AMENDING ATTACHMENT 8 CONTINUED-QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS_GOV RESPONSES.pdf

W81K0426RA011 –

AMENDMENT 0003

ATTACHMENT 8 CONTINUED

Document Page / Paragraph Requirement / Portion Gov’t Response PWS, ITO, Evaluation Factor, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Number(s)

Identify the requirement or portion to which the question pertains

Addendum to 52.212-1, Instructions — Factor 4 (Cost/Price)

pp. 94, 99 Volume for pricing submission The proposal volume table (p.

94) and the Factor 4 heading

(p. 99) list Cost/Price as Volume V, but the Factor 4 narrative refers to “Volume III” and “Volume IV” for pricing and states that pricing may appear in only one volume.

In which volume must offerors place the priced SF 1449 (Schedule B) and the Attachment 7 Price Matrix?

Are the “Volume III” and “Volume IV” references typographical errors that should read “Volume V”?

Yes, the references to Volume III and Volume IV within the Factor 4 narrative are typographical errors. All pricing information, including the priced SF 1449 (Schedule B) and the Attachment 7 Price Matrix, must be submitted exclusively in Volume V - Cost/Price. Offerors are reminded that no cost or pricing data shall be included in any other proposal volume.

Amended Attachment 1

— Compensation Plan

“Total Price” tab “Total Price” tab references an external file On the “Total Price” worksheet, the cells reference an external workbook (e.g., =’[1]Compensation Base Period’!H9) rather than the internal tabs of this template, so offeror entries in the yellow input cells do not flow to the “Total Price” tab as note 2 indicates (“auto populate corresponding cells on the total price sheet”).

Will the Government reissue Attachment 1 with the “Total Price” formulas repointed to the internal worksheets, or otherwise advise how offerors should populate and submit the “Total Price” tab so it reflects the proposed rates?

See AMENDED ATTACHMENT

1-COMPENSATION PLAN

(0003)

ATTACHMENT 8 CONTINUED

Addendum to 52.212-1 (Vol IV) & Addendum to 52.212-2 (Recency)

pp. 97–98, 106 Past performance recency standard The Volume IV instructions

(pp. 97–98) require performance “within the last three (3) years but not less than six (6) months” of the issuance date, while the recency definition in the Addendum to 52.212-2 (p.

106) requires only that “some portion … occurred within the last three years.”

(a) Which standard governs recency? (b) What does “not less than six (6) months” mean

— that a reference must reflect at least six months of performance, that performance must be at least six months old, or something else? (c) If the six-month element is retained, the Government is respectfully requested to expand the recency window from three (3) to five (5) years to broaden the pool of qualifying references while still ensuring recency and relevance.

(a) Both standards apply together. To be considered recent, a portion of the performance effort must have occurred within the last three

(3) years prior to the solicitation issue date, AND the reference must reflect a total period of performance of at least six (6) months. (b) "Not less than six (6) months" refers to the duration of the referenced contract. The Government requires references to demonstrate a sustained performance period of at least six months to be considered for evaluation;

short-term or one-off tasks lasting less than six months will not be evaluated. (c) The Government will not expand the recency window. The requirement remains that performance must have occurred within the last three

(3) years.

ATTACHMENT 8 CONTINUED

Addendum to 52.212-2 — Factor 2 (Compensation Plan)

pp. 104, 97 Basis for compensation adequacy rating The Compensation Plan is rated Acceptable/Unacceptable based on whether, per the Government’s “market research” (p. 104), total compensation is sufficient to recruit and retain qualified candidates.

Will the Government identify the compensation surveys or data sources it will rely upon to assess the adequacy of proposed professional compensation?

No, the Government will not identify the specific compensation surveys, proprietary databases, or internal data sources used to conduct its market research.

The Government utilizes a wide variety of public and private sector compensation resources to establish its internal benchmarks. To preserve the competitive integrity of this procurement, these specific sources and benchmark percentiles will remain confidential. Furthermore, as clarified, proposed compensation rates must be based on a national average. It is the offeror's responsibility to propose a realistic, compliant, and competitive compensation plan using a national average methodology that is sufficient to support nationwide recruitment and retention while meeting all minimum Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS) requirements.

ATTACHMENT 8 CONTINUED

Attachment 1 Columns: A previous response stated the Government is looking for direct compensation (wage & fringe) in the Compensation Plan. However, Attachment 1 contains columns for Overhead and Profit. Is it safe to assume that only the wage and fringe columns need to be filled out in Attachment 1, and not overhead and profit?

See AMENDED ATTACHMENT

1-COMPENSATION PLAN

(0003)

Yes. Offerors should only populate the Base Rate and Fringe Benefits columns in Attachment 1 (Compensation Plan). The Compensation Plan is intentionally designed to capture only the direct compensation paid to the employee for the purpose of evaluating recruitment and retention risk. Any columns or fields in Attachment 1 for indirect costs, such as Overhead, General and Administrative (G&A) expenses, or Profit, should be left blank. Your fully burdened rates—which must include all indirect costs and profit—are to be submitted exclusively in Volume V using the Attachment 7 Price Matrix and the SF 1449.

Price breakdown is a mandatory requirement to the pricing files;

however, under the instructions for Volume V there is no discussion of price breakdown, and what is required is only Proposed Price in Section B and Attachment 7, which is requiring fully burdened labor rates only.

Can you confirm the discrepancy between the response below and the requirement? Should vendors provide an additional Excel file containing the full breakdown as requested, or what specifically should be included.

No, vendors should not provide an additional Excel file containing a full cost breakdown (e.g., a build-up showing G&A, overhead, profit, etc.). The reference on page 95 stating "All price breakdown information... shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel" is a general formatting instruction that applies to the required pricing files. For this specific solicitation, the only required pricing files are the SF1449 (Schedule B) and the Attachment 7 Price Matrix, both of which require only the final, fully burdened labor rates. The Government is not requesting a separate, detailed cost element breakdown for Volume V on this Firm-Fixed- Price contract. Note: The breakdown of direct labor (Base Rate + Fringe) must still be provided in Volume III using Attachment 1, as previously instructed.