QA_Responses_(Formal_Amendment_0002).xls
XLS spreadsheet 126 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Administrative Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W911QX-17-R-0003
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a federal solicitation for administrative support services. The solicitation will be for a competitive 8(a) multiple award indefinite delivery indefinite quantity contract to provide program management, administrative, technical, security, financial management, logistics, technical publications, technical library, and graphic/audio visual support services across multiple Army Research Laboratory installation sites. Responses to the pre-solicitation notice were due by November 11, 2016. The primary agency is the Army Contracting Command Aberdeen Proving Ground on behalf of the Army Research Laboratory. Services will support the laboratory's basic, exploratory, and advanced research mission.
QA Responses (Formal Amendment 0002)
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Administrative Support Services has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
SIGNATURES
SOLICITATION
| COMPANY QUESTION | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| Please confirm that 8(a) offerors that submitted a compliant proposal on the original due date of the base solicitation are grandfathered as a certified 8a offeror based on this amendment, which allows them to submit as a qualified 8(a) bidder, even though they may have graduated from the 8a program since the last proposal due day. | In accordance with FAR 19.805-2(b), an 8(a) offeror's eligibility is based upon the time of submission of the original offer. The SBA is the authority for eligibility determinations and in accordance with regulation, the Contract Officer will rely entirely on the SBA individual eligibility determinations. Offerors are encouraged to consult directly with their assigned Business Opportunity Specialist at the SBA regarding further 8(a) eligibility determinations. |
| Is this opportunity only open to the offerors that submitted proposals on the original solicitation or can any certified 8(a) offeror that is qualified to bid as of due date of this amendment respond? | The amendment, as part of the corrective action plan, has re-opened the requirement. It is open for proposing by any certified 8(a) offeror that is qualified to bid as of the due date of the amendment response due date. |
| Are all previously published Q&A submissions / responses still valid? Or with the issuance of the Amendment, have any been superseded or are no longer relevant? | Previous Q&A documents are applicable to this amendment to the extent that they are not contradicted by the most recent amendments. |
| Since this is an existing solicitation, are Offerors who did not previously submit a proposal response able to now submit a new response to this Amendment? | Yes, certified 8(a) offerors who did not previously submit a proposal in response to the original solicitation, may submit a response to this solicitation amendment. |
| Will the Government please confirm you are requiring proposal revisions? | For previous offerors, the Government requires, at a minimum, an affirmative statement that their previous proposal submission remains valid in response to this amendment. Alternatively, those offerors are permitted to submit revised proposals. |
| Are offerors permitted to submit revisions to any/all volumes of the proposal or are submittals restricted to the areas affected by the Corrective Action? | For previous offerors, the Government requires, at a minimum, an affirmative statement that their previous proposal submission remains valid in response to this amendment. Alternatively, those previous offerors are permitted to submit revised proposals. No, the proposal submissions are not restricted to the areas affected by the amendment. |
| Is the DOL Map provided on 22 Dec 2016 still current for this solicitation? If not, would you please provide a more current document? | As stated in the Executive Summary 0002, the previous iteration of the DOL WD Map shall be referenced in response to this subject amendment as no changes have been made to that document as a result of this amendment. |
| Are the original SF1449 and SF30 documents required to be signed for new offerors? | New and previous offerors are required to sign and submit only the SF1449 and SF30 applicable to this solicitation amendment. |
Section L
| COMPANY QUESTION | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE | |
| Will a new Sample TO be issued and will there be a separate Volume for said Sample TO? | As stated in the Executive Summary 0002, offerors shall reference the previous iteration of the Sample TO PWS for this solicitation amendment, as no changes have been made to that document. There is not a separate Volume submission requirement for the Sample TO. | |
| If Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) were submitted in response to the original solicitation, W911QX-17-R-0003, are new Past Performance Questionnaires required for this formal solicitation amendment? | The Government will reference previously submitted Past Performance Questionnaires that were submitted in response to the original solicitation. Therefore, if a Past Performance Questionnaire was submitted in response to the original solicitation and still meets the requirements set forth in Section L (ii) Volume II Past Performance and Section M 2. Past Performance Evaluation Approach, the Government will reference that PPQ and a new PPQ form DOES NOT need to be resubmitted in response to this solicitation amendment. | |
| Due to amount of the information required in the Past Performance volume, | ||
| would the Government consider increasing the page limit to ten (10) pages maximum? | The Government will amend the Volume II Past Performance page count requirement from five (5) maximum pages to reflect five (5) maximum pages for the Prime and five (5) maximum pages for the Subcontractor/JV. | |
| Regarding past performance, is the limit a total of three (3) submissions or three (3) for the prime and then three (3) additional for major subcontractors? Section L states: "No more than (3) contract submissions for the prime offeror and no more than three (3) contract submissions for each Major Subcontractor will be evaluated" while Section M states: "The offeror shall provide past performance information for no more than three (3) contracts." | To clarify, no more than (3) contract submissions for the prime offeror and no more than three (3) contract submissions for each Major Subcontractor will be evaluated. | |
| If the key personnel is unchanged since the original solicitation, is the original Letter of Commitment, signed and dated by our key personnel, still acceptable? | The original Letter of Commitment, signed and dated by the previously proposed Key Personnel, is still acceptable for this solicitation amendment. | |
| If nothing has changed with the subcontractor since the original solicitation, is the original Letter of Commitment, signed and dated by the subcontractor, still acceptable? | The original Letter of Commitment, signed and dated by the previously proposed Subcontractor, is still acceptable for this solicitation amendment. | |
| Can the Government please provide detailed instructions on submitting the following: |
• Compliance Matrix
• Manpower Charts
• Contract Work Breakdown Structure
| • Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans (QASP) | As noted in Section L, should an offeror choose to submit a Compliance Matrix, Manpower Charts, and Contract Work Breakdown Structure, and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plans (QASP), these documents are excluded from the required Volume page counts and offerors shall adhere to the proposal submission requirements set forth in Section L.2. | |
| Section L.3.b states “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file.” Is there a page limit for the summary section? | As noted in Section L.2. Proposal Submission Requirements, Summary Sections are excluded from the Volume page counts. | |
| Can the Government please describe how Go / No-Go Criteria is to be presented? Specifically, should Offerors present Go / No-Go Criteria in a separate Volume? Or, should Offerors present the material as the initial Section to Volume I? Or, should the Go / No-Go Criteria simply reside within its appropriate Volume / Section and the Government will find and identify the material on its own? | For submission, the proposed Go/No Go Criteria shall reside within its appropriate Volume/Section. | |
| Can the Government provide narrative requirement details for Section L, Volume I, Section 3, Subfactor 3 regarding “Understanding of Work to be Accomplished”? | Offerors shall thoroughly review the contents of Section M, Section 1 Technical Evaluation Approach, Subfactor (c) Understanding of Work to be Accomplished to ensure an understanding of how proposals will be evaluated for that requirement. | |
| In Section L – Instructions to Offerors – Go/No Go Criteria, #3 (page 3), in item #3 of the Go/No Go Criteria, can the Government please confirm that Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) is the agency that determines adequate cost accounting systems? 2) | To clarify, DCAA performs the Preaward survey audit and makes a recommendation and DCMA then issues an adequacy determination, IAW FAR 42.302(a)(12). | |
| Will the Government please provide the clause language for FAR 42.302(b)(12)? | The reference to FAR 42.302(b)(12) is a typo in both Section L and Section M and will be revised in the forthcoming amendment to reflect the correct reference, FAR 42.302(a)(12). | |
| In Section L, (ii) Volume II Past Performance, will the Government confirm there are 5 pages required for the prime and 5 additional pages required for the subcontractors? | The Government will amend the Volume II Past Performance page count requirement from five (5) maximum pages to reflect five (5) maximum pages for the Prime and five (5) maximum pages for the Subcontractor/JV. | |
| In Section L, (ii) Volume II Past Performance, will the Government confirm Section 3 - Subcontracts and Joint Venture Partners and Section 4 – New Corporate Entities are excluded from the 5 page volume limit? | The Government will amend the Volume II Past Performance page count requirement from five (5) maximum pages to reflect five (5) maximum pages for the Prime and five (5) maximum pages for the Subcontractor/JV. | |
| In Section L, Volume III Cost, can the Government provide more detail or an example to explain what they mean by “labor codes matching its accounting/estimating system?” | As stated in Section L (iii) Volume III Cost and to clarify, the offeror shall provide a “crosswalk” between the proposed labor categories and those labor codes that match the labor categories in the Offeror's accounting/estimating system. | |
| In Section L, Volume II Past Performance, will the government accept CPARS or PPIRS in place of PPQs? | No, the Government will not accept CPARS or PPIRS in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs), as PPQs are a requirement of this Solicitation. The Government reserves the right to consult the CPARS and PPIRS databases, in addition to the PPQs. | |
| In Section, Section 2. Proposal Submission Requirements , instructions indicate that ‘Any pages that are changed (as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) should be in track changes.’ Can the Government please confirm that changes resulting from responses based on Amendment 0002 are not considered ‘revisions’ and that changes do not need to be tracked. | Correct, changes resulting from responses based on this solicitation amendment 0002 are not considered revisions and changes do not need to be tracked. | |
| In Section L, Volume II Past Performance, instructions indicate that ‘To be considered recent, all contract submissions must be within three (3) years of award from the issue date of this RFP…’ Can the Government please confirm that past performances must be within three (3) years of the RFP issue date of December 23, 2016. | Volume II Past Performance contract submissions are based upon the time of submission of the original RFP issue date. | |
| What does the Government consider evidence of a DCMA adequate cost accounting system? | As noted in Section L and Section M, in accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a)(3) and FAR 42.302(a)(12), the Offeror shall provide evidence of a Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) adequate cost accounting system determination and/or a DCMA accepted or approved cost accounting system for determining costs under cost reimbursement contracts within the offeror’s Volume III – Cost. To clarify, DCAA performs the Preaward survey audit and makes a recommendation and DCMA then issues an adequacy determination of the accounting system IAW FAR 42.302(a)(12). The DCMA adequacy determination is typically a letter, however an Offeror is permitted to submit email evidence of the adequacy determination that would be validated by the cognizant DCMA office. | |
| Section L, 3.(iii) Volume III – Cost requires evidence of a Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) adequate cost accounting system determination. Since the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) is the agency that performs these assessments, will a DCAA report be sufficient? | To clarify, DCAA performs the Preaward survey audit and makes a recommendation and DCMA then issues an adequacy determination of the accounting system IAW FAR 42.302(a)(12). The DCMA adequacy determination is typically a letter, however an Offeror is permitted to submit email evidence of the adequacy determination that would be validated by the cognizant DCMA office. | |
| In Section L, 3.(iii) Volume III – Cost, is the addition of the pay band information for Volume III required for both the Sample Task Order or just the Basic PWS? | To clarify, the pay band table (ranges) are required for all LCATS as part of the Basic PWS, but the pay band table is NOT required for the Sample TO PWS. As noted in Section M Evaluation Approach, the Government will evaluate the specific rates proposed for the purpose of executing a probable cost analysis. | |
| Can the Government confirm that offerors are only to submit for evaluation Volumes I-IV for the MA CPFF IDIQ (Basic PWS) under the Formal Amendment 002 release? | Offerors are required to only submit the revised requirements set forth in Section L for Volumes I-IV for evaluation under this amendment. Offerors should thoroughly review the contents and changes of Section L, Section M, and the Basic PWS. | |
| Can the government please confirm that only one Technical Volume is required to be submitted? If so, will the government consider increasing the Volume I page count? | Yes, only one Technical Volume I is required to be submitted in response to this amendment. The Technical Volume I page count will not be increased and remains at 25 maximum pages. | |
| Can the government please confirm PPQ Forms are to be submitted directly to the ARL Contracting Activity by the POCs completing the forms? | Correct, as stated in Section L, the offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative POCs responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to ARL Contracting Activity listed in Section L. | |
| Can the cost narrative for the Basic PWS be submitted via PDF or Word? | Yes, the Cost Narrative may be submitted via PDF or Word. | |
| Are resumes and letters of commitment required for any personnel proposed beyond the PM? | To clarify, Letters of Commitment and Resumes are required to be submitted ONLY for proposed Key Personnel. The Government will review those resumes and professional references for all proposed Key Personnel in accordance with the Section M Evaluation Criteria. | |
| This section requests the offeror to propose overtime for the Sample TO, however, the Sample TO PWS states "No overtime shall be proposed for this Sample TO." Can you confirm that no overtime shall be proposed on this Sample TO? | No overtime shall be proposed on the Sample TO. Revisions to Section L regarding this question will be evident in the forthcoming amendment. | |
| Section L requests the offeror explains the labor hours proposed, however, Appendix A states the offeror should use an estimate of 1920 hours for a full time employee work year. Can you confirm we are to use 1920 hours to our pricing on the Basic PWS as well as the Sample TO (with the exception of the Program Manager which we are to propose)? | The amount of hours to propose shall be based upon the Contractor's discretion. The labor categories listed within the Appendix A Labor Categories document assumes an estimate of 1,920 hours as a baseline comparison for a full time employee work-year. | |
| The Section L instructions state “A full cost proposal is NOT required in response to the Basic PWS, however a full cost proposal IS required in response to the Sample TO PWS “. In a later paragraph it states “A cost narrative shall be included for the Basic PWS”. Can the Government please clarify what it is looking for in the COST Volume? | To clarify, a full cost PROPOSAL is NOT required in response to the Basic PWS, however a full cost PROPOSAL IS required in response to the Sample TO PWS, to include a labor rate table and associated pay bands, organized by year and position, to include all potential labor categories as listed in Appendix A Labor Categories. A cost NARRATIVE shall be included for the Basic PWS. | |
| For the pricing portion, are Offerors required to submit both a pay and bill rate “pay band” for each labor category (minimum and maximum pay rates for both pay and bill rates?) | To clarify, Offerors shall submit only the direct (pay) rates in the payband for each labor category. | |
| Does the government want a complete compensation plan breakdown of proposed labor categories, or will that be requested later? | In accordance with Section L, the offeror shall submit within the Volume III – Cost, a labor rate table and associated pay bands, organized by year and position, to include all potential labor categories as listed in Appendix A Labor Categories. | |
| Please confirm that Section L Instructions to Offerors has removed the requirement to respond to, price and submit “Set #2 Sample TO (Sample TO PWS)”? | Correct, as stated in Section L, offerors are to only submit the revised requirements set forth in Section L for Volumes I-IV for evaluation under this amendment. Offerors should thoroughly review the contents and changes of Section L, Section M, and the Basic PWS. |
Section M
| COMPANY QUESTION | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| In Section M, Section 1, subfactor IV Adequacy of Work Force, please clarify what is meant by “The Government will review the resumes and professional reference for all Key Personnel and Sample TO proposed personnel". Please clarify the expectations of proposed personnel for both the Sample TO PWS and the Basic PWS. | To clarify, Letters of Commitment and Resumes are required to be submitted ONLY for proposed Key Personnel. The Government will review those resumes and professional references for all proposed Key Personnel in accordance with the Section M Evaluation Criteria. |
| In Section M – Evaluation Approach – D. Evaluation Approach, Subfactor (a): Management & Personnel, III. Internal Controls, is the evaluation criteria requiring information that typically would be included in Past Performance to instead be presented under the Internal Controls section of Management and Personnel? | Offerors shall thoroughly review the contents of Section M, Section 1 Technical Evaluation Approach, Subfactor (a) to ensure an understanding of how this subfactor will be evaluated. |
| How will the Government evaluate the Sample TO PWS if there is no longer a requirement to submit a Sample TO proposal volume? | The Government will utilize the Sample TO PWS to evaluate cost. To further clarify, the pay band table (ranges) are required for all labor categories as part of the Basic PWS, but the pay band table is NOT required for the Sample TO PWS. As noted in Section M Evaluation Approach, the Government will evaluate the specific rates proposed for the purpose of executing a probable cost analysis. |
| Regarding Section M Evaluation Approach, Subfactor (a), I Contract/Program Management Structure, does the Government want offeror’s management structure and approach to address the new WSMR ARL site added in the amendment? Is the Orlando site presented during the industry day and other ARL sites not included in the place of the performance paragraph a part of the scope of this contract? | Regarding Section M Evaluation Approach, Subfactor (a), I Contract/Program Management Structure, only APG and ALC are required locations under this solicitation. |
Basic PWS
| COMPANY QUESTION | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE |
| The Government removed "Optional" from the list of accreditations in Section C.4.3.2.4 of the Basic PWS and removed "Optional" from the DOD experience in Section C.4.3.2.5 of the Basic PWS. Neither requirement is listed as "mandatory" along with the other three mandatory skills. For clarification, are C.4.3.2.4 and C.4.3.2.5 still optional or have they become mandatory? | The requirements set forth in Sections C.4.3.2.4 and C.4.3.2.5 of the Basic PWS 0002 are not mandatory. |
| In the Basic PWS 0002, PWS C.4.3 – Key Personnel - C.4.3.2.3(page 6), please confirm that a candidate with a Master’s degree from an accredited school would meet this requirement. | As noted in the Basic PWS 0002, Section C.4.3.2, a minimum of a Bachelor’s degree from an accredited school is mandatory, in addition to the other mandatory elements listed in this section C.4.3.2. Therefore, yes, a Master's Degree from an accredited school would suffice, as it's above the mandatory minimum requirement of a Bachelor's degree. |
| The Government requires the provision of a Telework Plan in the Management Approach 30 days after the first task order is in place. Can the Government provide the ratio of contractor employees that are working from home versus on-site at each of the locations, i.e. APG, ALC, and WSMR for any current work being performed? | Information regarding the ratio of Contractor is not currently available at this time. The requirement for this plan would be incumbent upon Contractor award of a Task Order, at which point this information would become available. |
| Regarding the mandatory Program Manager requirement in the Basic PWS 0002, Section C.4.3.2.1 and Go/No Go Criteria, what changed from the original PM requirement that would cause this additional PM requirement? | The Government reevaluated its needs given the contemplated size/scope of the effort. |
| Regarding the mandatory Program Manager requirement in the Basic PWS 0002, Section C.4.3.2.1 and Go/No Go Criteria, what is the rationale for requiring a MATOC IDIQ PM to have supervision of 10 or more solely administrative personnel when typically IDIQ PM have no responsibility to supervise any personnel at the TO level as that is normally done by the TO PM or lead? | The Government has tailored its requirement based on its experience administering similar procurements. |
| Regarding the mandatory Program Manager requirement in the Basic PWS 0002, Section C.4.3.2.1 and Go/No Go Criteria, and given all the other PM requirements, certifications and education which are standard for PM in DoD contracts, will the Government consider removing the words “similar to those listed in Appendix A”? If not, would the Government consider reducing the number 10 down to 2 which would be more realistic a number of PMO administrative support personnel associated with the management of a large IDIQ contract? | No, the Go/No Go Criteria regarding the PM requirements will not be further amended under this solicitation. This is the Government's requirement given the contemplated size/scope of the effort. |
| Does WD 15-5447 (Rev.-4) for Dora Ana County, NM apply to this solicitation? | Yes. In addition to the ALC and APG Wage Determination attachment that's currently part of the solicitation, the WSMR Wage Determinations will be added to that attachment in the forthcoming solicitation amendment. |
| Please confirm that WSMR is one of the places of performance? If so, please provide clarification on the requirements and instructions to offerors for the new WSMR site? | There are not separate instructions for the added WSMR location. The Offeror is encouraged to provide a mix of personnel to support the Basic PWS requirements at WSMR, same as the personnel support proposed for APG and ALC. |
| In the Basic PWS 0002, Section C.4.3, can the Government please clarify whether a full time dedicated PM is required at the MA IDIQ contract level? If so, can the Government please provide the CDRL, performance requirements for this position at the contact level? | There is no billing/performance at the base IDIQ contract level, as no costs are to be incurred against the base contract. |
| Based on an affirmative answer, should it be assumed that the Government is willing to pay for a PM at the MA IDIQ for each of the IDIQ award winners. Please clarify? | There is no billing/performance at the base IDIQ contract level, as no costs are to be incurred against the base contract. |
| Should it be assumed that all TORs will have specific requirements for whether a dedicated TO PM will be required or whether it’s up to the offerors to decide how to manage and supervise employees at the TO level. Please clarify? | It will be the Contractor's discretion on how to manage and supervise employees at the TO level. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .