Final Question_Answers of W9124920R0009.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 13 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W91249-20-R-0009
About this file
This document contains questions and answers related to a solicitation for Cyberspace Response Assessment (CsRA) & Technical Instructional Support services. The contractor shall provide all necessary management, supervision and labor to perform non-personal Cyberspace Response Assessment (CsRA) & Technical Instructional Support services in accordance with the Performance Work Statement and other areas of the solicitation. The solicitation number is W91249-20-R-0009 and involves the Department of the Army Materiel Command Mission and Installation Contracting Command Fort Eustis. Evaluation will be based on a lowest price technically acceptable basis. Offerors must submit pricing using the SF1449 form and provide a total compensation plan for professional employees.
View the file
Other files
Show all 11
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
Sheet1
| Section | Reference | Question | |
| Attachment 7 Price | Column N | ||
| "Total Paid to Vendor Based on 1920 Hours" | Will the Government confirm that it wants offerors to provide a total price in this column based on the calculated fully burdened rate x 1920 hours and not the "Labor Hours" in column E? Government Response: Column E is deleted. Please insert column M for the total rate. | ||
| Subfactor 1B: Staffing, Recruitment, Retention, and Management | "The offeror shall provide letters of intent (signed within 60 days of proposal submission) and resumes for key personnel." | If the proposed key personnel is a current employee of the offeror, is a letter of intent required? Government Response: Yes | |
| Proposal Content Volume I and Volume IV | "TAB C, SF1449 – Continuation Sheets -- Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs – This section shall be submitted fully completed and error free. It shall contain the offeror’s prices for the established Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINS)" |
| "(d) Volume IV- Price – The offeror shall complete SF1449 – Continuation Sheets -- Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs section of the solicitation." | Will the Government allow offerors to create a Schedule B in lieu of manually filling in and inserting the SF 1449 Continuation Sheets? Government Response:The offeror shall complete SF1449 – Continuation Sheets -- Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs section of the solicitation." | ||
| Proposal Preparation Instructions | (c) The proposals shall be organized into 4 volumes. Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a coil-bound or spiral-bound binder (no three binders). 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. | When coil or spiral binding is used there is no area to place proposal information. Will the Government consider removing the requirement for information to be placed on the spine? Government Response: The information to placed information on the spine is removed. | |
| Basis for Coontract Award | Award will be made to a single offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements, and whose proposal, judged by an overall assessment of the evaluation criteria and other considerations specified in this solicitation, represents the Lowest Priced Technically Acceptable offer. | ||
| (2) Trade-offs between cost/price and non-cost/price factors are not permitted. Unreasonably high, unbalanced, inaccurate or incomplete price proposals, may be the grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. | The 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Section 813 mandated that LPTA source selection criteria be used only in situations in which six factors are fulfilled. Section 822 added two factors. It also stated that contracting officers should avoid LPTA for information technology services, cybersecurity services, systems engineering and technical assistance services, advanced electronic testing, audit or audit readiness services, or other knowledge-based professional services. |
Considering the 2017 NDAA mandate around LPTA, the importance of the cybersecurity, knowledge-based professional services supporting the CCoE, and the challenges of recruiting and retaining highly skilled instructors with the appropriate security clearances and certifications, will the Gov't reconsider the "LPTA" criteria in favor of a "best value" criteria in it's source selection? Government Response: The LPTA criteria will be used. In Accordance With (IAW) 52.212-1 Offeror's instructions. The Offeror’s staffing plans for recruiting and retaining personnel with all of the qualifications necessary to perform this requirement will be evaluated. The Offeror’s staffing plan shall describe its plans for recruiting and retaining personnel with all of the qualifications necessary to perform this requirement. Offeror shall describe and outline the strategy that will be utilized to effectively account for challenges in locating, relocating, and retaining personnel that are qualified to meet all requirements and a recruitment strategy(s) to motivate personnel to relocate to Fort Gordon area and work for the Government. Clause 52.222-46 evaluation of compensation for professional employees is incorporated within the solicitation. As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract.
| Is this a new requirement or a follow-on to an existing contract? If the latter, can I please find out the incumbent contractor's name and contract number? Government Response: This is a new requirement | ||
| Basis for Coontract Award | The Government will evaluate proposed prices for reasonableness using price analysis techniques. Proposed prices evaluated as unreasonable may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition | What price analysis techniques will the Government apply when determining "price reasonableness" while still using an LPTA selection criteria? Government Response: Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b). Through these techniques the Government will determine whether prices are reasonable, complete and balanced. Does the analysis technique take into account the challenges of hiring highly qualified personnel in the Fort Gordon area with the required training certifications, security clearance, and experience? Government Respons: Yes |
| Proposal Preparation Instructions; Proposal Format | Proposal preparation instructions state file names to be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission…" Without further information in the filename (such as volume number) all files will have the same name making it difficult to readily identify file information. May offerors prepend this title with the solicitation number and volume number? Government Response: Proposal prepartaion instructions are updated with information on volumes. | |
| Proposal Preparation Instructions, Proposal Content | Must offerors submit Representations and Certifications in entirety for Volume I - General Tab D, or may offerors provide a statement certifying this information is accurate and complete within the System for Award Management (SAM)? Government Response: Offerors may provide a statement certifying this information is accurate and complete within the System for Award Management (SAM). The Government will pull SAM data. | |
| Evaluation Criteria, Volume III Past Performance | Evaluation Criteria lists Past Performance ratings as "Acceptable and Unacceptable" and then states "Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, "unknown" shall be considered "acceptable." Government Response: Past performance verbiage is update to reflect offeror without a record of relevant past performance shall be considered "neutral" |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .