1: Section L, L.11.2, Page L-6 What are the options for delivering to the designated address? Can we hand deliver, over-night courier, U.S. Mail, etc.

Answer: Refer to Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 15.208

Question 2: Section L; page L-9, CD-R 3, Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan.

Does the page limitation of 30 pages include sections (a) Resources, (b) Program Management System and (c) Corporate Commitment?

Answer: The 30 page limit is not for each section in Folder H; rather it is for all three sections combined.

Question 3: Section H.2 – This section says that the PM is not to have billable hours, but the pricing table includes the program manager. Should we assume that task orders can have billable program management hours?

Answer: H.2.1 Contractor Program Manager is referring to the Basic Contract.

The pricing table is correct to include “program manager” which may be utilized for individual task orders.

Question 4: Section L, L.12.3 (c) and (d), Pages L-15 and L-16 Please provide clarity on the differences between single award service contracts that have tasks orders versus delivery orders. Our interpretation of this section is that single award service contracts have delivery orders rather than task orders.

Answer: By definition delivery orders are for supplies and task orders are for services.

Question 5: Will all tasks be sent out to all Alliant small business awardees?

Answer: Fair Opportunity guidelines will be followed (refer to FAR 16.505). An ordering guide will be developed for Alliant SB which will further define the ordering process.

Question 6: Under Section G.9, it states that all contractors will have to respond to all task order requests. Under most GWACs, a contractor does not have to respond to all task order requests (time constraints, resources, etc.). Under GSA Alliant, however, will this indeed be the case?

Answer: Negative responses (no bids) are required. See Section G.9(e).

Question 7: L.12.1 states that the Representations and Certifications file is page limited to the form, and except for a few fill-ins the form points to the online ORCA web record for the company; however, L.12.2(b) states that "The Offeror shall submit a completed "Representations and Certifications" that was entered into the Online Representations and Certifications Application (ORCA)." The question is, should ABC-ORCA.pdf contain

(A) just Section K of the RFP, or (B) just a pdf copy of the company's ORCA record, or

(C) both Section K and the full ORCA record?

Answer: The ABC-ORCA.pdf file should contain both Section K and the full ORCA record.

Question 8: Do you know at this point how many awards will be made for the above referenced contract? i.e. will you be awarding it to all qualified vendors or just the top X number of vendors?

Answer: Refer to L.3 of the solicitation

Question 9: Can a small business submit a proposal for both the Alliant SB GWAC (TQ2006MCB0002) solicitation and the full and open Alliant GWAC

(TQ2006MCB0001)?

Answer: Yes. They are two distinct solicitations

Question 10: TQ2006MCB0001 refers to Alliant full and open and TQ2006MCB0002 refers to Alliant small business. Each appears to be an independent procurement.

Accordingly, Alliant Small Business awardees will not automatically be allowed to submit proposals under Alliant full and open task orders? Rather if a small business wants to participate under Alliant full and open the small business must submit a proposal under Alliant full and open now?

Answer: A small business can submit an offer under both Alliant and Alliant SB.

You are correct that Alliant SB awardees will not be competing for Alliant task orders.

Question 11: We are an 8A Disadvantaged company but we are not on GSA Schedule

70. Are we still eligible to bid?

Answer: Yes. Alliant SB is open to all conforming small businesses.

Question 12: Where can we find an example of a completed Alliant RFP?

Answer: You can find the RFP at FedBizOpps (www.fedbizopps.gov). The offeror will have to complete it.

Question 13: Also, who will have access to our completed proposal? Specifically, who will view our Section J Attachment Spread Sheets and Past Performance Tables?

Answer: The Government Alliant SB evaluation and legal teams. Additionally, per Section M.10 the government may use contractor support in the evaluation process.

Question 14: If we find deals can we bring them to the contract similar to GSA schedule 70 business?

Answer: Task orders must comply with Fair Opportunity procedures and the exceptions to Fair Opportunity as enumerated in FAR 16.505.

Question 15: Is it possible that a portion of this procurement can be set-aside as a sole source 8(a)?

Answer: No. Alliant SB is a total small business set-aside.

Question 16: Does the GSA plan on giving a Price Evaluation Adjustment for Small Disadvantaged Business Concerns in accordance with FAR 19.11?

Answer: No.

Question 17: Section L.12.3(d) – Is 541512 the only NAICS code for which past performance references should be cited? The scope of IT services outlined in the solicitation appears to be much broader than this NAICS code.

Answer: The scope of work in Section C is the requirement and is not limited to only NAICS code 541512. The Overall scope should be addressed in submitting past performance references. An amendment will be forthcoming clarifying this point.

Question 18: On page L-21 paragraph “Folder K,” the RFP states “Offerors shall submit a total compensation plan setting forth salary ranges and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees ….” Does the Offeror have to repeat the itemized information previously provided in Folder I or will a reference to Folder I suffice to meet this requirement? If a reference to Folder I will not suffice, is the Government looking for aggregate corporate data in Folder K, e.g., “salary ranges vary from $50,000 to $100,000 and our fringe benefits equate to 34% of salary.” Please clarify how much detail is required to assist GSA in evaluating proposals.

Answer: Folder I and Folder K are two distinct requirements. Folder I relates to the cost and pricing analysis of proposed prices/costs under the contract. Folder K relates to the requirements of FAR Subpart 22.11 and FAR Clause 52.222-46 “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.”

Question 19: Can a small business which intends to submit a proposal as a prime for the Alliant Small Business contract also submit a proposal as a prime for the Alliant (Large Business) contract?

Answer: Yes.

Question 20: Can a company which intends to prime the Alliant Small Business contract also be a subcontractor to a firm who is priming the Alliant (Large Business) contract?

Answer: After contract award an Alliant SB contractor can be a subcontractor under the full and open Alliant.

Question 21: Are current GWAC holders allowed to be sub-contractors on the full and open Alliant proposal and also make a proposal as a prime on the Alliant SB proposal?

Answer: Yes.

Question 22: Given that the RFP (B.6.1 Order Type Preference and B.6.2 Performance Based Preference) lists fixed-price as first in the order of precedence, why are offerors with past performance on fixed-price efforts not viewed more favorably than those on cost reimbursement efforts?

Answer: The simple answer is that fixed price contracting is a common type of contract which most (if not all) offerors will have experience in. However, cost reimbursement contracting is a more complex type of contract and is a part of Alliant SB and therefore experience in it is valuable to the government.

Question 23: The contractor access fee CAF, is to be reported two weeks after a monetary payment transfer, would consideration be given for a quarterly payment and reporting?

Answer: There are no plans to change the CAF Payment Data – Report.

Question 24: Section G.4 There is a reference to contractors participating in various trade shows hosted by GSA to facilitate outreach efforts, presently what are the planned locations and dates of these outreach activities?

Answer: The dates and locations are unknown at this time.

Question 25: Section H.21 During the open season process, will the government consider allowing the remaining prime contract holders to resubmit revised or discounted price rates to remain competitive and offer customers best value?

Answer: Alliant SB contractors will not be able to alter their contracts in conjunction with an open season that the government may conduct. Alliant SB contractors always retain the ability to offer their best pricing in competitions for individual task orders.

Question 26: Page L-21, FOLDER L – COST/PRICE SPREADSHEETS: “Attachment 2 consists of 10 years of Government-Site Work. Attachment 3 consists of 10 years of Contractor-Site Work.” Will companies in existence for fewer than 10 years be penalized?

Answer: No. The Cost/Price Spreadsheets are prospective, i.e., future costs/prices.

Question 27: If the Offeror does not allow uncompensated overtime, will a statement to this effect be sufficient?

Answer: Please refer to the requirements of Section L.12.5, Folder K for information regarding what’s required. This is where any such statements would be addressed.

Question 28: L.12.4. CD-R 3, Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, (a) Resources,

(1) Internal Resources, Para 3.

Based on the length of time which is forecasted to lapse between the solicitation response, will a Letter of Intent as opposed to an Irrevocable Letter of Commitment satisfy the requirement?

Answer: If not a current employee of the contractor, the Government requires a letter of commitment and individual resume for the Key Personnel.

Question 29: Are resumes required solely for the Program Manager or for all proposed key personnel/key labor categories?

Answer: Only for the Program Manager (Key Personnel) defined in Section H.2 of the RFP.

Question 30: Within the small business set asides, will you consider establishing a goal similar to the Administration’s goal of x% for each of the socio-economic groups?

Answer: No. Alliant SB is a total small business set-aside.

Question 31: In Part 1 Section B.5 a contract access fee is applied to all invoiced costs.

However, Section B.8 requires that travel will be reimbursed at actual cost. Since we are required to pay a contact access fee on the total invoice, please confirm that this fee will be added to the cost of the travel.

Answer: Section B.8 allows contractors to apply indirect costs to travel in accordance with the contractor’s usual accounting practice.

Question 32: There is mention in several areas of the Solicitation of OCONUS work...are we required to provide OCONUS support?

Answer: Although this is a decision to be made at the task order level, the government expects to award Alliant SB contracts to offerors currently capable, or through capacity building, of performing requirements on a global basis.

Question 33: Will the Government consider moving the DCAA, EVMS, and Secret Facility Clearance evaluations to the Responsibility Determination phase of the Evaluation Process? This would allow for companies which are primarily service providers to obtain these qualifications.

Answer: The DCAA documentation is required for cost/price analysis, the Secret Facility Clearance is a definitive responsibility matter, and the EVMS is not a requirement but will be considered and the proposal evaluated more favorably if it exists.

Question 34: Compensation Plan & Policy for Uncompensated Overtime: Could you clarify why salary ranges are required if we could substantiate pricing methodology in our Basis of Estimate?

Section M.5.1 (e) is this section applicable to small business primes?

Answer: Folder I and Folder K are two distinct requirements. Folder I relates to the cost and pricing analysis of proposed prices/costs under the contract. Folder K relates to the requirements of FAR Subpart 22.11 and FAR Clause 52.222-46 “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.”

Question 35: After contract awards, will task orders be available to both offerors of the full and open Alliant GWAC and Alliant SB GWAC? In other words will Alliant SB winners be able to submit bids on all task orders? Or how will the government determine the criteria for which task orders will be issued under full and open Alliant and which task orders will be issued under Alliant SB set aside? (i.e. will Alliant SB task orders be limited to those between $100K and $999K, and Alliant full and open task orders as all those over $1M?)

Answer: No, They are two distinct solicitations. There are no task order limitations on Alliant SB.

Question 36: Page L-18, Paragraph L.12.4(2), External Resources—As part of a comprehensive response, may Offerors describe the process used to supplement core capabilities and provide examples of firms with whom the Offeror has historically worked?

Answer: It is sufficient to identify areas of expertise (as related to Section C) to be provided by external resources in order to supplement core capabilities. A list of subcontractors and their respective merits is not necessary and will not be evaluated. The focus should be on your methodology for acquiring, managing, and overseeing subcontractors.

Question 37: In section M, one of the criteria the government states that having a PM that has had experience in managing contracts "like SB Alliant" would be evaluated more favorably. Which current contracts would be considered similar to SB Alliant?

Answer: Multiple Award, Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity contracts for information technology services.

BASIC CONTRACT PLAN

Question 38: can small business discuss sub contract relationships in the Basic Contract Plan?

Answer: A small business can discuss subcontract relationships in the Basic Contract Plan; however, it is sufficient to identify areas of expertise (as related to Section C) to be provided by external resources in order to supplement core capabilities. A list of subcontractors and their respective merits is not necessary and will not be evaluated. The focus should be on your methodology for acquiring, managing and overseeing subcontractors—the “how” vs. the “who.”

Question 39: If, in order to show that we can expand our ability to support you in IT areas wherein we are not currently strong (i.e., in our Contract Plan writeup), we include (as a sub) one or more large businesses with strong capabilities in those areas, is that acceptable?

Answer: It is acceptable to include one or more large businesses with strong capabilities in IT areas where you are not current strong to show that you have the ability to fulfill the breadth of requirements in Section C; however, a list of contractors and their respective merits is not necessary and will not be evaluated.

The focus should be on your methodology for acquiring, managing and overseeing subcontractors—the “how” vs. the “who.”

Question 40: In the last paragraph of subsection (1) Internal Resources, the RFP states, “If applicable, the offeror shall provide evidence of an approved purchasing system by submitting the DCAA/DCMA-issued approval letter.” We respectfully ask the Government how a potential bidder would know if they are DCAA/DCMA approved?

And if we are not do we have to be approved to be considered for award? By using the word system, is the government referring to a process or procedure, or an actual software system?

Answer: An approved purchasing system is desired, but not required, in order to be considered for award. It is the collective methodology including policies, procedures and performance related to the contractor’s purchasing of material and services, subcontracting, and subcontract management from development of the requirement through completion of subcontract performance. Software may be a component of the purchasing system. Offerors should contact their cognizant ACO regarding the approval documentation. See FAR 44.

Question 41: Section L (a) (1) requires contact details (tel/email) to be included in the resumes of key personnel. Is it the Government's intention to contact these key personnel during the evaluation process?

Answer: It is not the Government’s intention to contact these key personnel;

however, the Government reserves the right to do so if deemed necessary and appropriate during the evaluation process.

Question 42: To propose on the Basic Contract, a Contractor Team Arrangement is defined as (joint ventures and/or SBA Mentor-Protégé Arrangements. You may include proposed subcontractors in your Basic Contract Plan in a limited context for consideration as an evaluation factor under the subfactor for 'Resources.' Is this an accurate statement of the relationship between a prime and subcontractors under Alliant

SB?

Answer: The Government will not be evaluating proposed subcontractors for the Alliant SB Basic Contract. The Government will not be evaluating past performance information regarding proposed subcontractors. In the limited context of the Basic Contract Plan, the Government will be evaluating how a prime contractor intends to supplement its “core” capabilities, which may be through contractor team arrangements or subcontracting. A list of proposed subcontracts is not beneficial or useful. The focus should be on how the prime contractor will augment its core offerings so that it can propose on orders that include requirements from all three component areas.

Question 43: Reference: CD-R 3, Folder H - Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan. Is it allowable for the offeror to use 11"x17" paper as long as each 11x17 sheet counts as 2 pages?

Answer: It is allowable for the Offeror to use 11x17 paper as long as each 11x17 sheet counts as two pages.

Question 44: Is it the Government’s intent to have the Statement of Work requirements addressed ONLY in Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan (for Alliant SB) and Folder H: Alliant SB SB Basic Contract Plan (for Alliant SB SB)? Please clarify the Government’s intent to evaluate responses to the Statement of Work requirements.

Answer: The Government is evaluating the Statement of Work requirements in both Past Performance and the Basic Contract Plans for both Alliant SB and Alliant SB Small Business.

Question 45: According to Section L.12.2, Folder D, last line first paragraph:

"Notwithstanding the above, the Government will consider proposed subcontractors in the limited context of evaluating an Offeror's Alliant SB SB Basic Contract Plan under Section M.5.2, when evaluating the subfactor "resources". Since M.5.2 says that you will evaluate the Offeror's ability to deliver relative to identified gaps, does this mean that you will look at past performance of proposed subcontractors? If the answer is "yes", how is this different from accepting formal teaming arrangements from the beginning? If the answer "no", than how will the Government evaluate subcontractors in M.5.2 w/o past performance?

Answer: The Government will not evaluate the past performance of proposed subcontractors.

Question 46: Are you requesting a separate write up that addresses the 3 component areas of Section C (i.e. Infrastructure, Application Services and IT Management Services), or are you requiring that the three subfactors include a separate write up that addresses the three component areas of Section C identified above?

Answer: Subfactors must be separately addressed. Offerors should address the three component areas of Section C, as appropriate, in order to fully address any strengths and weaknesses as related to successfully performing the contract requirements. Offerors will differ in their proposed Resources, Program Management and Corporate Commitment. Though subfactors must be separately addressed, it is up to individual Offerors how best to use the thirty pages to explain their plan. The documentation on purchasing systems, key personnel resumes, EVMS and organizational charts is now excluded from the thirty pages.

Question 47: Must companies who submit proposals be required to demonstrate their capabilities in all aspects of the SOW as subcontractor capabilities will not be evaluated?

What if a contractor is unable to demonstrate their capabilities in all areas of the SOW, are we still allowed to submit a bid for this procurement?

Answer: Offerors do not need to demonstrate their capabilities in all aspects of the SOW; however, in the Basic Contract Plan, Offerors need to explain their procedures and methods for acquiring, tracking and managing subcontractors, and generally how they will complement their core capabilities to be able to propose (perform) on all three component areas in Section C of the solicitation.

Question 48: Section L.12.4.H.c – States that “the organizational chart shall also include the locations of the corporate headquarters, regional offices, any other satellite offices, as well as any pre-identified CTAs.” Must the office locations be included in the organizational chart? Would it be acceptable to provide the headquarters and other office locations in a separate graphic or table?

Answer: In their organizational charts, Offerors should include only those offices that are relevant to Alliant SB.

Question 49: Section L.12.4 states: "The Offeror should convey its ability to insure successful performance of all aspects of the Basic Contract and Orders to include all 3 component areas of Section C (i.e. Infrastructure, Application Services and IT Management Services). The Offeror shall demonstrate a clear understanding of the management and performance requirements of this solicitation by providing a concise description of its management approach for the following three subfactors; (a) Resources;

(b) Program Management; and (c) Corporate Commitment." In addition to the reference of the three component areas in L.12.4, the reference is also made in the instructions for each subfactor. Are you 1) requesting a separate introduction that addresses the 3 component areas of Section C (i.e. Infrastructure, Application Services and IT Management Services), 2) requiring that the three subfactors include a section that addresses the three component areas of Section C identified above, or 3) is the reference to the three component areas not required as a separate write up in either an introduction or within the subfactors?

Answer: There is no requirement as to the specific construction of this section of the Offeror's Proposal beyond what is stated. The Offeror may choose how to construct their Proposal as they see fit.

Question 50: Section L.12.1 Table, CD-R 3, Folder (H) Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan.

Request that the Government allow the Contractor to include a 1 to 2 page Executive Summary at the beginning of Folder H (exclusive of the 30 page limitation in Section H).

Answer: See change to solicitation regarding Executive Summary.

Question 51: Section L.12.4 CD-R 3, Folder H. Under Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, paragraph (c) Corporate Commitment, 2nd paragraph, the last sentence reads, “The organizational chart shall also include the locations of the corporate headquarters, regional offices, any other satellite offices, as well as any pre-identified CTAs.” Our organization has numerous regional and satellite offices that would be impossible to include all locations on the organizational chart. Suggest the requirement be changed to read, “The organizational chart shall also include the location of the corporate headquarters, and all Key Personnel. In addition, the Contractor shall include as an attachment 1(x), a listing of all regional and satellite offices, as well as any pre-identified CTAs. This attachment shall be exclusive of the 30 page limitation for the Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan.

Answer: Offerors shall include only those components of the organization that will be working on the Alliant SB program.

Question 52: The Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan consists of 30 pages but three separate PDF files. How will the government count partial pages at the end of each section?

Typically, if the Basic Contract Plan were one file instead of three, one subsection would immediately follow the previous subsection on the same page, thereby minimizing potentially wasted space in a page-constrained response.

Answer: To eliminate this problem, the Government has revised the Basic Contract Plan pdf file to gather all information (except purchasing system, resumes, EVMS, organization charts) into one pdf file with a thirty page limitation.

Question 53: Per Section B.7.2: If one or more of a prime contractor's purchasing systems are approved, can the prime process all purchases through one of their systems?

Answer: If the Offeror indicates availability of an approved purchasing system, that system should be utilized for this acquisition.

Question 54: Section L.12.4, FOLDER H: ALLIANT SB BASIC CONTRACT PLAN,

(2) (B): This section sets forth the requirement for a detailed organizational chart including the locations of the corporate headquarters, regional offices, and other satellite offices. Since we have >150 CONUS/OCONUS offices around the world, there isn’t a way to include all of them within this organizational chart. May we include our organization chart with the names for our key positions and their locations on one chart and a second chart showing the locations of our corporate headquarters, regional offices, and all satellite offices on the second chart?

Answer: Offerors shall include only organizational components that will be involved in the Alliant SB program.

Question 55: In Section M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD, under the Basic Contract Plan, it is stated that Offerors with approved purchasing systems and EVMS will be "evaluated more favorably". Could you explain the evaluation process?

How much weight will be given to these factors and how will this be applied to the overall evaluation?

Answer: See Section M.2. (b). The purchasing system is covered in the Resources subfactor which is more heavily weighted than Program Mgt subfactor (which includes EVMS).

Question 56: Since the Basic Contract Plan is to be submitted in three separate files, can we reference information from one section in another or will common information across the sections need to be repeated in each section (i.e. will each section be evaluated separately? )

Answer: Let’s put it in one file. Cross ref within the BCP is acceptable.

Question 57: REF: Section L.12.1, CD-R 3-- The Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan is restricted to 30 pages with certain exemptions. The Purchasing System Documentation, the Program Manger Resume, and the Contract Administrator Resume are all excluded from the 30-page limit (Folder H (a) Resources). Folder H (b) Program Management System requests information regarding the Earned Value Management System (EVMS).

In order to provide the Government with complete information, we request the section pertaining to an offeror’s EVMS be excluded from the 30-page limit.

Answer: Amendment One will clarify these issues.

Question 58: L.12.4CD-R 3 FOLDER H: ALLIANT SB BASIC CONTRACT PLAN that an offeror should not include subcontractor lists or subcontractor qualifications. In addition, the Alliant SB website states that offerors should not include teaming:

Answer: The RFP is the official legal document which should be followed.

Question 59: Regarding Section M.5.2, Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, (b) Program Management: We request the Government please provide more detail on or elaborate on what capability is required regarding “electronic commerce/electronic business processes.” Specifically we would like to know how mature an EC capability is desired, as there is a wide range of capability that could be proposed – EC can be seen as simple as electronic paper trail or as sophisticated as Wal-Mart’s purchasing system. Please amplify the text about the desired level for EC for Alliant SB.

Answer: This phrase has been deleted in the solicitation.

Question 60: Folder H, ALLIANT SB BASIC CONTRACT PLAN, (a) Resources, (1) Internal Resources: It is/will be extremely difficult for JV to have to have an approved and in place Purchasing System? Would it be acceptable to the Government that an Offeror have a milestone plan containing an approved purchasing system in place by the time the contract is awarded?

Answer: An approved purchasing system is not required in order to be considered for award. Offerors should include any information relevant to Alliant SB requirement which conveys their ability to perform successfully on all aspects of the contract.

Question 61: Per Section B.7.2: Will prime contractors whose purchasing system has not been approved be considered for award?

Answer: An approved purchasing system is not required in order to be considered for award.

Question 62: Section M does not indicate any favorable evaluation criteria for firms that are ISO certified or have CMM/CMMI. Please explain.

Answer: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s program management system, and as such, will note those outstanding aspects of a system that would qualify it for various certifications. The Government chose not to evaluate specific certifications.

Question 63: If we propose additional key personnel, may we include their resumes?

Does the "no page limit" still apply even if we submit 6 additional resumes?

Answer: The Government does not want a resume for positions other than Program Manager. This resume is not included in the page count.

Question 64: References Section L.12.4, CD-R 3, Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan (a) Resources (1) Internal Resources, statements relative to Purchasing System, as follows: “…effectiveness of business systems, including evidence of an approved purchasing system.” “If applicable, the Offeror shall provide evidence of an approved purchasing system by submitting the DCAA/DCMA-issued approval letter.”

Section M.5.2 Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan (a) Resources (1) Internal Resources, statement relative to Purchasing System, as follows: “Offerors with approved purchasing systems will be evaluated more favorably.” Per GSA’s October 12 webcast, we understand that fewer than ten of more than 500 leading IT companies currently have DCMA approval of their purchasing systems. We also understand that the schedule for obtaining a DCMA audit of purchasing systems is years, not months. Therefore, the provision of a more favorable evaluation for only a few companies, when many of the Alliant SB competitors may simply be unable to obtain timely DCMA audit of their purchasing systems, appears inequitable. Will GSA consider removing this requirement from the solicitation?

Answer: This is only one component of one subfactor in the proposal evaluation.

The Government believes that contractors with approved purchasing systems provide a real benefit to the Government in terms of reduced risk in areas such as cost and compliance, as well as reduced administrative efforts associated with consent to subcontract. Offerors are not precluded from explaining their situation in regards to obtaining DCMA approval and may provide additional information supporting the adequacy of their purchasing system.

Question 65: Reference Section L.12.4, CD-R 3, Folder H, Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan.The Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) for Systems Engineering and Software Engineering (SE/SW) is a process optimization approach used to reduce risk and improve quality across IT projects. Given Alliant SB’s scope of work and the IT Service Categories described in Section C of the RFP, Alliant SB customers would benefit from Offerors with certified CMMI SE/SW processes. Would the Government consider requiring, or at least evaluating favorably, Offerors with CMMI SE/SW Level 3 or above certifications, similar to the evaluation of EVMS and purchasing systems under paragraph M.5.2 of this solicitation?

Answer: The Government is evaluating the Offeror’s program management system. The Government is not evaluating the specific certifications of a system.

Question 66: (Question also covered in past performance.) With regard to the use of subcontractors in the prime proposal, it is our understanding that subcontractors will not be evaluated as part of the prime proposal, and that subcontractor past performance will not be evaluated as well. Can the prime use mention of a subcontractor and their qualifications as an example of how effective our proposed solution is to managing external resources and the types of solutions they would provide?

Answer: Your statement that the Government will not be evaluating information regarding proposed subcontractors as part of the past performance evaluation is correct. As to the Basic Contract Plan evaluation factor, the Government will evaluate how effective a prime contractor will be in managing its external resources, such as subcontractors. However, at this stage the Government is not interested in the name(s) of any specific proposed subcontractors.

Question 67: Can the prime proposal mention names (not a list of subcontractors) in the body of the technical proposal as we explain our methodology? Again, we intend to use this information as proof to our claim that our proposed solution will yield results that benefit the Alliant SB customer base.

Answer: The specific names are irrelevant in the evaluation process. The skill sets/capabilities that the Offeror plans to subcontract and how the Offeror plans to acquire, manage and oversee its subcontractors is relevant to the evaluation.

Question 68: Reference Section M.5.2 Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, Part (b) Program Management, page M-6, The section reads in part "Offerors providing a comprehensive and effective program management strategy with quantifiable performance metrics that link incentives to performance and quality controls that ensure a comprehensive and verifiable approach for monitoring and reporting performance will be evaluated more favorably." Do the incentives mentioned refer to performance based contracting incentives to be negotiated on each task order, compensation or other incentives that the offeror provides internally to program and task order managers, both of these, or something else?

Answer: This refers to both internally provided incentives that may relate to employees, such as Program and task order managers, as well as externally applied incentives related to subcontractors in order to insure optimal performance is achieved. Offerors may also address how they incorporate TO level incentives into their overall program management plan. The key is the effectiveness of the overall program mgt strategy in assuring optimal quality of performance—timeliness, cost, quantity/quality/innovative solutions. Performance incentives are not restricted to performance based contracts and can be similar in nature. The distinction is that incentives are a required component of performance based contracts.

Question 69: Section M.5.2, Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, The RFP states:

“As part of its evaluation of the contract plan, The Government will evaluate the offeror’s overall capability to support the Alliant SB program by determining whether the plan sufficiently addresses any gaps or weaknesses not addressed in past performance.”

Request clarification on this requirement. Is the Government looking for the offeror to identify areas where they lack experience and how they are going to team, subcontract, etc. to fill this lack of experience or is the Government looking for the Offeror to identify lessons learned and performance improvements to overcome them?

Answer: The Government is looking for the Offeror to identify areas where they lack experience and how they are going to team, subcontract, etc. to fill this lack of experience and for how the Offeror will compliment core capabilities to cover the areas where they lack experience. It is up to the Offeror whether or not to identify lessons learned and performance improvements as part of this exercise.

Question 70: Section L.12.4 CD-R3 Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, and (b) Program Management, the RFP states in Folder H: Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan: “The Offeror shall explain in the Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan how it will continuously identity, mitigate, manage and control risks within its holistic approach for managing the comprehensive scope of the Alliant SB program.”

Answer: The question is unclear; however, the Government’s intent is that throughout the Basic Contract Plan, the Offeror will address risk as it relates to a particular subfactor.

Question 71: L.12.4 (b) Program Management. “The Offeror shall explain the methodology for risk minimization, schedule controls, costs controls, and efficient utilization of resources for ensuring task accomplishment.” Given the 30 page limitation for this section, could the Government provide further clarification as to what section they would like the risk mitigation plans to be included?

Answer: Risk mitigation shall be addressed as appropriate throughout the Basic Contract Plan with particular emphasis in the Program Management subfactor.

Question 72: L.12.4 also calls for information on topics such as “…current core capabilities, such as its ability to recruit, train, and retain high quality personnel; the number of personnel with security clearances and level of clearance; qualifications of key personnel, and effectiveness of business systems…” as part of the Internal Resources section of Folder H. Please clarify what is desired by the government in this section of the proposal response (Folder H). Specifically: a) Which parts of the Internal Resources response are page limited; b) what is meant by “purchasing system documentation” vs.

“evidence of an approved purchasing system” and c) please bring the two cited sections of the RFP into alignment.

Answer: The Basic Contract Plan is limited to 30 pages, exclusive of resumes and purchasing systems, as indicated in the L.12.1 Table. The Government will also exclude organizational charts from the 30 page limitation. The Government will correct terminology to consistently state ‘evidence of approved purchasing system” which can be a letter or memo from the cognizant ACO responsible for approving the purchasing system per FAR part 44.

Question 73: Basic Contract Plan Evaluation, Section M.5 of the Alliant SB RFP states that the Government will evaluate its confidence level in the Offeror’s ability to manage risk and to deliver high quality service and solutions. Under the Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, the RFP states that the Government will look “prospectively” and consider the Offeror’s potential for success. In order to increase the Governments “confidence level”, it would be beneficial to include brief examples of past experience and success using the processes and procedures described in an Offeror’s program management strategy as part of the Basic Contract Plan submission in CD-R 3, Folder H. The purpose of such references would be to document past experience with program management tools, processes and procedures, but NOT to supplement past performance information in CD-R2, Folder F. Will the Government accept the inclusion of such references to prior work in the Basic Contract Plan?

Answer: The Government will accept the inclusion of such references.

Question 74: Section L.12.1 and L.12.4. GSA has indicated it intends to evaluate proposal CD-R 3, Folder H, Alliant SB Basic Contract Plan, to determine offerors’ abilities and processes for managing and performing the scope of work under Alliant SB.

This calls for descriptions and explanations of resources, program management systems, organizational commitments, etc. To best provide GSA with the level of detail it needs to perform a fair and thorough evaluation of each offerors’ ability in each of these areas, we offer that GSA considers expanding the page limit for this section. We respectfully ask that GSA consider changing the page limitation on proposal Folder H from 30 to 45 pages. While we understand this provides the agency with more work in reviewing additional pages, we also believe it serves GSA’s mission and will provide for better identification of best-in-class contractors.

Answer: The Basic Contract Plan is limited to 30 pages, exclusive of resumes and purchasing systems, as indicated in the L.12.1 Table. The Government will also exclude organizational charts from the 30 page limitation.

Question 75: Under M.5.2 (b) Alliant SB Basic Contract. We are not aware of a Government entity that can approve an EVMS. Will GSA favorably consider expert EVM practices as compliant for the evaluation specified in M.5.2 (b)?

Answer: An approved EVMS system is not required to be considered for award.

The cognizant federal agency (FAR 2.10) is responsible for approval and oversight of the contractor’s EVMS—per FAR 52.234-4. Typically, this is the DCMA ACO.

Offerors may provide any other relevant EVMS related information for consideration.

Question 76: L.12.4, CD-R 3, Offerors are instructed to provide information re:

managing the comprehensive scope of the Alliant SB program as well as identify gaps or weaknesses in Past Performance and address them. There is no file specified for this information. Would the Government allow the Offerors to provide a file to be named by the Government in which we are able to address this information or should this information be included in the Resources file?

Answer: These instructions are intended to convey the Government’s overall objective and provide Offerors with an overall approach for addressing the specified subfactors. A separate file is not necessary. This is an overall plan which is intended to complement/supplement the past performance factor. The objective is to insure that the Offerors identify their weaknesses or any gaps in past performance and explain how they will address these to insure that they can provide optimal performance to the Government.

PAST PERFORMANCE

Question 77: Will the Government permit the submission of Past Performance References for commercial customers if the work performed pertains to the Alliant SB

SOW?

Answer: Yes

Question 78: Will commercial past performance be evaluated with the same weight as Government past performance?

Question 79: On page L-15, Section L.12.3 (c) Table 1 states that Offerors are limited to

(1) GWACs, (2) MA-IDIQs, and (3) Multiple Award Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs). However, Column A instructions, in the following table, do not include “BPAs”: “Enter GWAC or MA-IDIQ Contract Number”. Nor does Column I, “Enter Number of Task Orders Issued under the GWAC or MA-IDIQ“. Similarly, Attachment 6 Past Performance Table 1, column one does not list “BPAs”. Please clarify if BPAs are to be included in Column A.

Answer: Yes, Table 1 will be amended to include BPAs.

Question 80: Will GSA accept Single award service contracts and/or GSA Schedule performance for (c) Table 1 past performance?

Answer: The RFP stands. See Section L.12.3 as amended.

Question 81: How many past performances references shall be evaluated?

Answer: Refer to Section L.12.3, Folder F (e) of the solicitation.

Question 82: Page L-15: This section states as follows: “Offerors shall list the master contract only, not any task order contracts, which may have been issued there under.”

However, Page L-14, Section L.12.3(a) (6) states “Relate to projects for which the Offeror is (or was) the prime-contractor or for which the Offeror performed as a first-tier subcontractor where the Offeror had complete (turnkey) responsibility for a separately identifiable part of an overall system or service.”

Regarding Table 1, our firm is a valued first-tier subcontractor on a number of BPAs, GWAC, MA-IDIQ and contract vehicles. We understand that GSA does not want our task work detailed in this table. It is our intention to list GWACs, MA-IDIQs, and BPAs that we participate under in Table 1. Please clarify if this is acceptable.

Answer: An amendment will be issued to clarify. The offeror is to be the prime contract holder for Table 1. First-tier subcontracting work is to be listed under Table 2 only.

Question 83: Folder F: Past Performance Tables, (a) Acceptable Offers, (3) Be over $100,000 total estimated amount Page L-14: In support of a client, we have multiple task orders, with similar technical scope, that are cumulatively over $100,000 and are ongoing after 1 Jan. 2004. We are assuming that this cumulative entry is acceptable for Table 2?

Answer: This is not acceptable. Task orders and contracts must stand on their own.

Question 84: A Small Business is normally allowed to utilize the personal experiences of its Officers, vice corporate experiences, to meet Past Performance and Experience requirements of RFPs. Will GSA accept the personal experiences, within the limits specified within the RFP, of the Officers of the members of the Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA) in fulfilling the Past Performance requirements of Folder F?

Answer: Past performance must meet the guidelines in FAR Subpart 15.305 and conform to the requirement of the RFP.

Question 85: Reference Page L-15,16, Folder F, PAST PERFORMANCE TABLES:

Are Past Performance Tables 1 and 2 only for Primes Offerors (NO SUBCONTRACTOR PAST PERFORMACE WILL BE ACCEPTED)? However when submitting a JV proposal submission, the JV members Part Performances are acceptable on Table I and 2.

Please Clarify

Answer: The past performance of the individual members of the joint venture adhere to the joint venture entity past performance.

Question 86: L.12.3 CD-R2, Folder F Past Performance.

Based on the information provided by GSA with respect to past performance, it appears that the Offeror may only submit past performance information related to their experience and not the experience of a team mate/subcontractor that may be used to fill gaps or area of weakness with respect to past performance. Is this an accurate understanding?

Question 87: Is it acceptable to use Past Performance for only single awards (table 2) and not GWACs or MA-IDIQs (table 1) awards or do we need past performance in both?

Answer: If an offeror has no past performance on either Table 1 or Table 2, a neutral rating will be assigned. Refer to FAR Subpart 15.305(a)(2)(iv).

Question 88: AR regulations indicate that contract performance of all entities of a federally recognized Indian tribe may be used as past performance references on a RFP responses if additional criteria stated in the RFP are met. If the additional RFP criteria are met (i.e. prime contractor, same 541512 NAICS code, GWAC or MA-IDIQ, date parameters) may federally recognized Indian tribal companies utilize past contract performance references from all entities of the same tribe on this RFP?

Answer: Only the past performance of the prime offeror, which includes the past performance of members of a legally established joint venture, will be evaluated.

Question 89: If a small business does not have past performance in all the functional areas, will it be judged ONLY on those areas in which it is experienced? In other words, if it has outstanding experience in ONLY 25% of the functional areas, would its proposal be considered 75% deficient?

Answer: Refer to Section M.5.1.3

Question 90: Please clarify your comment during the web cast that you would like to see ALL relevant past performance. Is that ALL past performance for only the team lead in a joint venture, or is that ALL past performance for every member of the joint venture? In other words, in preparing our proposal, is it true that we do NOT have the option to pick and choose which past performance projects we want to cite?

Answer: The past performance of the individual members of the joint venture adhere to the joint venture entity past performance. The offering entity may choose any conforming past performance examples up to the limits specified in Tables 1 and 2.

Question 91: Page L-14, Folder F (c) indicates Table 1 is limited to "Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts (GWACS). Do GSA contracts like the IT Schedule 70, MOBIS, and PES qualify as GWAC contracts for the purpose of Table 1?

Answer: The RFP stands. Please refer to Section L.12.3 as amended.

Question 92: On page L-15 Section L Folder F (c) Table 1: will the Government accept inclusion in Table 1 of single or multiple award BOAs with separate task orders?

Answer: The Government will not consider multiple award Basic Ordering Agreements (BOA) with separate task orders in Table 1.

Question 93: On page L-15 Section L Folder F (c) Table 1: will the Government accept inclusion in Table 1 of a single award, competitive BPA with separate task orders?

Answer: No, Table 1 is reserved for GWACS, MA-IDIQs, and Multiple Award BPAs for services

Question 94: Section L.12.3 Folder F: Past Performance Tables Table I (Pg L-15 and L-16) Does this include the GSA MOBIS Contract? or Are those contracts to be listed only in Table 2?

Answer: Only multiple award BPAs against GSA Federal Supply Schedule contracts can be used for Table 1, not the contract by itself. Task orders issued against those contracts are permissible for Table 2.

Question 95: According to Section L.12.3(a)(6) of the Alliant SB solicitation, past performances must “Relate to projects for which the Offeror is (or was) the prime-contractor or for which the Offeror performed as a first-tier subcontractor where the Offeror had complete (turnkey) responsibility for a separately identifiable part of an overall system or service.”

This restriction could eliminate many very capable companies. For years GSA has lead the way in the use of small businesses and seems to me it would be contradictory to this policy to limit past performance to only instances where the offeror was the prime. Will you reconsider your position on past performance and permit past as a prime or as a sub performance to be considered?

Answer: Past Performance Table 2 permits first tier subcontracting that conforms to L.12.3, Folder F (a) (6).

Question 96:…