Amendment_0002_-_W9124716-R-0005.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

a. Provide responses to Industry Questions

b. Revise the PWS, Remove Technical Exhibit 8, Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-1 - Instructions to Offerors - Commerical Items, and FAR Clause 52.212-2 - Evaluation - Commercial Items.

c. Revise the submission date for proposals to 11 May 2016 at 2:00PM.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 65

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Apr-2016

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W91247-16-R-0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

08-Mar-2016

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

27-Apr-2016

CODE

MICC CENTER - FORT BRAGG

MICC - FORT BRAGG

2175 REILLY ROAD STOP A

FORT BRAGG NC 28310-5000

W91247 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91247-16-R-0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

Question Number

Reference Question Response

1 General

Does the Combined Synopsis/Solicitation under solicitation number W9124716R0005 contain requirements similar to a current contract? If possible, please provide the current contract number. Or, is this a new requirement for the government?

This is not a new requirement.

Services are current being received under contract number W91247-13-D-0009

RFP,

PWS

Section 1.6.6.5 of the Request For Proposal states:

The Contractor shall coordinate with the COR regarding initiation of NACI’s. Facility Security Officer (FSO) or designated Contractor Security Representative (CSR) shall submit required employee documentation of security clearances and documentation of adjudicated CNAC-Is and IRC through the COR to the Government Security point of contact.

If the prospective contractor does not have a Facility Security Office (FSO) or a Facility Clearance, would that exclude the prospective contractor from participating in the solicitation?

There is no requirement for an Offeror to obtain a Facility

Clearance.

RFP,

PWS

Are you looking for industry to partner with Universities? Technical Acceptability Standard 3 - Accreditation. To be deemed technically acceptable, the Offeror must demonstrate the following:

(a) The Offeror submitted accreditation documents that demonstrate that they are a regionally or nationally accredited institution recognized by the U.

S. Department of Education.

1.6.8.1.1. Accreditation. The Contractor shall be

accredited by a regional or national accrediting association. Documentation of this accreditation shall be provided to the Government with the proposal.

Accreditation suggests academic soundness and is a means of substantiating quality of instruction methods and the SLA theories and approaches that inform them. Accreditation is neither divisible nor transferable; a non-accredited institution or organization does not gain accredited status solely because of an affiliation or arrangement with an accredited institution. Any contract service provider directly involved with instruction or curriculum development must, therefore, belong to an accredited institution, whether Prime or subcontractor. The Government will verify the Offeror's certification of accreditation through the U.S. Department of Education; Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs listing at Caution-http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Agencies.aspx < Caution-http://www.ope.ed.gov/accreditation/Agencies.aspx > and/or Caution-http://www.sacs.org/ < Caution-http://www.sacs.org/ > .

If the offeror is regionally or nationally accredited and provides documentation – they meet the requirement – this can mean partnering with a University but not necessarily.

The following extract is key.

“Accreditation is neither divisible nor transferable; a non-accredited institution or organization does not gain accredited status solely because of an affiliation or arrangement with an accredited institution.

Any contract service provider directly involved with instruction or curriculum development must, therefore, belong to an accredited institution, whether Prime or subcontractor.”

RFP,

PWS

On page 115, paragraph, under Technical Acceptability, is the following statement: "The Offeror submitted accreditation documents that demonstrate that they are a regionally or nationally accredited institution recognized by the U. S.

Department of Education."

Can the contracting company be in a partnership with an accredited academic institution - or - must the contracting company be an accredited school/university?

Would it be acceptable for the prime to compete and have an accredited academic institution (local university) as a sub, thereby fulfilling the requirement for accreditation?

Please see response to Question 3.

5 General Who is the incumbent company/organization?

The incumbent is NESI/Milburn Academy Inc./Middleton Academy

6 RFP/PWS

Reference PWS 1.6.8.1.1. Accreditation.

This section states that “Any contract service provider directly involved with instruction or curriculum development must, therefore, belong to an accredited institution, whether Prime or subcontractor.”

We believe that this requirement unnecessarily restricts competition given that most of the providers of language instruction to the military are not accredited, and many of them achieve highly desirable results. Will the government consider relaxing this requirement and allowing non-accredited subcontractors, given the Prime meets all the accreditation requirements?

3. The Prime contractor and all subcontractors must be accredited to fulfill the accreditation requirements.

7 RFP/PWS

Sections 1.6.1.1 to 1.6.1.8 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS) describe the requirements of the Quality Control Program. Section 1.6.1.3 describes recordkeeping requirements for instructor professional development. For many locations instructors use a virtual training program to satisfy the 40 hours professional development requirement over the course of a 12 month period. There may not be training completed on a monthly basis. Could the clause be modified to submit a quarterly report of professional development activities?

A monthly report is still required. Even if the report states “no training has taken place.”

8 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.6 of the PWS-Security Requirements: Is a DD254 included with this contract?

No – a DD254 is not required.

9 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.9.12.1.1 in the PWS requires a PM for the Eastern Region and West Region. Has the requirement for a PM in the Central region been eliminated? Do the PM and APM need to be located in the same site for the East Region or can they be at different sites?

The government has combined the Eastern and Central Regions.

There is no specific location requirement for the PM/APM therefore the PM and APM for either region can be located at different sites.

10 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.9.12 Key Personnel in the PWS:

Personnel may elect to leave a job voluntarily or at the request of the contractor. Replacement of key personnel staff may take up to 15 work days (3 weeks) to fill the requirement. Will any consideration be given to changing the period for replacement of key personnel to 15 work days instead of 10 days?

Per Section 1.6.9.12 the requirement will remain at 10 working days.

11 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.9.12-Key Personnel in the PWS: Are key personnel resumes required as part of the proposal submission?

No, resumes are not required.

12 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.9.12.1 in the PWS: Is the Alternate Program Manager a full time position? Could the APM be assigned other duties while not tasked as the

PM?

The APM must be able to act full time in the ABSENCE of the PM

13 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.9.12.2.1 Program Manager Qualifications in the PWS: Please clarify what a related field of study would encompass to ensure clarity around the requirements for the position?

A field of study related to:

Second Language Acquisition, Cultural Anthropology, Cross Cultural Communication, or

Instructional Design.

14 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.13.1-Technical Support in the PWS states that technical support is needed at Fort Lewis, Fort Hood, and Fort Bragg. Fort Hood does not have technical support currently. Is this a new requirement for the Fort Hood? CLIN 0003AA and CLIN 1002AA only indicate 1 FTE, presumably in the East. Please clarify.

Please see revised PWS Section

1.6.13.1. which removes the Fort

Hood Technical Support Requirement.

15 RFP/PWS

Section 1.6.13.2 Administrative Support in the PWS- Please clarify the level of administrative support necessary for Fort Lewis, Fort Hood, and Fort Bragg? Is the LOE the same at each region? CLIN 0002 does not break out the support by location.

Please see revised PWS Section

1.6.13.1.2. which removes the

Fort Hood Administrative Support Requirement.

16 RFP/PWS

Sections 5.4.1.3 in Part 5, Specific Tasks– Are ODA assessments available for all languages expected to be taught? What is the average length of time to administer an ODA? How will this be coordinated in sites that do not have access to the Internet for students?

ODAs are not available for all languages. Typical length is two to three hours – may be longer for high level proficiency. This will be administered with the local CLPM

17 RFP/PWS

In Sections 5.4.1.6 of Part 5, Specific Tasks, the deliverable for lesson plans is 3 days before the class begins. If this is a new class, will additional days of service be provided for lesson plan development before the class officially starts or can the deliverable be changed to 3 days after the class starts?

Contractor is responsible for POIs and lesson plans.

Additional days are not planned for new classes unless requested by the COR

18 RFP/PWS

The level of effort in Tech Exhibit 2 for the EAST/CENTRAL region is approximately half the number of days requested in CLIN 0004AA? Is the number of days in CLIN 0004AA the maximum available to order while Tech Exhibit 2 provides a realistic estimate of required services in the region?

Please clarify.

CLIN 0004AA is the maximum available to order for the first ordering period. Technical

Exhibit 2 is the Deliverables Schedule. Technical Exhibit 9 contains historical workload data.

19 RFP/PWS

In the proposal preparation instructions pages 104- 106, Volume I and Volume II both have executive summaries. Is the Executive Summary duplicated in both volumes? Does the Executive Summary count against the page count in Volume II?

The Executive Summary should not be duplicated in both volumes. Paragraph 4(b)(Tab D)(Executive Summary) of Addendum to FAR Clause

52.212-1 has been revised to exclude the duplicative requirement to introduce the Offeror’s team in Volume II.

Additionally, paragraph 3.2(v) of this section has been revised to exclude the Executive summary from the page count.

As reflected in the chart in Addendum to 52.212, the content contained in Volume II shall not exceed 50 pages, excluding those pages specifically identified in paragraph (v).

20 RFP/PWS

In the proposal instructions, pages 104-106, Does the 50 page limit for Mission Capability in Volume II apply to Tab D - Executive Summary and to Tab E - Mission Capability in total, so that the two tabs together cannot exceed 50 pages?

Please refer to paragraphs 3–4 of Addendum to FAR Clause 52.212-1 as to what is included in Volume II’s 50-page limit, noting what pages are expressly excluded by paragraph 3.2(v) which now excludes the executive summary.

21 RFP/PWS

In Section 1.6.8.1.5.1 of the PWS, "obtaining hard copy fingerprints for background checks" IAW DoD/DSS you can only scan fingerprints to OPM.

Will the Base Security Office scan the employees’ fingerprints to OPM?

That depends on the local procedures of the Installation

Security Offices

22 RFP/PWS

In Section 1.6.8.1.5.1 of the PWS it states, "Contractors will not be able to perform services under this contract until they have obtained such favorable adjudication" IAW with DoD and Army process, an employee can be granted a CAC card while OPM is doing there NACI background investigation. If employee requires a NACI background check, will the COR issue the employee a CAC card while OPM completes the investigation?

CAC cards are only issued after a favorable NACI background check

23 RFP/PWS

In Section 1.6.8.1.8 of the PWS it states, "The security requirements are in accordance with the attached DD254." No DD254 was in the attachment, will a DD254 be issued?

This sentence has been removed from PWS 1.6.8.1.8.

24 RFP/PWS

On page 103 of the RFP, Table 1 only indicates that a CD is required for Volume 1. Do all Volumes 1-4 require a CD? And if so, does each Volume need to be on a separate CD or can all volumes be on one

CD?

Table 1 has been revised to require one (1) digital copy encompassing Volumes 1 -4 on CD-Rom. One (1) CD containing all four (4) volumes is sufficient for submission.

25 RFP/PWS

In Clause 1.6.8.1.9 in the PWS, what type of security clearance does an employee need to have access to Government controlled information systems? Does the Government perform the background check?

There are no security clearance requirements in this contract.

The requirement is for a favorably adjudicated NACI

Evaluatio n Criteria

Reference: 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999) a) Basis for Award

Referenced section begins with the words “This is a best value source selected conducted in accordance with FAR Par 12 in addition to FAR Par 15.3…” Later in the same paragraph there is a sentence that states: “The Government will award the contract to a contractor whose proposal represents the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) proposal after evaluation and in accordance with the solicitation.”

Question: Can the procurement approach be both best value and LPTA?

Per FAR 15.101, Best Value is a continuum. The Source

Selection Process under that continuum is Lowest Priced

Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

See FAR 15.101-2.

Evaluatio n Criteria

Reference: 52,212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999) c) Evaluation Factors

Under Factor 1: Mission Capability and Technical Acceptability Standard 2: Technical Approach -- there are seven subfactors: 1) management Concept, Organizational Plan Summary; 2) Recruitment Plan;

3) Teacher Training Plan; 4) Programs of Instruction;

5) Transition Plan/Phase-In/Phase-Out; 6) Quality Control Plan; and 7)Technical Scenario.

Question: What is the relevant importance of each of these subfactors?

There are no subfactors, per se, in this solicitation. However, all stated requirements under each factor must be met if the proposal is to be deemed technically acceptable. Further, as this is a Lowest Price

Technically Acceptable (LPTA) procurement, there is no relative importance to any factor or aspect of the technical requirements.

Evaluatio n Criteria

Reference: 52,212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS (JAN 1999) c) Evaluation Factors

Question: Will the Government please provide the relative weight value (percentage) for each of the Factors (Factor 1: Mission Capability; Factor 2: Past Performance; Factor 3: Price)?

Please see response to Question 27.

Reference: PROPOSAL PREPARATION

INSTRUCTIONS ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE

52.212-1 – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS –

COMMERCIAL ITEMS

Section 4. Proposal Content. Volume III: Factor II:

Past Performance (Page 108, subsection C(i)) states that the Contractor must “provide information regarding any relevant experience acquired in providing similar Language and Culture Services exceeding $35,000,000.00, in the last three (3) years…”

Question: Is the $35,000,000.00 over a one-year period or the total of the last three years of the proposed past performance contract?

Question: Will the Government consider eliminating or significantly reducing the dollar amount of this requirement?

Please see revised language under Section 4. Proposal

Content. Volume III: Factor II subsection C(i) revising the requirement to $5,000,000.00 annually.

30 General

The $35 million dollar threshold (to be qualified to bid) appears to be overly restrictive and appears to significantly limit competition. This may be inconsistent with the intent of Competition in Contracting Act.

31 RFP

Clauses Incorporated by Full Text (Wage Determinations); page 24: The Government provides the applicable SCA wage determination tables to be used in development of daily rates. Under SCA regulations, employees accrue vacation time based on number of years of service regardless of contractor.

This time could be anywhere from 2 weeks to 4 weeks, creating a significant variance in vacation pay costs. Could the Government please provide the incumbent anniversary dates of current SCA-covered employees so that offerors may appropriately plan for vacation and associated costs?

The Government does not have the incumbent anniversary dates of current SCA. During phase-in/out the awardee can request this information at that time.

32 RFP/PWS

PWS Part 1; paragraph 1.6.9.12.1.1; page 38: The PWS states “The Contractor shall provide a PM for the Eastern Region and the Western Region, as well as an APM for each region…” To clarify, is the Government requesting one (1) PM in the Eastern Region, one (1) PM in the Western Region, one (1) APM for the Eastern Region and one (1) APM for the Western Region for a total PM/APM count of four (4)?

Yes, the Government requires a total of four PMs/APMs. PWS

1.6.9.12.1.1. states, “The Contractor shall provide a PM for the Eastern Region and the Western Region, as well as an

APM for each region who shall be responsible for the performance of the work under this contract. The APM will act as the PM, with equal authority, during any absence of the PM.

The PMs (or APMs in the respective PM’s absence) shall have full authority to act for the

Contractor on all contract matters relating to daily operation of this contract.”

33 RFP/PWS

PWS Part 1; paragraph 1.6.9.12.1.1; page 38: Where specifically should the PMs and APMs be located in both the Eastern and Western Regions?

There is no specific location requirement for the PM/APM and the PM/APN do not have to be co-located.

34 RFP/PWS

PWS Part 7; Technical Exhibit 8; page 80: The PWS states Technical Exhibit 8 is “provided as an outside attachment” however it was not posted to FBO. Could the Government please provide Technical Exhibit 8?

Technical Exhibit 8 has been removed with the release of

Amendment 0002.

SF 1449 Continuation Sheet (CLINS); page 3-16 and PWS Part 7; Technical Exhibit 9; page 80-81: The CLINS for CLP, Technical Resource Support, and Foreign Language Instruction state that Contractors should provide daily rates “in strict compliance with the PWS and historical workload data for the Eastern/Central/Western Regions…” Based on the work days and hours provided by the Government within the PWS (M-F, 40 hours/week); and the historical workload information in Technical Exhibit 9, could the Government please confirm that all offerors must base their daily rates on the available work days/hours and the specific workload data provided, regardless of any knowledge of actual planned workload? For example, if planning Foreign Language Instruction in Ft. Campbell, all offerors would need to plan for 1 language (Arabic), no more than 10 students at any one time, for 251 training days per year, regardless if the offeror has insight as to the actual or projected training days (or students) at that location which might be less. Such information would provide an offeror with an unfair advantage and would create an unequal evaluation of that cost.

The Government 's evaluation will be according to criteria contained in the solicitation and will include no criteria not articulated therein it's up to the contractor to price the requirement based on their own pricing structure. The workload data provided is based on historical data only and the contractor is cautioned when using this information to prepare their proposal. Offerors should base pricing off of the quantities as specified in the CLINs, considering the provided historical workload.

36 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Format; paragraph 2(ii); page 102: The paragraph states “Files names to be ‘Company Name—Initial’ for the first submission.” How should the Volume identifier be incorporated—should offerors provide the Volume number after “Initial” (e.g. Company ABC—Initial Volume 1)?

Volume number after "Initial" (e.g. Company ABC - Initial

Volume 1) is acceptable.

37 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(a) Volume 1 Tab E; page 105:

Could the Government please confirm that the Representations and Certifications to be included in this tab are listed beginning on page 114-128 of the solicitation?

The Representations and Certification are as listed in paragraph 4(a), Volume I, Tab E.

38 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(a) Volume 1Tab G; page 105:

The paragraph instructs offerors to “identify any potential OCI conflicts…” and “if such concerns exist, the impacted Offeror will submit an acceptable OCI Mitigation Plan”. Could the Government please confirm that offerors who have no such OCI conflicts should not submit any information in this tab/volume?

The Offeror is asked to review FAR 9.5, and if an OCI concern exists, the Offeror shall submit a Mitigation Plan. All Offeror’s who do not submit an OCI Mitigation Plan under TAB G, must include in Tab G a statement that they have determined that no actual or potential OCI exists.

39 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Format; paragraph 2, Table 1; page 102: Per Table 1, only Volume 1 requires a CD ROM. Could the Government please confirm its intent that only one (1) CD is required and only for Volume 1?

Please see response to Question 24.

40 RFP/PWS

The paragraph states “Spreadsheets will not contain hiding worksheets. All formulas, lookup tables, and links shall be intact…” Could the Government please clarify this paragraph or remove it, as per Table 1 (page 103) offerors are only to submit a hard copy of the price proposal (Volume 4)?

Please see response to Question 24.

41 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(d)(ii) Volume 4; page 109:

Could the Government please confirm if there is a requirement to submit either certified cost and pricing data or other than certified cost and pricing data?

Per Volume 4 and FAR 15.403- 1(b)(3), certified cost or pricing data is not required.

42 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(a) Volume 1; page 104: The paragraph states “Offerors are required to submit a completed SF1449…and FAR Provision 52.212-1.”

Could the Government please clarify how offerors are to submit the FAR Provision 52.212-1 as stated? Is the Government looking for offerors to simply state that they have complied with the instructions therein?

Revised to read “Offerors are required to submit a completed

SF 1449 (including acknowledgment of

Amendments) and all documents as stated in the Addendum to

FAR Provision 52.212-1.”

43 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(a) Volume 1Tab F; page 105:

The paragraph states that Large Business offerors are to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan and that “this plan shall be submitted separately from the Small Business Participation information identified below.” Could the Government please confirm if the Small Business Participation information is referencing the recommended goal percentages at the end of the paragraph? If so, could the Government please provide the goals for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan? If the percentages provided are NOT for the Small Business Participation, could the Government please provide the Small Business Participation information/percentage goals?

Removed statement regarding Small Business Participation information. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan should strive to meet the percentages as listed under Tab

F.

44 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(a) Volume 1Tab F; page 105;

and PWS paragraph 1.6.8.1.1; page 35: Volume 1, Tab F illustrates the small business subcontracting goals. Paragraph 1.6.8.1.1 states “Any contract service provider directly involved with the instruction or curriculum development must, therefore, belong to an accredited institution, whether Prime or subcontractor.” Given the overly restrictive nature of this paragraph, could the Government please consider removing the requirement for subcontractors to be accredited? There are a limited amount of certified small businesses who meet the criteria, fit in the stated concern categories (WOSB, SDB, HUB Zone, etc.) who are also accredited institutions. The language in paragraph 1.6.8.1.1 creates an overly restrictive circumstance in which small businesses would have difficulty providing subcontractor support. Thus, the goals in Volume 1 Small Business Subcontracting would be similarly difficult to attain.

Please see response to Question

3. The Prime contractor and all subcontractors must be accredited to fulfill the accreditation requirements.

45 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(c) Volume 3; page 108: Could the Government please confirm that there are no requirements to include tabs, a table of contents, or a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms in Volume 3?

If not, could the government please revise this paragraph with the necessary information to include in the desired order/format?

There is no requirement to include tabs, a table of contents, or a glossary of abbreviations and acronyms in Volume III.

46 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(c) Volume 3; page 108: Could the Government please confirm no Past Performance Questionnaires are required for this solicitation?

Past Performance Questionnaires are not required.

47 RFP/PWS

Could the Government please confirm there are no requirements to provide any resumes for any personnel (to include key personnel) with the submission of proposals?

There is no requirement to provide resumes with the submission of proposals.

48 RFP/PWS

PWS 52.212-2 Evaluation; paragraph 1; page 110:

Could the Government please clarify if this is a best value source selection or a lowest price technically acceptable source selection?

26.

49 RFP/PWS

PWS 52.212-2 Evaluation; paragraph 1; page 110:

Could the Government please explain its intent to make an award based on LPTA criteria? This seems confusing as all price factors, criteria, and metrics for development have been provided by the Government, such as: the required number of days, applicable SCA Wage Determination tables to be used for base pay;

hours per day, maximum hours per week, no overtime allotments; and has required offerors to base their prices on the Historical Workload in Technical Exhibit 9. Assuming all offerors follow the Government’s instructions (all things being equal), the only variance in prices would be from fringe benefits and any applicable markups such as G&A and Fee.

In accordance with FAR 15.101- 2, the Contracting Officer determined that using LPTA would provide the best value to the Government.

50 RFP/PWS

PWS 52.212-2 Evaluation; paragraph 3 Factor 1; page 111-112; PWS Part 1; paragraph 1.1.1; page 30;

paragraph 1.3; page 31: The Government lists the ratings for Mission Capability as Acceptable or Unacceptable, which would be in accordance with an LPTA source selection method. However, as stated in PWS paragraph 1.1.1 “FORSCOM language and culture program emphasizes creativity and flexibility to meet unique instruction needs…This program’s courses/training events do not have rigid Programs of Instruction…” further, the stated objectives of this program are to “achieve and maintain/sustain the Army minimum qualification…and strive to enhance proficiency.” Given the emphasis on creativity and flexibility, the Government’s description of the fluid and varying nature of POIs for this program, and the Government’s objective of enhancing proficiency, could the Government please explain the rationale for an LPTA award and the rigidly vague acceptability criteria for the Mission Capability Factor? More than one offeror could “meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation” as the nature of instruction requires the use of differing techniques and methodologies.

How will the Government evaluate those differing methodologies? Further, LPTA would be best suited when there is no additional value to be gained from exceeding the technical requirements, which per the Government’s objectives in the PWS, is not the case.

If the goal is to use flexibility and creativity as part of enhancing proficiency with non-rigid POIs as the Government states, would it not be in the best interest of the Government to evaluate offers based on best value criteria and not LPTA?

The Government will evaluate differing methodologies in accordance with the Government's stated evaluation criteria. Proposals will be evaluated to ensure they meet all solicitation requirements. Where those requirements appear to restrict creativity or flexibility, ensure your proposal focuses on meeting the Government's stated requirements.

51 RFP/PWS

PWS 52.212-2 Evaluation; paragraph 3; Factor 2 page 112-113; and PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions;

Proposal Content; paragraph 4(c)(i) Volume 3; page 108: The proposal instructions state relevant experience as exceeding $35,000,000, however the evaluation criteria on page 112-113 do not make any mention of the $35,000,000. Is this an evaluated requirement for past performance? If so, could the Government please add the criteria to the Evaluation factors on pages 112-113?

Please see response to Question 29.

52 RFP/PWS

PWS Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Content; paragraph 4(c)(i) Volume 3; page 108: The paragraph states the Contractor must submit recent and relevant experience “in support of Army, Active, Reserve, and National Guard…” Could the Government please provide an explanation as to why the past performance is limited to Army, especially given the possibility of other CLPs from other military organizations could potentially be using this contract?

Please see revised language under Section 4. Proposal

Content. Volume III: Factor II subsection C.

53 RFP/PWS

Per the pre-solicitation Section 4 Proposal Content (paragraph C sub i): The Offeror should provide information regarding any relevant experience acquired in providing similar Language and Culture Services exceeding $35,000,000.00, in the last three

(3) years that will enable successful execution of the proposed approach and satisfy the requirements of the contract. For an accredited University to successfully bid this contract, it is requested/recommend the past performance cost requirement be reduced to the NAICS standard of $11,000,000.

29.

54 RFP/PWS

Per the pre-solicitation, Section1.6.8.1.1.

Accreditation. The Contractor shall be accredited by a regional or national accrediting association.

Documentation of this accreditation shall be provided to the Government with the proposal. Accreditation suggests academic soundness and is a means of substantiating quality of instruction methods and the SLA theories and approaches that inform them.

Accreditation is neither divisible nor transferable; a non-accredited institution or organization does not gain accredited status solely because of an affiliation or arrangement with an accredited institution. Any contract service provider directly involved with instruction or curriculum development must, therefore, belong to an accredited institution, whether Prime or subcontractor.

It is requested/recommend the solicitation be amended to state that the Prime must be an accredited institution and the subcontractors working under the Prime do not have to be accredited institutions.

3.

55 RFP/PWS

In reference to Addendum to 52.212-1 Proposal Preparation Instructions, paragraph 4.c.(i). on page 108 of 128, it is stated that the requirement for past performance references are for services exceeding $35,000,000 in the last three years. Few existing language and culture requirements – potentially including FORSCOM Language and Culture Services requirement, as indicated on USASpending.gov – meet this high standard. It is requested that the US Government lower the standard to a more realistic $6,000,000 in the last three years.

29.

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time 11-May-2016 02:00 PM has been added.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

ADDENDUM TO FAR CLAUSE 52.212-1 – INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS

1. Submission of Offer.

a. Electronic submissions via email or fax will not be accepted. All proposals shall be delivered by the deadline for the submittal of proposals indicated in the solicitation. Proposals SHALL be delivered by the deadline for the submittal of proposals indicated in the solicitation. All proposals hand carried or mailed through a commercial or Government carrier shall be delivered to one of the following addresses:

VIA REGULAR MAIL:

Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC)

MICC – Fort Bragg Attn: Ms. Samantha R. Davis

W91247-16-R-0005 2175 Reilly Road, Stop A

Fort Bragg, NC 28310-5000

VIA EXPRESS CARRIER OR WALK-IN:

Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC)

MICC – Fort Bragg Attn: Ms. Samantha R. Davis

W91247-16-R-0005 Bldg 2-1105 (C-Stack), Macomb Street

Fort Bragg, NC 28310-5000

(910) 908-2898

b. The points of contact for this acquisition include the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) – Ms.

Angelina M. Clements and the Contract Specialist – Ms. Samantha R. Davis. Address all written questions or concerns you may have to the PCO. Any questions submitted will need to identify the pertinent document (Performance Work Statement (PWS), Solicitation Attachment, Solicitation Technical Exhibit, etc.) and include the applicable page number, paragraph number, and/or reference with each question. Questions regarding specific verbiage or content in the solicitation package shall include excerpts or examples from the subject matter to ensure the question is clearly conveyed. The PCO and Contract Specialist at Angelina.m.clements.civ@mail.mil and samantha.r.davis.civ@mail.mil respectively, shall be included on all correspondence between the Government and Offerors. The deadline for the submittal of all questions is Wednesday, March 16, 2016 at 2:00PM EDT.

2. General Instructions.

a. The selection of a source for award purposes will be conducted utilizing source selection (negotiated) procedures as delineated in FAR Part 15.3, Source Selection. Offers will be evaluated using the criteria under FAR Clause 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items. Noncompliance with the RFP requirements may hamper the Government's ability to properly evaluate the proposal and may result in elimination of the proposal from further consideration for contract award.

b. The Offer. The submission of the documentation specified below will constitute the Offeror's acceptance of the terms and conditions of the RFP, concurrence with the Performance Work Statement, and contract type.

c. It is the Government’s intention to award without discussions. Offerors are encouraged to present their best technical proposal and prices in their initial proposal submission. However, in accordance with FAR Part 15.306 (Exchanges with Offerors After Receipt of Proposals), should discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to hold them. If this occurs, a competitive range will be determined and Offerors notified. The competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency IAW FAR Part 15.306(c)(2) (Competitive Range).

d. Instructions outlined in this solicitation prescribe the format for the proposal and describe the approach for the development and presentation of proposal data. These instructions are designed to ensure the submission of necessary information to provide for the understanding and comprehensive evaluation of proposals.

e. In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

f. If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, an ambiguity, omission, or are otherwise deemed unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

g. All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities

(FedBizOpps) web site at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation

h. Debriefings. The PCO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR

15.505 (Preaward Debriefing of Offerors). The PCO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.506 (Postaward Debriefing of Offerors). Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

3. Proposal Preparation Instructions.

1. Offeror’s proposal shall consist of four (4) separate volumes: RFP Documents, Mission Capability, Past Performance, and Price.

2. Proposal Format.

(i) Offerors shall submit an original and the number of copies of their proposal as listed in Table 1 below.

(ii) The proposals shall be organized into four separate volumes. Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring loose leaf binder which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. All text shall be single spaced and printed black on white paper (Black and white requirement does not apply to graphics, photos, etc., Company stationary and logos are acceptable). Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type) Cross-references should be utilized to preclude unnecessary duplication of data between sections. In addition to submitting hard copies of the proposals, digital copies shall be provided on Compact Disk - Read Only Memory (CD-ROM) disk in Microsoft Word (MS), PowerPoint and/or Excel as outlined in Table 1. File names to be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission. File name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision. Page limitations are also included at Table 1.

Table 1

VOLUME TITLE FORMAT

NUMBER OF

COPIES

No. of Digital Copies on CD

MAXIMUM

PAGE LIMIT

ROM

Volume I

RFP Documents TAB A - Executive

Summary TAB B - Signed SF 1449 and Amendments TAB C - Contact

Information TAB D – Responsibility

Statement TAB E - Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors

TAB F – Small Business Subcontracting Plan

TAB G - Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan (if applicable)

MS Word 2013 or earlier compatibility or Adobe PDF

1 Original + 3 Copies

None

Volume II Mission Capability

MS Word 2013 or earlier copies

50 Pages

Volume III Past Performance

MS Word 2013or earlier copies

Volume IV Price: Completed Schedule B and all Supportive Data

MS Excel 2013 or earlier compatibility; if narrative is included: MS Word 2010 or earlier compatibility (unprotected)

1 Original

(iii) Proposal Limitation. The proposal shall not exceed the limits stated above. If the page limits are exceeded, the pages in excess of the limit shall be removed and returned, unread, to the Offeror.

The Government will not accept any changes to the contractor’s proposal after the closing date of the solicitation (See FAR 15.208 (Submission, Modification, Revision and Withdrawal of Proposals) for further information regarding late proposals). If discussions become necessary, page limitations may be placed on responses Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors.

(iv) Page Limit Includes: All appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc.

(v) Page Limit does not include covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, executive summary, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Pages will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e., diagrams, extraneous data, etc. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted.

(vi) What Counts As A Page? A page shall be an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Letter size and spacing requirements shall be at the discretion of the Offeror, but must be easily readable. Fold-outs will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper . Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins. The Contractor shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event contractor creates an ambiguity in their numbering of pages, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages.

(vii) 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.

(viii) Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

(ix) All spreadsheet documents shall be in Microsoft Excel. Spreadsheets will not contain hidden worksheets. All formulas, lookup tables, and links shall be intact, and no links shall exist to files not included with the submission. PDF or flat files will not be considered adequate.

4. Proposal Content.

a. Volume I – RFP Documents. Offerors are required to submit a completed SF 1449 (including acknowledgment of Amendments) and all documents as stated in the Addendum to FAR Provision 52.212-1. Failure to follow the below Contract Proposal preparation instructions may cause your proposal to be deemed unacceptable by the Government. Volume I will be organized as follows and contain the identified information.

TAB A, Executive Summary. Provide an executive summary that introduces the contractor team and proposal submission, to include a list of team members and subcontractors and the task areas they are designated to provide support. The executive summary shall also include a list of the proposal package contents.

TAB B, Signed SF 1449 and Amendments. The SF 1449 will be submitted fully completed. The offeror is cautioned that the SF 1449 must contain an original signature in block 30a of the form. The contractor will acknowledge all amendments to the RFP in accordance with the instructions on the SF 1449 and with Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Instruction to Offerors Commercial Items.

TAB C, Contact Information. The Offeror shall provide a contact list (with phone numbers, fax numbers, mailing addresses, email addresses, etc.) including the name and title of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government on behalf of your company.

TAB D, Responsibility Statement. The Offeror shall submit a statement of their responsibility, in accordance with FAR 9.104-1 along with supporting documents, such as an Annual Profit and Loss Statement, or other such document to indicate that the Offeror possess adequate financial responsibility, or the ability to obtain such resources.

This will be used in the Government’s determination of responsibility for the Offeror.

TAB E, Representations, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors. In accordance with provisions FAR 52.212-3 Alt I and DFARS 252.212-7000, Offeror Representations and Certifications -- Commercial Items, The offeror will ensure that Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements are submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

TAB F, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Offerors that are classified as a “Large

Business” shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all the elements required by FAR Clause 52.219-9. The Subcontracting Plan is not a requirement for evaluation in source selection, but rather, a requirement for award to an Other Than Small Business and it will be incorporated into the resultant contract. The Department of Defense has established small business goals to assure small businesses receive a fair proportion of DoD awards. The recommended goals for this acquisition are as follows and are based on the total proposed subcontract effort: Small Business 39.61%; Small Disadvantaged Business 20.33%; Woman-Owned Small Business 8.07%;

Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUB Zone) Small Business 3.89%; Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business 7.03%. (Note, for example, that a participation plan that reflects 8.07% for Woman-Owned Small Business, would count towards the overall Small Business Goals.

TAB G, Organizational Conflict of Interests (OCI) Mitigation Plan (If Applicable).

In accordance with FAR 9.5, the PCO is currently examining whether or not potential OCI exists with performance of this contract which may impact prospective Offerors.

However, all prospective Offerors are hereby advised to examine the Federal Acquisition Regulation § 9.505 and Performance Work Statement (PWS) Paragraph 1.6.18 and identify any potential OCI conflicts that may now exist to include Unequal Access to Information, Biased Ground Rules, and Impaired Objectivity; if any such concerns exist, the impacted Offeror will submit an acceptable OCI Mitigation Plan to the PCO with its proposal. The PCO will determine based on the facts and circumstances of each individual case whether impacted Offeror’s OCI Mitigation Plan is acceptable for this requirement prior to making an award. All Offeror's who do not submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, must include a statement that they have determined no actual or potential OCI exists.

If any Offeror has questions with regards to your affirmative responsibility to identify OCI concerns and/or mitigate each issue, each potential Offeror is encouraged to ask questions and seek clarifications before proposal due dates. The Government will be prevented from awarding a contract to any Offeror who has an actual OCI issue that cannot be mitigated to the satisfaction of the Contracting Officer

b. Volume II – Mission Capability. The Mission Capability Volume II should be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims in the Offeror’s…