Amendment_0004_QAs.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 40 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W911QY-17-R-0012
About this file
Questions posed with answers and correlation to RFP changes as warranted.
View the file
Other files
Show all 28
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
RFP Q&A Matrix Amend 0001
| Company | Question No. | RFP Section | Question | From the RFP: | Response | RFP revision(s) | Concur/PM | Concur/Legal | Concur/BC |
| SAG | 1 | SF 1449 Cover Page | Please clarify the solicitation issue date. The SF1449 shows an issue date of 3 July 2017 but FEDBIZOPS shows the date to be 12 July 2017. | The SF1449 incorrectly showed 3 Jul 2017 as the issue date. The date of issue of this solicition was 12 July 2017 | |||||
| 2 | PWS, Page 11, paragraph 8.1 | Is the PM position separate from any specified labor category or is he/she one of the specified key personnel acting as the contract PM? Additionally, will the Government provide office space for the PM at Fort Belvoir? | 8.1 Contract management. The Contractor shall provide a program manager (PM) to adequately supervise all Contractor personnel during the period of this contract. The PM shall work onsite at Fort Belvoir, VA. The PM shall manage all work locations/assignments and act as the primary point of contact (POC) for the COR and KO regarding performance under this effort to ensure requirements and logistics of the contract are being met. The PM shall provide all aspects of TDY, CONUS and/or OCONUS (to include any SPOT reporting requirements), of Contractor personnel with COR coordination and approval. The PM shall ensure that any problems that cannot be resolved shall be referred back to the designated COR and/or KO for resolution. The PM shall be available to the COR and/or KO during normal duty hours. | Indirect cost only. See revision to Attachment 1, PWS, Paragraph 8.1 Contract Management. | Attach 1, PWS, 8.1 Contract management. The Contractor shall provide a program manager (PM) to adequately supervise all Contractor personnel during the period of this contract. The PM shall be an indirect cost and not an on-site labor category. The PM shall manage all work locations/assignments and act as the primary point of contact (POC) for the COR and KO regarding performance under this effort to ensure requirements and logistics of the contract are being met. The PM shall provide all aspects of TDY, CONUS and/or OCONUS (to include any SPOT reporting requirements), of Contractor personnel with COR coordination and approval. The PM shall ensure that any problems that cannot be resolved shall be referred back to the designated COR and/or KO for resolution. The PM shall be available to the COR and/or KO during normal duty hours. | ||||
| 3 | Instructions to Offerors, paragraph 6.3.7 | Is the Government asking for an index in addition to a table of contents? What exactly is tab indexing? | 6.3.7 Indexing - Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Indices and tables of contents do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes. | Tab indexing in terms of an electronic file is anticipated as a Blank sheet within the file with the title of the Section that is to immediately follow it. | |||||
| 4 | Attachment 2, Tab C | Where is the delineation between “required” and “desired” personnel requirements? The Evaluation Factors for Award para 2.3 describes the “standard” in terms of required and desired qualifications; however, those do not appear to be defined anywhere. | STANDARD: Majority of Key Personnel meet all of the required and some of the desired qualifications, the required education within the stated fields of study as stated in the PWS, some of the certifications required, and some experience is in support to SOF communities and/or Government Intelligence Agencies. | 1. See Revision to Attachment 8, paragraph 2.3 and Attachment 2, Tab C, column B title. | Attach 8, 2.3, STANDARD: Majority of Key Personnel meet all of the required and some of the desired qualifications, the required education within the stated fields of study as stated in the PWS, some of the certifications required, and some experience is in support to SOF communities and/or Government Intelligence Agencies. |
Attachment 2, Pricing Model, Tab C, Column B changed to read: Typical Duties and Qualifications 5 Section L, 7.2.2 Key Personnel and Attachment 4, Paragraph 2 There are 24 distinct labor categories in the Pricing Model. Attachments 4 list eight of these, by labor category title, as Key. See Revisions to Attachment 4, paragraph 2, Attachment 7, paragraphs 7.2.1 and 7.2.2. Revisions to Attachment 8, paragraph 2.2. Attachment 4, paragraph 2 has been revised to reduce the number of Key Personnel.
Attachment 7, Revise 7.2.1 Transition Plan, to add sentence immediately following: The percentage of personnel available immediately at contract award, percentage of recruit hiring to fully staff the initial planned requirement outlined in Table 1 to accommodate those Task Orders that end on 30 April 18 and the Plan to recruit for the Task Orders ending in late CY18, depicted in Table 2. One Resume shall be provided for each of the labor categories shown in tables 1 and 2 below. (The Offeror does not need to include a resume for each FTE under each labor category, the requirement is for just at least one resume per the labor category description). This is in addition to the resumes provided for Key Personnel in paragraph 7.2.2.
Attachment 8, paragraph 2.2, added as last sentence: The Offeror has provided resumes and Contingency Hiring letters for all of the personnel depicted in Table 1 and 2 of paragraph 7.2.1.
Revision to7.2.2 Key Personnel:...The qualifications and experience for each labor category expected to be required under the contract are specified in Attachment 2, Tab C. The Offeror shall include one resume for each of the FTE Key Personnel labor categories in Attachment 4, Special Contract Requirements, Paragraph 2. The Offeror shall clearly label the resume to identify the specific Labor category, location and expertise the submitted resume is intended to support.
| 1. IT Network Engineer - Senior | ||||
| 2. IT Software Engineer Senior | ||||
| 3. Network Engineer - Principal | ||||
| 4. Project Manager | ||||
| 5. Project Manager - Senior | ||||
| 6. Software Engineer-Senior | ||||
| 7. Subject Matter Expert - Sr | ||||
| 8. Subject Matter Expert-Principal | ||||
| The instructions state that the offeror shall include no more than two resumes per labor category. We understand that this requirement is defined by the labor category title and typical duties description. Addition of Expertise and Location define Positions rather than Labor Category. This means an offeror would present no less than seven and no more than fourteen resumes, and designate the specific Expertise and Location for which the resume is intended to support. For example, Network Engineer-Principle is a single Labor Category. Attachment 4 lists six Network Engineer- Principal Positions at two locations with two different expertise definitions. The requirement is to present at least one and no more than two resumes and specify the position (i.e. Springfield or Fort Bragg). Is this correct? | ||||
| If so we recommend section L 7.2.2, as reads “…clearly label the resume to identify the specific Labor Category…” be changed to read “clearly label the resume to identify the specific position, by location and expertise,…”. | See Revisions to Attachment 7, paragraph 7.2.2. | The Offeror shall clearly label the resume to identify the specific Labor category, location and expertise the submitted resume is intended to support. | ||
| 6 | Section L 7.2.1 Transition Plan. | Section L 7.2.1 Transition Plan. This section states that the Offeror may provide Contingency Hiring Letters with start dates related to the start of Task Orders. Neither section 7.2.2 nor Section M describes the need for, or evaluation method of Hiring Letters. We understand that offers may use Contingency Hire Letters to substantiate their transition plan, but these letters are not required for evaluation of key personnel. Is this understanding correct? | See revisions to Attachment 7, paragraph 7.2.1 and Attachment 8, paragraph 2.2. | Attach 7, 7.2.1 Transition Plan, The Offeror’s planning assumptions to recruit and hire personnel in order to sustain competence, minimize loss of capability and sustain continuity. The Offeror shall provide Contingency Hiring letters of planned personnel commensurate with the start dates for the Task Orders following the expiring Task Orders. |
Attach 8, paragraph 2.2, add the following to the STANDARD:...The Offeror has provided resumes and Contingency Hiring letters for all of the personnel depicted in Table 1 and 2 of paragraph 7.2.1 of Attachment 7.
7 FBO notice The FBO notice shows this as a “Presolicitation”. Please clarify The FBO notice posted on 12 Jul is notice of the Solicitation being posted as shown under "Changes".
| Trident Technoloties and Consulting (T2C) | 8 | Reference Section L of the RFP and Attachment 4 | Reference Section L of the RFP and Attachment 4. The RFP appears to require at least one, and no more than two resumes for every position on attachment 4. This would mean no less than 46 resumes and as many as 92 resumes. We assume the second resume per position is to demonstrate depth. If this interpretation is correct, we believe it is unduly burdensome for Offerors in the designated SB NAICS code, injects risks to the USG through restricted competition and induced excessive turnover. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. |
| Overly Burdensome. Requiring an offeror to obtain 46 resumes in less than 30 days would be a significant challenge for a business of any size, except for the incumbent contractor. Potential qualified candidates are either currently on this or similar tasks, and as such are difficult to reach during a normal duty day. No small business qualified under the designated NAICS will have the required HR and recruiting staff to secure, assess, vet, and format 46 candidates to the quality standards this contract deserves. To meet this requirement many companies will present resumes with the expectation that the candidate will not be available in April of 2018. While meeting the compliant standard, this approach does not accurately reflect on the staffing approach. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. | |||
| Risk to USG-Restricted Competition. The requirement for more than 70% of the workforces resumes gives a distinct and unfair advantage to the incumbent contractor. This is compounded by the short response time. The effect will be the screening out of companies who rate significantly high in the higher priority evaluative criteria of Transition and Management. Restricted competition reduces the USGs options and induces cost and performance risk. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. | |||
| Risk to USG- Transition. We understand the value in designating 46 positions as Key persons. This helps ensure continuity of work and ensures quality manning throughout the life of the contract. We also understand the customer’s strong desire to maintain a large portion of the incumbent workforce at the start of the contract. Requiring more than 70% of the resumes is at odds with this objective. Requiring identification and commitment of all key personnel at submission induces transition risk to the USG. A successful offeror may present 46 non-incumbent Key Persons. Upon award the USG may face the turn-over of more than 70% of the workforce. No organization can accept this without impact, least of all the SOF customers supported by this contract. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. | |||
| Personal Services Contract. The option to present back-up resumes, and their purpose is not well defined. If they represent a recruiting depth, they are unnecessary as this is evaluated in other factors. The screening of such a high percentage of resumes, and potential back-up candidates, approaches the characteristics of a Personal Services Contract. The GAO often cites a USG excessive role in employee selection as a de facto Personal Services Contract. Requiring 46 resumes at submission essentially becomes a screening criteria and is more important than the stated best value, non PSC evaluative criteria. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. | |||
| Recommendation: We recommend that the RFP be adjusted to require one resume per Labor category Title (i.e. Project Manager, Project Manager- Senior) from within the list of Key Persons from Attachment 4. This would give an eight (8) resume requirement, maintain Key Person Designations, open competition, and avoid all risks of establishing a de facto PSC. | See answers to questions above, and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. |
| KTC | 9 | "DRFP", page 3/33 | CLIN has “45,000,000” and Units = LOT. | This is not a DRFP. In regards to the quantities shown in Section B of the RFP, those quantities are the max units that can be ordered under this IDIQ. The Unit price is anticipated as $1. ea. |
| Recommend change Units to be “Task Order” or “Delivery Order” and Qty to be “Est 200”. | ||||
| 10 | Attach 4, page 2/23 | “Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors)” | ||
| Apparently followed by two blank lines to be filled in (but overlapped with the text on our copy) | ||||
| Does this mean that the contractor is to specify which of the 46 personnel from the list are Key?Are no corporate personnel considered Key (e.g. Task Request Order Manager; Contract Manager)? Are TWO Key Persons from the list sufficient?If not, what is the required quantity of Key Personnel? | The "two blank lines" are not an indication of the number of Key Personnel. The table shown below the "lines" includes a column to be filled in with the "Name" of the proposed "key person". This Attachment (Attach 4, Special Contract Requirements) becomes an attachment of any resulting contract. See also revisions to Attachment 4, paragraph 2. | |||
| 11 | Attach 4, page 2/23 | “Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors)” Followed by a Table of 46 positions. | ||
| Are offerors to provide resumes for all 46 positions? | See answers to questions above and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8. | |||
| 12 | Attachment 7, Page 9/2; 7.2.2 | “Offerors shall include the names proposed for Key personnel in this paragraph for inclusion of this document to…” | ||
| Which is “this” document –Attachment 4 or Attachment 7? | Attach 4, Special Contract Requirements, will become an attachment to any resulting contract. | |||
| 13 | Attachment 7 Vs SF1449 Block 8. Page 1/21;1.1 | Attach 7 Instructions: “…11:59:00 pm Eastern Standard Time Vs Block 8 "Local" time. | ||
| Current time is Daylight. The ARMDEC system appears to use Eastern Local Time. Recommend remove “Standard”. | Due date and time of offers is 11:59:00 pm Eastern time. | |||
| 14 | CDRL A0001, page 1, Block 11 | CDRL 1 Kickoff Meeting, Block 11; recommend alter to be something similar to 10 Days post award. | revise block 16 of CDRL to clarify corresponding block being tailored. | |
| 15 | Comments to Acquisition Strategy | We ask that this acquisition be further Set Aside in the SDVOSB track of OASIS-SB. This is appropriate for DoD work and will contribute to making Department-wide goals. If two or more qualified respondents are SDVOSB, this should be Set Aside in that socio-economic category; KTC is one | The determination to set aside this acquisition for Small Business has been made. |
Leo Tech, LLC 16 Would you consider changing the requirement of the Facility Clearance at time of proposal submission? No. Requirements are as stated in the RFP, Attachment 7, Paragraph 7.1.
Future Technologies, Inc 17 Instructions for Offerors Section 7.2.2 state we have include the names of Key Personnel in Attachment 4, Paragraph 2. It shows forty six (46) positions. Do we have to show the names for all forty six (46) positions? See answers to questions above and revisions to Attachments 4, 7 and 8.
| Praetorian standard, Inc | 18 | Attachment 4 – Special Contract Requirements and Attachment 7 and Addendum to FAR 52-212-1 Instructions to Offerors – | The proposal due date provides an ominously short time to identify, qualify staff and obtain a commitment from each potential Key staff member to support the contract. This requirement infers the government is predisposed to give preferential selection treatment to the incumbent contractor due to the fact that the incumbent would be the only company having all of the required Key positions currently staffed. It is unreasonable to assume that a small business, without perfect RFP knowledge, would have identified staff with the professional qualifications and clearances necessary for this contract prior to the RFP issuance. It is equally unreasonable for the government to assume a small business could recruit and qualify the requisite number of key personnel during the short bid period. | The Government has identified the Key Personnel in Attachment 4, Paragraph 2. See also revised Attachment 4, provided in Amendment 0001 | CONCUR - CH |
| Paragraph 2.c.-Key Personal Chart requires the names of 46 key personnel; Attachment 7, para 7.2.2, requires the contractor to provide names and no more than two resumes per labor category (46 names x 2?) proposed to be included in Key Personnel requirements. | · To provide a more competitive bidding process for small businesses, would the government provide names of the current contractor staff assigned to the key positions and make those staff members available for recruiting interviews. | The Government is not in the business of revealing current contractor staff to anyone outside the Government. | CONCUR - CH | ||
| · Would the government consider reducing the number of Key personnel to a number closer to an industry and Federal Government standard (less than 10%). | The Government has identified the Key Personnel in Attachment 4, Paragraph 2. See also revised Attachment 4, provided in Amendment 0001 | CONCUR - CH | |||
| We would encourage the government to ensure that any staff members choosing to make themselves available for an interview would suffer no negative repercussions for their actions. | The Government has no role in managing the contractor's staff. | CONCUR - CH |
| K2 Solutions | 19 | The statement of work and evaluation criteria includes descriptions of the qualifications and experience of key personnel. Attachment 4, para 2c, requires names of 46 key personnel. Attachment 7, para 7.2.2, requires the contractor to provide names and no more than two resumes per labor category (46 names x 2?) proposed to be included in Key Personnel. | As written, it is hard to read these requirements as anything other than heavily favoring the current incumbent contractor.Given the proposal due date, the time frame for identifying, qualifying, and obtaining a commitment from each prospective staff member is untenable.Due to the unreasonably high number of resume and commitment requirements, would the Government consider either reducing the number to include only true key personnel (5-10% of workforce, normal standards) or providing the names of incumbent workforce for recruiting activity while also extending the proposal submission date? | See revised Attachment 4 provided in Amendment 0001 | CONCUR - CH |
| 20 | PWS states that this is a “Non-Personal Services” contract. The requirements provide information that could be interpreted otherwise. Examples applied against the questions used to identify personal services contracts from FAR 37.104 Personal Services Contracts (Caution-https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2037_1.html < Caution-https://www.acquisition.gov/sites/default/files/current/far/html/Subpart%2037_1.html > ), para (d) are; | Since the tasks are not deliverable based and appear to be civil service/Government staff type support for routine and skilled staffing function requirements, will the Government consider revising them to meet and/or comply with traditional non-personal services guidance and build task oriented, deliverable based, objective requirements? | The Government has made the determination that this contract is for non-personal services based on TO PWSs that will be task oriented, deliverable based, with objective requirements. | CONCUR - CH | |
| - (1) Work is Government site. | Confirmed | CONCUR - CH | |||
| - (2) All equipment is GFE. | Confirmed | CONCUR - CH | |||
| - (3) The tasks are all work normally performed by civil service employees with requirements common to Government site employees without detailed tasks to accomplish. Specific examples are:Procurement Support. The Contractor shall perform administrative tasks; Contracting Support. The Contractor shall provide input to the Contracting Office with work products that are accurate and free of any errors for Government Contracting Officer approval.;Financial Services Support. The Contractor shall perform a variety of functions related to PMSP’s financial management operations.; and5.7 Administrative. The Contractor shall provide: typing, word processing, data entry and reproductive services. | Government employees are not performing the expected efforts. There may be some tasks that are similar to Government efforts but there are distinctions between the two types of work | CONCUR - CH | |||
| - (4) The services are comparable or meeting comparable needs as those performed by civil service personnel. | Contractor service compares to but is not exactly that performed by civil service personnel | CONCUR - CH | |||
| - (5) They last well beyond 1 year with a 5 year ordering period. | Task Order periods of performance will not necessarily last well beyond one year. | CONCUR - CH | |||
| - (6) Government supervision is implicit in the very administrative nature of the tasks. | There will be no Government Supervision of contractors performing under the prospective contract. Contracting Officer's Representatives and Technical Monitors will provide oversight and quality assurance effort relative to the contract deliverables. | CONCUR - CH |
| Command Services & Support, Inc. | 21 | Go/No Go Criteria | In attachment 1, paragraph 6.3.1, Volume I is given a page limit of 15 pages. The requirements for Volume I located in paragraph 7.1 of the same attachment list the only requirement for that volume as whether offerors possess a TS Facility Clearance. This could be accomplished with a printout from the Industrial Security Facility Database (ISFD), which is 1 page. Could the Government clarify if this would fulfill the requirement given in 6.3.1 and 7.1? | The Government has provided a limitation of 15 pages for Offerors to supply the necessary documentation to provide verification that the offeror does possess a TS Facility Clearance. | CONCUR - CH |
| 22 | Key Personnel | In Attachment 4, Paragraph 2, the Government lists 46 labor categories in the Key Personnel table. Would the Government clarify if all of these labor categories are considered key and therefore require resumes, or if offerors may determine which of these labor categories are key by filling in their name in the provided table. | The Government has identified the Key Personnel in Attachment 4, Paragraph 2. See also revised Attachment 4, provided in Amendment 0001 | CONCUR - CH |
Amend 0002
| Company | Question No. | RFP Section | Question | From the RFP: | Response | RFP revision(s) | Concur/PM | Concur/Legal | Concur/BC |
| Mayvin | 1 | PWS Section 4.1 General (Security) states “Designated individual(s) supporting this contract shall be cleared at the TOP SECRET level with SCI eligibility in JPAS at the start of this contract and must be able to obtain SCI access within 30 days of filling an assigned billet. Government. All other Contractor team individuals shall be cleared in JPAS at the SECRET level.” | Is the word “Government.” that appears between the two complete sentences in this section part of a missing sentence, or a typo? | Yes, See revised Attachment 1, PWS | Removed | ||||
| 2 | PWS Section 8.1 ‘Contract Management’ states that there will be a Program Manager on-site at Ft. Belvoir, however there is no job description for this position in the LCATs (Attachment 2), and this position is not included in the pricing sheet. | Is the Government’s intention for PWS Section 8.1 for a full-time, on-site, Government paid Program Manager? If so: | See PWS revised by Amendment 0001 | ||||||
| 3 | Will the Government provide a labor category (LCAT) description in attachment 2, and an updated pricing sheet to include this position? | N/A See above | |||||||
| 4 | Or, will the Government clarify which labor category this requirement will be provided by? | N/A See above | |||||||
| 5 | PWS Section 8.5, Government Skills Verification | This section states “All Contractor personnel shall have, at the time of hiring, the necessary requirements for experience and special qualifications, as stated in Attachment 1, Tab D of Section J for Employee Qualifications and Experience incorporated upon Contract award.” | See answers below | ||||||
| Did the Government intend for this section to reference Attachment 2 Tab B, Labor Categories? | The correct referenc in 8.5 is Attachment 2, Tab C. See revised Attachment 1, PWS | Revise | |||||||
| 6 | PWS Section 9.0 | In paragraph 9.0, the PWS references “attachment Five (5) to the Contract for specific Travel/ODC Reimbursement Requirements” should it state “Attachment 4”? | Yes, See revised Attachment 1, PWS | Revise | |||||
| 7 | PWS Section 9.2 | Should reference in 9.2 to Attachment 5, Special Contract Requirements actually read “Attachment 4”? | Yes, See revised Attachment 1, PWS | Revise | |||||
| 8 | Attachment 3, DD254 | Did the Government intend to include Fort Eustis, VA as a performance location on the DD254? | See revised DD 254, attachment 3, indicating Ft. Eustis as an additional place of performance. | ||||||
| 9 | Attachment 6, CDRLs A002 and A003 Page 1, Block 16 of CDRL A003 states “The contractor shall conduct a quarterly In-process Review (IPR) that contains a consolidation of the monthly reporting deliverables listed in paragraph 7.3 of this statement of work and submit to the Government.” | Did the Government intend to reference paragraph 7.2 of the PWS? | Yes, See revised Attachment 6, CDRLS A002 and A003 | Revise CDRL | |||||
| 10 | Attachment 7, Instructions to Offerors Section 7.2.1; Table 2, under Transition Plan, states "Those task orders ending later CY 18", however the PoP is being shown in either later CY17, or right at the beginning of CY18. | When the Government references TOs ending late in CY18, do they mean ending in late CY17? | Periods of Performance for the Transition Plans are for evaluation purposes. The Contract Period of Performance will start prior to task orders being issued. |
| 11 | Attachment 7, Addendum to Instructions to Offerors, Volume II Description, Section 7.2.2, Key Personnel, Page 9 states “Key Personnel positions and locations are listed in Attachment 4, Special Contract Requirements, Paragraph 2. The qualifications and experience for each labor category expected to be required under the contract are specified in Attachment 2, Tab C. The Offeror shall include no more than two resumes per labor category proposed to be Key Personnel.” | (a) The Key Personnel list identifies labor categories that do not have a direct equivalents/maps in Attachment 2, Tabs A, B, or C. Did the Government intend for this listing in Attachment 7 to list the labor categories as follows: | See revised Attachment 4 to Amendment 0001 and Attachment 7 also revised with this Amendment. |
| - IT Network Engineer – Senior to read Network Engineer – Senior? | See Above | ||
| - IT Software Engineer – Senior to read Software Engineer – Senior? | See Above | ||
| - Project Manager to read Project Manager – Senior? | See Above | ||
| - Subject Manager – Senior to read Subject Matter Expert – Senior? | See Above |
(b) Did the Government intend all abbreviations “Sr” to mean Senior? See above
(c) If the above corrections are what the Government intended, then are the 6 required Key Personnel LCATs? See Revised Attachment 4 to Amendment 0001
| 1- Network Engineer - Senior | |||
| 2 - Network Engineer - Principal | |||
| 3 - Project Manager - Senior | |||
| 4 - Software Engineer - Senior | |||
| 5 - Subject Matter Expert - Senior | |||
| 6 - Subject Matter Expert - Principal | |||
| 12 | Attach 7: Instructions; Paragraph 7.2.1 This paragraph references a two-phased transition plan to accommodate those TOs that end on 30 April 2018 and those than end in the last two months of CY 18. Table 1 shows TOs ending 30 April 2018. Table 2 references TOs with 1 January 2018 start dates, and 1 December 2017 start dates. | Should this section reference a three-phased transition plan to accommodate the three different start dates shown in tables 1 and 2? | A two phased Transition Plan is sufficent. |
| First Division Consulting | 13 | Is this a new or follow on requirement? If it is a follow on, please let us know the current contract number(s) and who the incumbent contractors supporting it are. | Yes, Mayvin Consulting Group Inc. W911QY-14-D-0075 | |||
| 14 | Attach_7_Instructions & Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 6.3, pages 2 and 3 | How many of the requested 57 Key Personnel currently have TS/SCI Clearances? | The RFP reflects current mission requirements | |||
| 15 | Attach_7_Instructions & Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 6.3, pages 2 and 3 | How many of the 57 personnel in Table 1 were Key Personnel on the former contract? | The RFP reflects current mission requirements | |||
| 16 | Will the Government answer questions periodically (prior to 15 days before the proposal due date as many questions are urgent/needed early to inform the proposal process. | Yes. | ||||
| 17 | Attach_1_PWS. 2.5, page 2. | Does the Governent anticipate awarding a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) (per FAR 16.202) contract or a Level of Effort (LOE) Term (per FAR 16.207) contract? Section 2.5 with the reference to adjusting the amount that the contractor submits in an invoice and would be paid would apply for a FFP LOE contract. | Entire section 2.5 | The requirement is FFP with the referenced term included | ||
| 18 | Attach_1_PWS. 2.5, page 2. | Is reference to Attachment 12, supposed to be Attachment 2, the pricing model? | "The price of the firm-fixed price services for that period shall be adjusted downward using the fully loaded labor rates contained in the PMSP Pricing Model, Attachment 12, on an hourly basis until the position is filled with a qualified candidate." | Yes, See revised Attachment 1, PWS | ||
| 19 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 2(c), Page 2-4 | This is a non-personal services contract. Why does the Government request names of the key personnel? | "Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors):" | Names of Key Personnel with qualifications provides insights to assure mission requirements can be fulfilled. | ||
| 20 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 2(c), Page 2-4 | Does the Government consider all 46 of these labor categories to be Key Positions? | "Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors):" | See revised Attachment 4 issued with Amendment 0001 | ||
| 21 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements | If the Government consideres 100% the positions on the contract as Key Positions, this gives an unfair competitive advantage to the incumbent contractor and will restrict competition. Will the Government consider changing the requirement to six Key Positions, one of each Labor Category, regardless of expertise. | "Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors):" | See revised Attachment 4 issued with Amendment 0001 | ||
| 22 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements (and Attach 7, table 1), 2(c), Page 3 | Typos "Enginer" and "Exeprt" | "Key Personnel (Name in Table below to be filled in by Offerors):" | Corrected in Amendment 0001 | ||
| 23 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. Sections 8,9, & 10 pages 12-13 | Is this cost proposal a part of the IDIQ proposal or will task order proposals be required after IDIQ award? | "The Contractor shall be required to submit a FFP/Cost proposal for accomplishing the total effort inclusive of all labor, material and travel costs, as appropriate. The contractor shall be required to deliver the specified services within the specified time and FFP/Cost amount. " | The cost proposal is part of the IDIQ proposal. The awardee will be solicited for Task Order proposals for specific mission requirements. | ||
| 24 | Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 9 Page 13 | Will these task orders be FFP Level of Effort or FFP | "The Contractor shall be required to submit a FFP/Cost proposal for accomplishing the total effort inclusive of all labor, material and travel costs, as appropriate. The contractor shall be required to deliver the specified services within the specified time and FFP/Cost amount. " | FFP | ||
| 25 | Attach_7_Instructions. 6.3.3, pages 3 | Will Government allow contingent offer letters to be exempt from page count? | Page limitation for Volume II is listed as 50 as a maximum for the entire volume | See revised Attach 7, paragraph 6.3.3 attached to this Amendment. | Revised | |
| 26 | Attach_7_Instructions & Attach_4_Special Contract Requirements. 6.3, pages 2 and 3 | Table 1 in Attach 7 has 47 labor categories (54 FTEs); Attach 4 has 46 labor categories. | Tables 1 and 2 in Attachment 7 include more than just "Key Personnel" categories | |||
| 27 | Where do our customers send their PPQ's? | The Contracting Officer's Name and email address: Lee A. Hess, lee.a.hess.civ@mail.mil, as identified in Attach 7, paragraph 8. | ||||
| 28 | Why 100% have TS/SCI? | Mission requirement. | ||||
| 29 | What changed since last time. | The mission requirement is reflected in the RFP. | ||||
| 30 | Attach 4 Key Personnel Table. Page 2 | There are 4 Labor Cats called Project Manager-but only Project Manager Senior is listed in the Excel sheets | See revised Attach 4 to Amendment 0001. | |||
| 31 | Attachment 7, Tables 1 and 2. page 6 | There are a number of Labor cats in Table 1 and 2 that don't correspond to the Government Labor Categories or pricing model - Admin Support, Budget Analyst, Program Manager, Program Manager -Senior, Subject Matter Expert Principal, Program Analyst, Project Manager, IT Systems Administrator, and Physical Security Specialist. | See revised Attachment 7 to this Amendment. |
Amend 0004
| Question No. | RFP Section | Question | From the RFP: | Response | RFP revision(s) |
| 1 | Reference the answers to Q&A and the amendment. | The amendment failed to correct some inconsistencies between sections / attachments of the RFP, and fails to clarify the significant resume requirement. We have several questions and anticipate other offerors will as well. We anticipate that the Government will take some time to answer these questions and issue another amendment, which will significantly impact offerrors’ approach and tasks required to be compliant. We strongly recommend the USG extend the submission date until no earlier than 30 days from the answer to the final round of questions and resultant amendment. | The RFP due date is extended to 30 Sep 17 11:59 pm ET in order to allow interested parties ample time to prepare and submit an offer. The RFP is also amended to provide further amplification of the resume requirements. | Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 | |
| 2 | Reference Section L, 7.2.2 Key Personnel, 7.2.1Transition Plan, and Attachment 4, Paragraph 2 | The answers to questions and Amendment one do not clarify resume requirements. The RFP requires offerors to cross reference three separate tables against Tab C of the Pricing Model. As written, the resume requirement is confusing and subject to reasonable different interpretations. |
| We recommend the RFP be amended to include a single table in the instructions to offerors that captures the resume requirement. This can be done without affecting the designation of personnel as Key at contract award. Each Position / Labor category that requires a resume and Letter of Commitment should be captured as a single line, including Labor Category, Expertise, and Location. | See Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 | Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 | |
| 3 | Reference Section L, 7.2.2 Key Personnel, 7.2.1Transition Plan, and Attachment 4, Paragraph 2 | Any interpretation of the resume and Letter of Commitment presents an unrealistic and overly burdensome requirement to any offeror other than the incumbent, and does not meet the agencies specified and implied intent to minimize transition risk. The Key Person alone list would require 29 resumes and letters of commitment. Offerors have less than 30 days to identify, assess, recruit, vet, and execute a letter of commitment with what the USG has identified as highly skilled, low-density skill sets. As stated in answers to questions, it is not the USG’s duty to report on incumbents or monitor employee agreements regarding engagement with other offerors. It is in the USGs interest to be aware when this is occurring and understand the impact of these practices on the acquisition strategy. The impact, along with the short suspense, is especially burdensome for a Small Business. |
Offerors who successfully identify and get the commitment of qualified personnel who are not incumbent employees will hire the approved and qualified candidates. The resume is requirement is between 29 and 55 personnel. This will mean a turnover of between 43% and 82%.
We recommend the Government reduce the resume requirement to no more than 15% of the workforce anticipated with the two task orders defined in the RFP.
Will the USG extend the submission date t enable offerors to effectively engage the incumbent workforce, fully vet alternates, and prepare LOCs?
Will the government accept a transition plan that includes greater than 40% turnover? Will an offeror proposing turnover of greater than 40% be able to achieve a Good or Outstanding rating?
Is it’s the USG’s intention to encourage a successful offer to rescind offers to qualified, non-incumbent candidates, with signed LOCs, in order to enable incumbent employees to remain on task ?
| The Government's mission is dependent upon a contractor's ability to provide required personnel. The additional time afforded to submit offers allows for the recruiting necessary to fulfill the Government's mission | ||
| 4 | Reference: Attachment 7 – Instructions to Offerors – 7.4 Volume IV-Price sections 7.4.1, 7.4.3, and 7.4.5 | It is our understanding IAW Section 7.4.3, Offeror’s are to provide fully burdened labor rates which will be the maximum allowable rates used throughout the life of the contract and the Offeror may offer discounts as part of individual task order proposals. However, Section 7.4.1 requires that Offeror’s identify those subcontractors that will be used to supplement an Offeror’s work force and include the subcontractor’s rate in the PMSP Labor Rate Pricing Model. |
Given that the rates being proposed are the maximum allowable rates to be used throughout the life of the contract regardless of which Offeror’s team member or members will be performing the work we recommend that the USG remove the requirement to provide individual subcontractor rates and allow Offeror’s to provide ceiling rates applicable to the entire Offerors’ Team.
| If the USG agrees, the requirement in Section 7.4.5 for Offeror’s to submit a proposal for all subcontractors is not necessary. Please confirm. | It is encumbent upon an offeror to identify the total resources required to perform by providing subcontractor resources to augment wherever the prime contractor does not have those resources. | ||
| 5 | Reference Attachment 2 – PMSP Pricing Model and Attachment 7 – Instructions to Offerors – Table 1 and Table 2. | Table 1 and 2 reference multiple labor categories that are not included in Tab C, Labor Categories of the PMSP Pricing Model. We recommend that the Government cross-walk and correct the labor categories in Tables 1 and 2 and the labor categories provided in Tab C of the PMSP Pricing Model and reconcile the differences. For instance, Table 1 and 2 includes labor categories for a Program Manager and a Program Manager – Senior, however Tab C only includes a job description for a Project Manager Senior. Table 2 requires a Subject Manager-Senior, the closest title in Tab C is Subject Matter Expert-Senior. Table 1 includes labor category for a Physical Security Specialist, however Tab C only includes a job description for a Personnel Security Specialist Senior. |
| As these inconsistencies significantly impact recruiting and preparation of letters of commitment, we recommend an extension of the submission date. | See revised Attachment 7 included in Amendment 0002, see also revised Attachment 7 to this Amendment (0003) which corrects additional typographical errors. | Revised Attachment 7 | |
| 6 | Attachment 7 – Instructions to Offers – 7.2.1 – Transition Plan - Resume Requirement. | In reference to the question 5 above. Once all the labor categories have been standardized across Tables 1 and 2 and Tab C we recommend that the Government provide Offerors an updated table specifically identifying the labor category, location and number of required resumes. |
| In addition, since there is still confusion and questions on the labor categories that are not matching up in the tables and who and how many resumes are required; we strongly recommend the due date is adjusted to allow for the Government to correct the RFP and allow the offerors time to react to the correct requirement for resumes. | Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 | ||
| 7 | Reference PWS, Section 1.2 – Non-Personal Services and Attachment 7 – Instructions to Offers – 7.2.2 – Key Personnel. | The RFP requires Offeror’s to include specific names in the Key Personnel Table and that the Government will incorporate this into the resultant contact award. This requirement appears to favor the incumbent contractor and also favors a “personal services like” contract, whereby the Government is ordering/dictating specific names vs requiring a Prime to fill the positions with qualified people per the position description. |
| Please remove the requirement for names in the resultant contact award. | It is imperative for the Government to assess an individuals' capacity to perform the required efforts under the prospective contract and can only do so with the assurance of having named individuals proposed by an offeror. There are no personal service efforts included in the contract requirements. | ||
| 8 | RFP Amendment 0001- Attachment 4- Special Contract Requirements | When the Government updated the Key Personnel and Subject Matter Expert table under Section 2 to spell out the word “Senior”, all other sections containing “Sr” (i.e., Section 5, etc) were changed as well. Every word with”Sr” was changed. For example dysrhythmias was changed to dySeniorhythmias. These errors occur throughout the document. |
Recommend review of the Special Contract Requirements for potential errors. Typos were identified in an internal review and were corrected - unfortunately the typos re-occurred in the Amendment material and are now corrected again.
| 9 | Attach_4 | ||
| Section 2, Table | Will the government clarify which positions on the contract will be on government site and which will be on contractor site? | Labor categories indentified in Attachment 7 are all on government site personnel. Any personnel required to work at a contractor site will be identified in individual Task Orders. |
Amendment 1 revised Attachment 7 Section 7.2.2 Key Personnel paragraph two contains the following statement:
“The Offeror shall include one resume for each of the FTE Key Personnel labor categories in Attachment 4, Special Contract Requirements, Paragraph 2.”
| 10 | The inclusion of the words “FTE” and “labor categories” as interchangeable in this statement causes confusion on the interpretation of the Key Personnel requirements. Please confirm that the Government’s requirement for Key Personnel is for one resume for each of the Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) for a total of 29; or, provide clarification on the Key Personnel Resume requirement. | See revised Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 | Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 |
| 11 | Can the Government clarify the labor category mapping between the table found in the Amendment 1 revised documents Attachment 7 Section 7.2.1 Transition Plan and Attachment 2 Tab C Labor Categories? It appears that the following labor categories in Attachment 7 Section 7.2.1 Transition Plan do not have an equivalent or exact match with those found in Attachment 2 Tab C Labor Categories. We do not want to make assumptions, therefore, we request he Government clarify the following labor categories: | See revision to Attachment 7, Section 7.2.1 provided in Amendment 0002 as well as revisions to Attachment 7 in this Amendment (0004) | Attachment 7 - Detailed Labor Category Resume requirement added to Table 1, 7.2.1 |
| Admin Support | |||
| Budget Analyst | |||
| IT Network Engineer-senior | |||
| IT Software Engineer-senior | |||
| IT Systems Administrator | |||
| Physical Security Specialist | |||
| Project Manager | |||
| Program Manager | |||
| Program Manager - Senior | |||
| Program Analyst |
12 PWS 8.5 The government mentions, “All Contractor personnel shall have, at the time of hiring, the necessary requirements for experience and special qualifications, as stated in Attachment 1, Tab D of Section J for Employee Qualifications and Experience incorporated upon Contract award.” Will the government provide Attachment 1, Tab D of Section J? PWS 8.5 was corrected with Amendment 0002 to read" "All Contractor personnel shall have, at the time of hiring, the necessary requirements for experience and special qualifications, as stated in Attachment 2, Tab C of Section J for Employee Qualifications and Experience incorporated upon Contract award."
| 13 | Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C | Are there any other requirements, qualifications, or certifications required for the resumes of key personnel besides what is written in Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C? | No | |||
| 14 | Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements 2.c; | |||||
| Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C | In Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements paragraph 2, there is a position title for a Subject Manager-Senior, but there is not a labor category for this position in Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C. What are the requirements, qualifications, and certifications required for this position? | Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements paragraph 2, does not include a position title for a "Subject Manager-Senior". There are "Project Manager - Senior" and "Subject Matter Expert - Senior" | ||||
| 15 | Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements 2.c; | |||||
| Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C | Is there any difference between the requirements for a Project Manager and Project Manager-Senior as shown in Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements 2.c? | This was in error, and Attachment 4 has been corrected by Amendment 0001 to read "Project Manager-Senior" | Attachment 4 is updated | |||
| 16 | Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements 2.c; | |||||
| Attachment 2 PMSP Pricing Model, Tab C | Is there any difference between the position of IT Software Engineer-Sr and the position of Software Engineer Sr as shown in Attachment 4 Special Contract Requirements 2.c ? | See Attachment 4 corrected by Amendment 0001. | ||||
| 17 | PWS 4.1 | The Customer states “Designated individual(s) supporting this contract shall be cleared at the TOP SECRET level with SCI eligibility in JPAS at the start of this contract and must be able to obtain SCI access within 30 days of filling an assigned billet. All other Contractor team individuals shall be cleared in JPAS at the SECRET level.” Will the customer define who the “designated individuals” and who “all other Contractor team individuals” are? | Personnel identified in Attachment 7, 7.2.1, Table 1 and 2 have had Clearance requirements "designated". | Attachment 7 is updated | ||
| 18 | N/A | Will the Customer provide the projected award date? | The projected award date is in the 1Q FY 18. | |||
| 19 | Attach. 4, 8.10; |
Attach. 7, 7.4.3;
| PWS 9.1 | Which employees will need to use the Contractor’s facility? | After the IDIQ contract is awarded, a Task Order PWS will provide details if the contractor's facility is the place of performance | |
| 20 | Attach. 4, 8.10; |
Attach. 7, 7.4.3;
| PWS 9.1 | Where should the Contractor’s facility be located? | An offeror may propose any location for its facility where performance may take place | |
| 21 | Attach. 4, 8.10; |
Attach. 7, 7.4.3;
| PWS 9.1 | What will the Contractor’s facility be used for? | After the IDIQ contract is awarded, a Task Order PWS will provide details if the contractor's facility is a place of performance | |||
| 22 | Attach. 7, 7.2.1; Attach. 2 | Attachment 7 – 7.2.1 says, “…the offeror is prepared to assume full contract responsibility from the incumbent contractor with a maximum of 120 and a minimum of 30 days from contract award date.” However, according to attachment 2, projected contract start is Sept. 30, 2017. With this timeline, a 120-day transition is not possible. Please explain the discrepancy. | Attachment 2 is updated to reflect that 30 Sep 17 is not to be construed as the start date for the prospective contract. | Attachment 2 is updated | |
| 23 | In order to accurately price the contractor site costs, will the government please provide a distribution of labor hours for each base/state and each labor category and for both the government and the contractor sites? | After the IDIQ contract is awarded, a Task Order PWS will provide details if the contractor's facility is a place of performance | |||
| 24 | Are there any requirements, restrictions, or limitations as to the location of each contractor site? | No | |||
| 25 | Attachment 8 Section 2.4 Factor 4 | 2.4 Factor 4. Management Plan says, “Offeror’s outlined plans describe recruitment, development, training…” | |||
| What type of development and training is the Government referring to | It is encumbent upon the offeror to define appropriate development and training required to fulfill requirements under the contract |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .