TEM meeting questions and answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 19 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W50NH924R0005
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a draft solicitation for the INSCOM G4 Global Intelligence Logistics and Engineering Support (GILE) contract. The GILE contract will provide multi-disciplined engineering, facilities, maintenance, logistics, and sustainment support to U.S. Army INSCOM and other intelligence organizations. Key details include:
The government plans to release a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) for industry feedback prior to the final RFP publication. The draft RFP will include Sections L and M with instructions to offerors and evaluation criteria. The government anticipates award in Q3 FY25. No site visits are planned, but the government will provide opportunities for industry engagement and feedback on the PWS. The PWS covers a wide range of logistics, engineering, and facilities management services, with specific tasks such as operating a government-provided warehouse facility, maintaining IT systems, and providing site leads at multiple locations. The government has not provided historical metrics or cost data, but plans to establish minimum labor rates. Transition requirements are extensive and may provide an incumbent advantage. The government is considering a pass/fail approach to evaluating the transition plan to optimize competition.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Warehouse Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 0002 GILE GFPM Format.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Draft RFP QA FINAL.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| W50NH924R0005.pdf | ||
| W50NH924R0005.pdf | ||
| Attachment 0001 Draft DD254 and Addendum.pdf | ||
| Attachment 0002 GILE GFPM Format.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 0005 - Past Performance Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 0003 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs).pdf | ||
| Attachment 0007 SBP-WorkbookInstructions.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 0009 GILE Density List.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 0004 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).pdf | ||
| Attachment 0006 SBP-Workbook.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 0008 Government Furnished Property (GFP).xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 14
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
G4 GILE TEM Questions
| QUESTION | ANSWER |
| How is INSCOM intending to align with the Department of Defense's Cloud mandate, particularly in terms of its cloud-related initiatives or projects? | |
| Question is out of scope of this TEM | |
| The Estimated Historical Workload Data includes Software Engineer (Level 3). There does not appear to be a corresponding position in either the PWS or Technical Exhibit 3. Will the Government please provide Duties, Required Experience / Security Clearance, and Required Education / Certifications for the Software Engineer? | The Database Managemenet position fulfills this role |
| Is the government seeking a particular candidate for the Software Engineer position? Will there be any adjustments to the qualifications required for this role by the government to allow for greater competition among the potential bidders? | No to both questions. |
| Is Zero Trust compliance being considered by the Government? | Question is out of scope of this TEM |
| Due to the wide scope and global scale of the GILE contract, will the Government consider offering all offerors a site visit to a medium-sized location where significant GILE-related work is performed to provide industry appropriate insight into the nature of the government-contractor arrangement, facilities, and other environmental considerations? | No site visits are planned | |||
| Recognizing the robust and expansive requirements of GILE, will the Government disclose when it will conduct an Industry Day and a site visit, and distribute a refined draft PWS and draft RFP with Sections L and M? Multiple, and iterative, rounds of engagement with industry will ensure the requirements are fully and completely articulated and understood by all parties, thereby reducing execution risk for both bidders and the government. | In addition to this TEM, the Government plans on issuing a draft RFP soliciting questions and industry engagement before the RFP is published, additionally there will be a Q&A period for industry to provide comments before submiitng their proposals. | |||
| The revised PWS (11APR2024) indicates that the contractor shall operate a Government-provided facility (1.6.11.7). Given that the Alban Road GOCO warehouse facility currently has a SCIF, is there a concurrent requirement for contractor to operate a SCIF with NIPR, SIPR, JWICS, NSANet outside of this space with office space and 10 server racks? | Revisions within PWS | |||
| A complete list of DCGS-A, Mission and Foundry system density, complete with full (vice the current codified version) nomenclature/description, owning unit and location is required to promote efficiency in offerors' technical and staffing approaches. An example would be the equipment density list provided in the previous acquisition (via GISS). Will the Government please provide this in the next draft RFP update or as an item in a bidders' library? Can you provide the same fidelity as you did in the last solicitation? | ||||
| Offerors will receive all the information via technical exhibit they will need to produce a quality proposal. | ||||
| To enable meaningful competition and also ensure the Government is able to evaluate and award a proposal that is both reasonably priced and can realistically be delivered, will the Government provide a competitive price range based on the Governments IGCE? | ||||
| Currently planning to establish floor rates, however subject to change. Draft RFP will include more information in section L. | ||||
| PWS Sections 1.6.31-1.6.31.3 detail extensive and comprehensive transition/phase-in requirements that are paramount to mission success by minimizing performance risks and support degradation. However, given customer intimacy and direct insight into performance risks, there is an inherent incumbent advantage to transition impacting proposed approaches and costs that may dissuade prospective bidders from competing in adjectively scored transition evaluation. Will the government consider a Pass/Fail approach to evaluating transition (versus an adjectival score) to eliminate the inherent incumbent advantage and optimize competition? | See updates in PWS | |||
| The PWS states "Directed 5 Each Site Lead per AOR" and four (4) AORs are listed; this implies the government is looking for twenty (20) site leads. However, on the Estimate Historic Workload Data, twelve (12) Site Leads are identified. Could the Government please clarify how many total site leads it desires? | See updates in PWS | |||
| Reference Part 5: Specific tasks, conducting site surveys is mentioned quite often, does INSCOM maintain a schedule in advance and can they provide approximate number of surveys conducted per year? | No, cannot provide number of surveys based on mission requirements at the time. | |||
| Is the intent to have a facility tradesman with general knowledge, or one that is certified in specialized trade skills such as plumbing, electrical, HVAC, etc.? | Refer to LCATs provided. GFPM will be provided with solicitiation that containall of the required LCATs. | |||
| Are Niagara and Metasys approved for use on the INSCOM network and currently in use today? | Question out of scope of this TEM. | |||
| What is the status of the current contractor-provided G-4 portal? | Status is that it is operational and not a contractor provided portal. | |||
| Is the G-4 portal hosted on the Government environment and populated with Government-owned data? | Yes | |||
| Will the G4 Portal transition with the contract? | Yes | |||
| Senior Facility Engineer appears in the PWS (5.5.44) and the historical workload data (Facility Engineer, Senior). However, the corresponding reference in Technical Exhibit 3 for PWS 5.5.44 is for Senior Facility Manager. Please confirm that this position is intended to be Senior Facility Engineer. | Corrected. Senior Facility Manager is the intended LCAT | |||
| 1.6.11.1 states "The contractor shall provide program management and reporting for all subtask areas to include, but not limited to: Task Planning, Preparation, and Execution (Establish Baseline and Metrics)". And 5.2.2.1.25 states "The Contractor shall develop and maintain a RAM Program and report performance metrics via the G-4 Portal. The performance metrics shall include, but is not limited to, the following:" Will the Government provide historical metrics and work order data other than historical staffing levels to allow offerors to propose innovations and efficiencies? | Answer will be provided prior to RFP release. | G-4 Concur with government comment | ||
| Does the Government anticipate requiring offerors to provide resumes for Key and Non-Key Positions to be evaluated with the proposal? | No, resumes will not be required or evaluated at time of proposal. | |||
| Does the Government intend to release Instructions to Offerors and Evaluation Criteria (historically Sections L&M) in draft form? | Yes, a draft RFP is forthcoming and will include Sections L & M. | |||
| Could the Government share the anticipated acquisition schedule/timeline? | Planned Award in 3Q FY25. | |||
| What is the Government's preferred Logistics Management Lifecycle software? | G4 Portal | |||
| What is the expected size and frequency of each ISR training event? | TBD based on mission requirements | |||
| Could the Government provide a sample BOM for program-related spares inventory by vendor (CONUS and OCONUS)? | No | |||
| For the Program Manager under required education/certifications, Exhibit 3 states that a “Project Management certification” is required. Please confirm that this should be PMP Certified. | PMP certification is correct | |||
| Can the government release a copy of the Performance Requirements Standards, Technical Exhibit 1, cited in 1.6.2? | The PRS will be published with Draft RFP | |||
| Can the government clarify if the "Contract Limitation of funds" statement is referring to the established Contract Ceiling, CLIN Ceiling, or the Funding on CLIN? This makes a difference when contracts are incrementally funded. | The Government currently intends to fund this contract incrementally and will insert Clause 52.232-22 Limitation of Funds in the solicitation and subsequent award. In that clause (b) The Schedule specifies the amount presently available for payment by the Government [Funding on CLIN] and allotted [CLIN Estimated Cost Ceiling] to this contract, …, and the period of performance it is estimated the allotted amount will cover. … The Contractor agrees to perform, or have performed, work on the contract up to the point at which the total amount paid and payable by the Government under the contract approximates but does not exceed the total amount actually allotted by the Government to the contract. |
| Reference 1.6.5 Extended Work Week (EWW) hours it reads ' If request is approved, all EWW hours worked shall be billed at the normal labor category billing rate.' Question: Can the Gov't define normal billing rates as it applies to hourly employees who are entitled to time and a half overtime pay by law, or to and shift workers if a differential rate is to be applied by law? | Normal Billing Rates are the Fully Burdened Labor Rate of the Labor Category agreed upon at the time of award. Compliance with labor laws is the contractor's responsibility and the cost of compliance should be considered in the development of proposed FBLRs | |
| In the "Days of Operation" column, the number of days corresponding to locations on pages 4 and 5 are blank. Recommend adding the appropriate number of days per location. | The “Days of Operation” column will be completed by the time the Draft RFP is published. | |
| 1.6.10.3 references the GILE Program Management Plan, the description discusses updating the PMP for every project tasking submitted to the contractor. It is our understanding on the current program it is common for the Contractor to receive multiple new project taskings every week. Requiring the Program Management Plan to be updated for every project tasking would require significant contractor effort and cost to the Government. Could the government consider modifying 1.6.10.3 to only be applicable to program level changes, rather than project level? | The Government will take this suggestion into account before we publish the Draft RFP. | |
| Standard industry payroll is not completed by the 10th of the month, so vendors will not have sufficient time to calculate financial information from the previous month to be incorporated into CDRL A004 and CDRL A006. It takes on average 2 weeks to be able to complete payroll in order to capture actual costs incurred and another week for the program team to be able to capture this information in deliverables to the government. Recommendation: Change submission of the Monthly CDRLS requiring financial reporting in accordance with the Contractor's accounting procedures to ensure sufficient time for analysis of the data prior to submission. | The Government will take this suggestion into account before we publish the Draft RFP. | |
| The table in 1.6.10.5.1 cites 5 site leads in the header, however the paragraph only Identifies 4 AOR site leads - CONUS; Europe; Korea and Kuwait. Question: Can the gov’t clarify the number and location of the Directed Site Leads? | One site lead at each AOR – 5 total. Location will be clarified by time Draft RFP is published. | |
| Standard industry practice for reporting of labor hours is either bi-weekly or twice monthly. Recommendation: Change reporting of labor hours (1.6.11.3) and personnel manning (5.2.2.1.19.3) to bi-weekly or twice per month, in accordance with Contractor's accounting procedures. | The Government will take this suggest into account before we publish the Draft RFP. |
| Can the government provide a consistent definition or formula for 'utilization' that encompasses, leave (time off), EWW, holidays, training, etc? | There is not enough context for the Government to answer this question. | |
| The PWS denotes a more extensive use of the portal to operationalize requirements. 5.4.6 & 5.4.7 reflects an LOE that consists of a Database Administrator and .NET Developer. Their responsibilities are to develop and maintain every aspect of website improvement and customized builds on both its development and production environments. Additionally, Portal operation includes, but it not limited to, hands on interaction with three AWS GovCloud servers and maintenance, operating system maintenance and updates, database management, environment management, cyber and CUI compliance, website help desk, requirements testing, deploying, and disaster and back up plans oversight. With the increase requirements (PWS 5.1.2.2) and expectation. Recommendation: Add a Systems Engineer labor category to the program to support hardware and operating systems of Portal and manage updates and installs required for cyber compliance and by the Portal Team. The Systems Engineer will cover the following gaps: AWS GovCloud Virual server health and wellness; backups/maintenance; cyber complainace; Visual studio software management; GIT Hub source control management; establish and oversee Portal codes and database backup and recover plan; establish and maintain software development source control software, license and update; and 3rd party software innovation... | The Government will take this suggestion into account before we publish the Draft RFP. | |
| Can the government confirm if the warehouses described on pages 10 and 49 of the PWS are refencing the same government warehouse facility within 45 miles from HQ INSCOM, or are these 2 separate locations? | The vendor will manage and operate a warehouse and maintenance facility located within 45 miles of Ft. Belvoir. They will also staff warehouse personnel to operate the MSRA, which is located at Ft. Belvoir. | |
| Reference to trip report submission: Recommend 5 business days vs calendar days, to avoid additional costs that might be incurred from having reports being written and filed on non-business days, thereby avoiding the potential for EWW. | The Government will take this suggestion into account before we publish the Draft RFP. | |
| Reference trip reports required by 1.6.18.1:and CDRL A010. Recommendation: Since travel costs (8), supporting documentation and receipts (9) are part of a contractors' DCAA accounting system, recommend that these two items be removed from inclusion with trip reports due upon completion of travel. Further recommend that deadline for submitting travel reports be within 5 business days of completion of travel, not calendar days. | The Government will take this suggest into account before we publish the Draft RFP. |
Can the government confirm that the statement "The Contractor shall pay for any required training for their employees to achieve required certification levels required by the contract," includes certifications necessary to meet Labor Category Qualifications? The Government will not pay for contractor employees trainings necessary to meet Labor Category Qualifications.
| Ref 1.6.31 Transition (Phase In/Phase Out Period): To minimize any decreases in productivity and to prevent possible negative impacts on additional services, the contractor shall have personnel on board during the 120-day phase in/phase out period. Can the government confirm that the transition phase-in period is 120 calendar days? | The current transition period is 120 calendar days. |
| Paragraph 1.6.31.1 states "the contractor shall have key personnel on board for the entire duration of phase-in and phase-out periods, however paragraph 1.6.31.1.1 states "the contract shall fill all key positions within 30 days of the Base Period of Performance/Approved Award Date with the exception of Site Leads. Recommendation: Change 1.6.31.1.1 to state that, "The Contractor shall have all key positions filled on the first day of the Contract Base Period of Performance, with the exception of the Site Leads, which shall be filled at the start of the ToA for each site." | The Government will take this suggest into account before we publish the Draft RFP. |
| The 5 bullets below PWS 5.1.1.3.1.2 appear to be a copy/paste of the final 5 bullets in 5.1.1.2.2. Can the government confirm this is a copy paste error? | Yes, the Government will address this and other errors before Draft RFP is published. |
| Recommend the government include a Systems Engineer labor category to the contract in order to support lifecycle planning for all systems engineering solutions and systems accreditation requirements of this paragraph. | The Government will take this suggest into account before we publish the Draft RFP. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .