QA_-_Questions_and_Answers_Amendment_0002.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 13 KB Posted
- Attached to
- AMENDMENT 0005 Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W911QY-17-R-0029
About this file
This document provides a questions and answers file and federal contract opportunity notice regarding a scientific and technical development support services contract. The U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Natick Contracting Division intends to issue solicitation W911QY-17-R-0029 as a 100% small business set-aside to provide services including scientific and technical development support, program management and operational support, laboratory management support, clinical research coordination support, protocol review support, physiological support, psychological support, veterinarian and animal care support, statistical support, polysomnographic support, clinical monitoring support and administrative support at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research in Silver Spring, Maryland. The solicitation will be issued on March 10th, 2017 via the Federal Business Opportunities website with quotes due on April 11th, 2017. The contract will have a base period and four option periods exercisable at the government's discretion and utilize firm-fixed pricing.
Questions and Responses.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment_C_-_Price_Proposal_Form-_revised_Amendment_0005.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Amendment_0002.pdf | ||
| Attachment_C_-_Price_Proposal_Form-_revised_Amendment_0002.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| AMENDMENT_0001_-_ALL_QUESTIONS_AND_RESPONSES.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_A_-_Labor_Categories_and_Descriptions-_revised.docx | DOCX document | |
| AMENDMENT_0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment_C_-_Price_Proposal_Form-_revised.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| B_-_Past_Performance-_revised.docx | DOCX document | |
| W911QY-17-R-0029.pdf | ||
| B_-_Past_Performance.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_C_-_Price_Proposal_Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment_A_-_Labor_Categories_and_Descriptions.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 12
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
Sheet1
| Document Name | Section Number | Page | Question | Responses |
| Amendment 1 QAs, row 95 | A contractor submitted a question about page counts, referencing the three task management plan (TMP) deliverables. The government’s answer stated that Section L had been revised, but we cannot find any revised language on page counts (i.e., Table 1 in L.8.3). |
Regarding Volume II Technical Approach:
Is the 50-page limit inclusive of the three proposal deliverables for the TMP (Deliverable #1- Task Management Plan , Deliverable #4 - Incoming Transition Plan, and Deliverable #8 - Quality Control Plan)? That is, the 50 pages should include those three deliverables plus the technical and management approach.
| The page limit excludes the proposal deliverables identified in Section L.8.7.1. | ||
| 2. L.8.2.5 Glossary | Should the glossaries for the five proposal volumes include the RFP-provided glossary, or only those terms that the contractor introduces in its proposal? | The glossaries in the proposal shall include only those terms the Offeror introduces. |
| 3. L.8.3 Table I, Volume III Personnel (QA row 95 implies some page counts have been revised in the updated RFP) | Given the reduced number of key personnel resumes, should the page count for Volume III be reduced from 120 pages? Are there limits to page count for each key personnel resume? Is it correct that this volume should be inclusive of resumes, letters of intent, and the staffing plans (no appendices, no page-count exclusions)? | The page limit remains at 120 pages for Volume III. There are no exclusions. The page limit includes all requirements stated in Section L.8.8.1, as revised in Amendment 0001. |
| 4. L.8.3 Table I, Volume IV Past Performance, QA row 95, QA row 101, L.8.9.1.1 | The QA row 101 states that contractors must submit a minimum of two complete past performance questionnaires for the prime offeror and a minimum of one complete past performance questionnaire for each subcontractor performing 25% or more of the total labor positions. |
| Does the government want contractors to submit copies in Volume IV of the questionnaire “packages” that they send to clients? That is, the government would have a set of the questionnaires for reference. | The Offerors shall not include copies of the questionaire "packages" that were sent to clients in the proposal package. The completed questionaires should come directly from the Offeror's client to the Government as directed in Attachment B. The completed questionaires received directly from clients by the Government are excluded from the page limitation. | ||
| 4. L.8.3 Table I, Volume IV Past Performance, QA row 95, QA row 101, L.8.9.1.1 | Does the government want a written description of the contractors’ performance -on each project that is selected for a questionnaire – submitted in Volume IV? L.8.9.1.1 simply states that Volume IV should be a “past performance submission.” It is unclear what information the government requires for Volume IV. Is there a revised page count for Volume IV, which currently stands at 75 pages? | Section L 8.9.1 states: The Offeror shall submit a narrative description of overall past performance (preceding three years only) for the same or similar Government contracts covering the breadth of the project, anticipated completion and actual completion, and how it relates to the current scope of work. If the Offeror have limited Government contracting experience, a description of similar contracts with commercial entities, local and/or state governments should be included, if relevant. Information furnished concerning these efforts shall be similar to that requested of Government contracts. The page limit remains at 75 pages. The page limits are a maximum not a minimum. | |
| 5. Amendment 1, revised PWS, RFP Section L.8.7.1 | Amendment 1 includes a revised PWS, Sections 1.0 – 14.0, including a Section 5.0 Statement of Work (SOW). Given the length of the full PWS, and the Section L.8.7.1 instructions stating “The Offeror shall include it’s technical approach for accomplishing the requirements of the PWS...” please clarify which part of the PWS should be addressed in a written technical/management response in Volume II Technical Approach. Some of the PWS sections are background and contractual language. |
For example, should contractors develop a written response only to:
PWS 5.0 Statement of Work PWS 6.0 Major Task Area: Technical Support Requirements PWS 7.0 Specific Tasks PWS 8.0 Reports
| The Offeror shall address sections of the PWS in relation to how they will meet performance requirements stated in the Performance Work Statement (PWS). | |
| 6. QA row 17, RFP L.8.8 | It appears in QA row 17 (staffing plans) that the revised RFP L.8.8 requires the staffing plan in Volume III Personnel to be focused on staffing for the incoming transition only. Is this correct? |
It also appears that L.8.7 still requires that contractors propose another staffing plan in Volume II, Task Management Plan – Deliverable 1, and that this staffing plan should address staffing for multiple duty locations as well as staffing management activities (e.g., directing performance, recruiting).
The revised RFP language does not include Section M Evaluation Criteria. Should M.2.4 Factor II – Personnel be revised to reflect the changes to L.8.8? Currently M.2.4 refers to vacancies and maintaining key personnel, which we understand from QA row 17 is discussed in Volume II TMP.
| Amendment 0002, revises Section M.2.4. | ||
| 7. Revised Attachment C Price Proposal | The Training Specialist is not marked as key personnel in Attachment C. | Attachment C is now updated to reflect the Training Specialist as Key Personnel. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .