Q A_36-82.pdf

Q36. Page 9 states that “The Government estimates an additional 4 FTE’s in supplement to the key personnel to assist in carrying out the PWS (this is only an estimate; all approaches will be evaluated per the evaluation criteria).”Are these 4 additional FTEs reflected in the level of effort of the current support contract? If so, what labor categories are they currently filling? Is the current contract’s level of effort

17 total FTEs? Please confirm it is the Government’s intent that bidders propose these 4 FTEs (in addition to the 13 key personnel) using vendor‐defined labor categories.

A36. The 4 additional FTE’s is the Government’s estimate to complete the PWS in addition to the Key‐

Personnel. As noted, the contractor may propose however they see fit. This estimate is based on the requirements of the PWS in this solicitation, not on any existing effort. Any FTE’s proposed in addition to the key personnel would be vendor‐defined labor categories and should be based on the PWS and its’ requirements.

Q37. How does the Government want vendors to price out leased facility and signage costs in cost proposals? Can these costs be included in the Government defined not to exceed ODC amount?

A37. Answered previously, reference question 8 from previous Q&A session.

Q38. Regarding the Proposal Adequacy Checklist: a) We intend to submit the Proposal Adequacy

Checklist as a separate attachment. Is this permissible, or does the government want this checklist located elsewhere with the submission? b) Also, we assume that this checklist does not count against any of the stated page restrictions. Please confirm.

A38. Answered previously, reference question 22 from previous Q&A session.

Q39. Regarding the page count limit for Volume 1, Section I, Technical Approach and Project Team, request that the government consider increasing the page count from 15 to 25 pages to improve ability to craft a thorough technical response.

Q39. All page limits will remain as stated in the solicitation.

Q40. Regarding the page count limit for Volume 1, Section IV, Past Performance, request that the government consider increasing the page count from 10 to 15 pages to improve ability to thoroughly demonstrate relevant past performance.

A40. All page limits will remain as stated in the solicitation.

Q41. Submission requirements appear to indicate that only soft copies are required, submitted to the email address provided. However, Page 70, Item 4 seems to suggest that multiple copies are expected.

Will the government confirm that no hard copies are required?

A41. Hard copies are not required.

Q42. Per the solicitation, “Resumes and Letters of Intent for Key Personnel ‐ maximum 3 pages/person, no limit on number of persons and no limit on Staffing Matrix.” It appears that the resumes and offer letter together should be a maximum of 3 pages total for each person. Can the government confirm that this is the intent?

Q42. Yes, that is correct.

Q43. The solicitation states that the submission shall be “clearly indexed.” Does a Table of Contents and traditional use of meaningful headings meet the spirit and intent of this requirement, or does the government require an actual index for each volume?

A43. A table of contents and headings meets this requirement.

Q44. The solicitation states that “MS Word (.doc) files” shall be used. Is it permissible to user the newer

.docx format?

A44. Yes, newer versions are permitted.

Q45. Will the Government consider an extension due to the Questions and Answers?

A45. Yes, the submission date has been extended to 5:00 PM local Durham, NC time on 3 November

2016.

Q46. Will Solicitation W911NF‐16‐R‐0020 be open to telework due to qualified individuals who cannot meet the place of performance?

A46. The SBIR PMO requires all work to be performed on site per the solicitation. Should a disability prohibit an individual from meeting this requirement, requests for exception should be noted in the proposal and will be considered and addressed.

Q47. While the Government has specified an FTE as 2080 annual hours, this does not account for vacation/sick leave and Federal holidays. Can the Government please revise an FTE to 1920 annual productive hours to ensure all bids reflect the same total hours across the program and ease evaluation?

A47. For the sake of consistency, the Government will still use 2080 hours per year as an FTE in cost analysis. Only those hours actually worked may be billed on any resultant contract.

Q48. Please confirm that the “estimated 3% escalation in labor rates per year” only applies to labor categories and positions offerors choose to classify under the Service Contract Act.

A48. The 3% estimated escalation in labor rates applies to ALL labor positions proposed. This 3% is to be used for the sake of consistency across proposals.

Q49. Given the revised ODC values, will the Government be issuing an updated Section B with the new/revised for offerors to include in their business volume?

A49. Yes. An amendment to the solicitation will be posted to FedBizOpps on Friday, 28 October 2016.

Please use the amounts in amendment 0002 to the Solicitation.

Q50. Given that there are two volumes and the amount of content and supporting information, such as

Letters of Intent and ODC documentation, will the Government reconsider accepting PDF file format?

A50. All written volumes/sections with page limitations must be in MS Word format. However, resumes, Letters of Intent, and cost backup documentation may be submitted in PDF if preferred by the proposer. This includes items in Section V of Volume 1 and backup information for Volume 2.

Q51. Can the Government please clarify if offeror’s should propose the provided NTE ODCs in A8 or propose the actual costs as provided in the required justification?

A51. Offerors should propose the updated ODC amounts from amendment 0002 to the solicitation.

Q52. Section 3.4 states that the offerors may design an alternative allocation of labor to meet the agency’s requirements as long as the allocation comprehensively and collectively provides the required skills and experience to effectively perform the requirement. Is this correct? To what extent and scope do offerors have flexibility to do this? In what staffing areas will the Agency allow?

A52. The PWS requirements in the solicitation must be met, and the Government has provided the required key personnel within the solicitation. The contractor, however, has flexibility in the label of the key personnel categories; but each key personnel stated in the solicitation must be fulfilled with a full‐time equivalent and the individual for each position must meet all of the requirements of that position. The TAA’s shall remain labeled as TAA’s in accordance with the solicitation.

Q53. Section M.2(5) indicates that the Agency will consider budgetary constraints when evaluating cost.

Is there an upper limit of cost to which solutions must conform?

A53. The Contractor should use the NTE amounts in amendment 0002 to the solicitation for all ODC

CLIN’s. The Government has also provided the required key personnel labor positions and total number of FTE’s estimated for non‐key personnel as a guide for potential offerors.

Q54. Section H.10 states that the contractor must comply with Section 508. Will the successful offeror use current Government systems and SBIR tools to support the ongoing requirements? If so, are they currently 508 compliant? If not, is the contractor expected to develop a new suite of tools and applications to effectively meet the agency’s requirements?

A54. A successful offeror will use current Government Systems and SBIR tools to support the requirements of the PWS. To the Government’s knowledge, all systems are currently compliant with

Section 508. If it is discovered that a required system or tool is not compliant, the Government will unilaterally bear the responsibility of remedying that situation.

Q55. Does the Government intend to allow exceptions to the terms and conditions stipulated in the

RFP? If so, what constitutes a tolerable exception?

A55. Per the solicitation, “should the offeror take exception to any Provision or Clause contained within the RFP, the exception must be documented in a Summary of Exceptions”. This includes any

FAR based provision or clause included in the solicitation, as well as any other clause noted within the solicitation. If any exceptions are submitted, they will be considered and addressed prior to award.

Q56. The last sentence in M.2(1) states, “Demonstrated specific/relevant DOD and SBIR or related technical experience will be considered a significant strength during evaluation.” Does this mean that

DoD SBIR experience is a significant strength or does it mean that any relevant DoD and any relevant

SBIR experience is a significant strength? In addition, what is “related technical experience”?

A56. Proposals should demonstrate the relevancy of any experience to the PWS requirements. The more relevant any demonstrated experience is to the PWS requirements of this solicitation, the more favorable that experience will be rated. For “related technical experience”, the proposal should also demonstrate how relevant that experience is to the PWS requirements of this solicitation.

Q57. Among other things, section M.2(4), “Past Performance” states that the Government will evaluate the offeror’s past performance providing support to the Government management of Federal, DoD, Army SBIR. Is Civilian, DoD, and Army SBIR past performance equally valuable? In addition, what is the definition of a similar program?

A57. The more relevant the past performance example is to this specific solicitation and PWS requirements, the more relevant that example will be considered. Past performance does not have to be in Army SBIR to be considered very relevant.

Q58. Section M.3, Factor 4 states that complexity is one of the considerations in past performance.

What reference attributes constitute similar complexity to the instant requirement?

A58. Complexity involves, among other things, the management of programs with detailed tasks such as this one, similar dollar amounts, and required management structure.

Q59. Are the business or technical degrees required for the key personnel Bachelor’s degrees unless otherwise stated?

A59. Yes, unless otherwise stated, which several are. By definition, an “advanced degree” is a postgraduate or post bachelor’s degree.

Q60. Does the Team Lead/PM candidate require six years of experience in both program and personnel management or may the program and personnel experience be combined to meet the six‐year requirement? Also, what qualifies as recent experience?

A60. The Team Lead/PM shall have at least 6 years of relevant, recent experience in each of program management AND personnel management. The more recent the experience of the Team Lead/PM, the more valuable that experience may be, taking into account all other qualifications and requirements. There is no specific number of years to qualify the term “recent” that would deem the individual being proposed for the position as responsive or non‐responsive.

Q61. The TAA Team Lead position description states that the position must possess advanced technical degree(s). Does the Government consider additional degrees to be a proposal benefit?

A61. The minimum requirement, in terms of education, is an advanced technical degree. Additional degrees could be a benefit, depending on the nature of the degree and its relevancy/contribution to the requirements in the PWS.

Q62. The TAA Team Lead positions mentions 6 years of relevant experience in DoD acquisition or

Science and Technology (S&T) Activities. Are the science and technology activities DoD specific or may the experience be in other venues? If S&T experience may be from venues other than DoD, does the agency view DoD experience more favorably?

A62. The TAA Team Lead position requires 6 years of relevant experience in DoD acquisition or DoD

Science and Technology (S&T) Activities.

Q63. The solicitation states that the Financial Management position must have a business degree and a business degree with an accounting concentration is preferred. Does business degree mean business‐ related “Business Administration” or is the connotation more general in nature and encompasses finance, accounting, or other business‐related degrees?

A63. Finance, accounting, or other business‐related degrees are all considered a business degree.

Q64. The solicitation states that the Jr. Programmer must have a minimum of three years of experience in application development, application architecture, and IT systems support. Does this mean that the candidate may have three years of experience in any combination of the three stated disciplines?

A64. No. The Jr. Programmer must have a minimum of three years of experience in each of application development, application architecture, AND IT systems support (could be 3 years total, with experience in each every year).

Q65. Section B.3 and clause 52.217‐9 seem to be in conflict. Is the interpretation that the Government can exercise the option at any time provided that the contractor is given a 60‐day notice of the

Government’s intentions?

A65. Correct, the notice must be provided 60 days in advance of contract expiration.

Q66. Is the language in the third paragraph of 3.1.2 a minimum requirement or a goal? This may fluctuate based on circumstances beyond the contractor’s control.

A66. This statement has been changed in the recent amendment language posted to FedBizOpps.

Q67. Section H‐16, “Security Considerations” lists the security‐related considerations and requirements for this contract, but there is no corresponding DD254 attached. Request the Army please provide.

A67. This was added to a recent amendment to the announcement in FedBizOpps.

Q68. Both 52.203‐6 and 52.203‐6 Alt I are included in the solicitation. Which clause applies?

A68. 52.203‐6 is the applicable clause. 52.203‐6 Alt I is not applicable.

Q69. The 52.217‐9 clause authorizes 66 months of performance. Is the additional six‐month period authorized under 52.217‐8, “Option to Extend Services” included in this calculation?

A69. Yes, per the CLIN’s and Period of Performance, the 66 months of performance includes the additional six‐month period.

Q70. Clause 52.217‐8 is incorporated by reference; therefore, the “fill‐in” is not completed. Does this mean that the Government is required to provide written notice of its intent to exercise this option at least 30 days before the end of the period of performance?

A70. Yes, this fill‐in will be included in any resultant contract and set at 30 days.

Q71. Section L.1 states that Reps and Certs shall be submitted via the On‐line Representations and

Certifications Application (ORCA). Section L.2(b) second paragraph states that provisions and clauses, some of which are representations and certifications, should be submitted with the cost proposal.

Request please clarify.

A71. All Representations and Certifications shall be submitted through the ORCA, as stated in L.1.

Those submitted via ORCA need not be submitted in the Business Volume of the Proposal.

Q72. Section L incorporates 52.215‐1, “Instructions to Offeror—Competitive Acquisition”. However, several subsequent sections provide instructions pertaining to the same subject matter, but the instructions may not be the same. Which set of instructions take precedence? For example: 52.215‐

1(c)(2) requires that the first page of an offer contain certain information but section L.2(b) Section II and section L4 contain different instructions pertaining to amendments, exceptions, and the title page.

A72. The requirements in clause 52.215‐1 are applicable. The sections listed in the question above do not necessarily respond to the first page of the proposal. The information listed in Section L must also be included in the proposal as directed by the solicitation.

Q73. Does the solicitation require the submission of certified cost and pricing data and the inclusion of

252.215‐7009 given the probability of receiving adequate price competition in accordance with FAR

15.403‐1 (c)(1)?

A73. Yes, see previous question 25.

Q74. Section L.1(1)(b) states that proposals must receive a rating of “good” or better in the first three factors to be eligible for award. Legally, all proposals that are acceptable or better in all factors must be included in the trade‐off analysis. See Contract Contract Engineering, LLC (B‐405732.4). Do the Army intend to eliminate proposals with all Acceptable ratings?

A74. Yes, this is the Army’s intent, as this is not a lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) requirement. Only proposals receiving a rating of “good” or better in each of the first three factors will be eligible for final award. This will not be a requirement for inclusion in the Competitive Range, should one be established.

Q75. Section M.2(5), “Costs” states in bullet “c” that a proposal will be evaluated for conformance to the budgetary constraints/projections defined in the independent government costs estimate. Does this mean that the price will be evaluated for “reasonableness” using budget projections and the IGCE?

A75. Costs will be evaluated for realism based primarily on the technical proposal and also reasonableness based on the Government’s market research for cost elements.

Q76. Section M.2(5), “Costs” states that costs will be evaluated for reasonableness and realism;

however, clause 52.215‐1 states that the price will also be evaluated for balance also. Please clarify.

A76. Unbalanced pricing will be reviewed in accordance with clause 52.215‐1. Unbalanced pricing is a concern to the Government because it could be an indication of unrealstic costs to perform the effort based on the PWS.

Q77. Section M.2(5), “Costs” states that costs will be evaluated for realism. This includes an evaluation of whether the pricing is realistic for the work to be performed, reflect a clear understanding of the work, and are consistent with the unique methods of performance described in the proposal. Are contractors required to submit the information requested by clause 52.222‐46 and how will this information be used in the realism evaluation?

A77. Yes, 52.222‐46 is included in the solicitation. The contractor shall submit a full budget to include broken down cost elements in accordance with the solicitation. The Government will use these cost elements and rates to compare to the IGCE and other market conditions to support the proposed cost elements.

Q78. Section M.3 Evaluation Approach, Factor 4 states that Relevancy will not be separately rated, but the first paragraph of page 75 sets forth a minimum overall Relevancy rating. Please clarify.

A78. The final “rating” for the Past Performance factor will be the “Performance Confidence

Assessment”, which takes into account the Recency, Relevancy and Quality Assessment ratings.

Relevancy alone does not determine the rating for Past Performance. Rather, it is an element that, in conjunction with Recency and Quality Assessment, is used to derive an overall Performance

Confidence Assessment rating for Past Performance.

Q79. Will the Government assign a relevancy and quality rating to each reference and then assign an overall confidence rating consistent with the instructions in DoD Source Selection Procedures at DFARS

215.3?

A79. Yes, see question 78. The Past Performance Section will be evaluated in accordance with the

DoD Source Selection Procedures and Section M.3 of the solicitation.

Q80. Section M.3, Factor 5 states that there is a wage determination included with the RFP. Please clarify.

A80. Per previous questions, the Government does not anticipate labor categories that fall under the

Service Contract Act. However, should the contractor propose a labor category which does, that category should be in line with currently approved wage determinations.

Q81. If subcontractors request to submit pricing information directly to the Government, do you have a preferred method of delivery and/or suggested file name so you can align the SubK pricing with the prime proposal?

A81. Subcontractors may submit their information to the email address listed in the solicitation for proposal submission. Their submission shall make clear in the title of the email and any corresponding attachment that it is in support of the proposal submitted by “Prime Contractor

Name”.

Q82. There is an assumption that RDECOM will sponsor facility clearance should a contract be awarded.

With the amendment and addition of the DD254, can you clarify whether we need a facility clearance in advance or if you will sponsor it after award?

A82. The Government will not sponsor facility clearance for this requirement. Facility clearance must be obtained independently by the contractor in accordance with Section L of the solicitation and the

DD Form 254.