RFP Attachment 8 - TOR Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 32 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Cyber Center of Excellence (CCoE) Information Technology (IT) Engineering and Services Support (ITESS)
- Solicitation number
- W9124923R0002
About this file
This document summarizes questions received from industry and responses provided by the government regarding a solicitation for cyber center of excellence information technology engineering and services support. The solicitation seeks proposals for IT services support at Fort Gordon, including for all training and administrative platforms and facilities. The incumbent contract is held by Kupono Government Services. Key personnel are required to hold top secret clearances with sensitive compartmented information eligibility. The estimated contract value cannot be disclosed. The performance work statement outlines requirements for IT service management, operations, and engineering support across several task areas. Offerors must demonstrate experience in these areas and provide past performance references of similar scope and magnitude, with individual references valued at a minimum of $7 million annually. The closing date for proposals and past performance questionnaires was extended to match the new proposal due date.
View the file
Other files
Show all 19
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
CCoE ITESS Solicitation for Cyber Center of Excellence (CCoE) Information Technology (IT) Engineering and Services Support (ITESS) Questions and Answers
| Question # | Solicitation Reference | Industry Questions | Government Answer |
| 1 | Is there any incumbent performing these services, If Yes, please provide the name and contract number | Yes. The current contract is W91249-20-C-0009. The incumbent is Kupono Government Services, LLC. | |
| 2 | Is there a facility clearance requirement? | The Facility Clearance Level is Top Secret. See RFP Attachment 7, Block 1A. | |
| 3 | Volume III: Factor 3 - Past Performance. Page 70, paragraph 6 | The Solicitation mentions that the Past Performance Assessment Questionnaires (Attachment 2) must be submitted to the contracting office by October 18th, 2022, at 11 am. However, the cover page of Attachment 2 (Past Performance Cover Letter and Assessment Questionnaire) mentions that they are due “no later than 15 days after receipt of request or November 2, 2022, whichever occurs first”. Could you please clarify as to when these PP Questionnaires are due? | The solicitation has been revised to align with the dates identifed in Attachment 2 with the proposal due date. |
| 4 | I’m contacting you to see if you could please let me know what the Value is for this CCoE opportunity | The Government estimated value for this action cannot be disclosed as it is considered "Source Selection Information" as defined in FAR Part 2. Offerors are expected to estimate the effort and provide a proposed price using the RFP Attachment 3, Pricing Worksheet, with their proposals. | |
| 5 | Would you be kind enough to provide me with the documents for this bid, so we can evaluate and see if it is a fit for us? | The solicitation and associated documents are available on sam.gov. | |
| 6 | RFP p. 70, Volume III - Factor 3. Volume III: Factor 3 – Past Performance (1) | Many companies are structured with multiple divisions or multiple legal entities that individually perform Prime Contracts but fall under a broader corporate umbrella. Recognizing such corporate structures exist across the industry, the procurement rules and numerous GAO decisions have made clear that procuring agencies may evaluate and credit an offeror with the past performance and corporate experience of affiliate companies where the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the affiliate (e.g., workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will be meaningfully contributed to contract performance. See GM–Bulltrack, B- 414591.6 (Comp. Gen. Oct. 30, 2018) (holding that an agency may properly attribute the experience or past performance of an affiliated company), and Iyabak Construction, LLC, B-409196 (Comp. Gen. Feb.6, 2014) (holding that the agency failed to articulate a rational basis for solicitation’s refusal to consider experience and past performance of affiliates). |
| Please confirm that the Offeror may cite the prime contract past performance and experience of a sister subsidiary company so long as the Offeror demonstrates how the resources of the sister subsidiary will meaningfully contribute to the performance of the opportunity. | The RFP has been revised to allow consideration of the experience of proposed sister affiliate companies. See RFP for the changes. | ||
| 7 | RFP 70 Volume III - Factor 3. Volume III: Factor 3 – Past Performance (1) | The Government requests that bidders submit five (5) recent and relevant past performance references using Attachment 1 provided by the Government. |
| Please confirm that Attachment 1 must be completed for each past performance reference, to not exceed the 15-page past performance volume limitations. | Yes, Attachment 1 must be completed for each past performance reference. When combined, the references should not exceed the 15 page past performance volume limitation. | ||
| 8 | RFP Attachment 1, p. 68, Volume III - Factor 3. Volume III: Factor 3 – Past Performance (1) | The list of items excluded from the page count does not include CPARS, as required in Volume III-Factor 3, section (6). |
| Would the Government please add CPARS to the list of items excluded from page count? | CPARs are not included in the page limitation. The RFP ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, Section I, Subsection B, Paragraph 9, has been revised. | ||
| 9 | RFP p. 68, B Proposal Content (10) | The Government’s Attachment 1 has a font of 10pt. Times New Roman. The Font size requirement in the Proposal Content section have a requirement of 12pt. Arial. |
| Would the Government please confirm that Offerors are to use Attachment 1 without altering the font? | See revised Attachment 1. The Attachment formatting shall be in accordance with the RFP Addendum to 52.212-1, Section I, Subsection B, Paragraph 10, font and size requirements. The Offeror is responsible to ensure its proposal complies with all the requirements of the RFP. | ||
| 10 | RFP p. 68, B Proposal Content (10) | Font requested for Tables and graphics is 12pt. Size. |
| Would the Government please reduce the size for tables and graphics to 10pt. size? | No. The Government will not reduce the font for tables and graphics. | ||
| 11 | RFP Technical Exhibit 1, p. 54; RFP p. 69 Volume I: Factor 1 – (2) Tab A: Element 1(c)ii | Technical Exhibit 1 states that Key Personnel must be replaced within 15 days from departure. Factor 1, Element 1 states that Personnel must be replaced within 30 days from departure. |
| Would the Government confirm whether the replacement period for Key Personnel is 15 or 30 days? | All key personnel shall be replaced within 30 working days. RFP and PWS have been revised to reflect 30 calendar days. | ||
| 12 | B. (10) 68 | The instructions for proposal response pages states that offerors must use a 12-pitch font. |
Would the Government please confirm that 12-pitch font is the same as a 12-point font?
| Yes, 12-pitch is the same as 12-point font. The solicitation was revised to reflect 12-point font. | ||
| 13 | B. (1), Volume III-Factor 3 (12), Attachment 1, pp. 67 and 71 | The Government indicates a 15-page limit for Volume III Past Performance. In addition to the requirements that are to be provided as part of Attachment 1, Volume III-Factor 3 – Past Performance Section 12 requests that offerors provide several pieces of information, including a chart or schedule describing organizational changes. The Government-provided Attachment 1 is two pages without any content added. |
For Offerors to provide satisfactory responses for each of the five required Past Performances, would the Government please increase the Volume III page limit to 20 pages?
| No. The Offeror may remove the Government's narrative instructions and reduce the size of the blocks to fit its content. | ||||
| 14 | Attachment 3: Pricing Worksheet | CLIN pricing worksheet, option year 5 is listed as 12 months. Based on the solicitation should this be 6 months? | Attachment 3 has been revised to remove Option Year 5. | |
| 15 | Attachment 3: Pricing Worksheet | CLIN pricing worksheet, the total evaluation pricing formula does not sum correctly and does not include option year 5 pricing. | ||
| Will the Government provide a revised Attachment 3 to correct this formula? | As stated in the RFP Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section C, Volume IV: Factor 4 - Price, Paragraph 1, Offerors are responsible to ensure all the formulas in all worksheets, including any worksheets provided by the Government, such as the pricing worksheet, are accurate and correctly reflect the Offeror's desired pricing. |
| 16 | Attachment 3: Pricing Worksheet | Labor Cost Detail worksheet, does not show anything for option year 5. Should contractors add rates for option year 5 or will the Government provide a new workbook? | See answer to question 15. |
| 17 | Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Pricing Sheet | There is no place for overhead cost. If we are not allowed to include overhead the rates in attachment 3 will not match the rates in attachment 4. |
Will the Government provide a new workbook that will allow for contractor to input overhead cost or should contractor insert rows to allow for overhead rates using our standard accounting practices?
| An Offeror may change the cost elements in Attachment 4 to accurately reflect how the Offeror categorizes expenses. | ||
| 18 | Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Pricing Sheet | The Government applied plug percentages for G&A and profit. |
| Can contractors use their own indirect rates to complete attachment 4? | As stated in Attachment 4, Note 2, the G&A and profit rates are not mandatory. Offerors should propose their own rates. | |||
| 19 | 1.2 | Will this contract incorporate the new Cyber/EW school facilities? | Yes, In support of the CCoE’s training efforts, the G6 provides IT services support to all the CCoE’s training and administrative platforms and facilities. | |
| 20 | 52.222-42 Page 20 | The Government provided “potential” Labor Categories and provided the current wage determination for the Fort Gordon area. |
Does the Government think that any of the “potential” labor categories would fall under the wage determination?
| It is the responsibility of the Offeror to identify the proposed labor categories that would fall under any applicable Wage Determination. Per the RFP Addendum to 52.212-1, Section I, Subsection C, Volume IV: Factor 4 - Price, Paragraph 2c, the Offeror shall identify on the Attachment 3, Pricing Worksheet, which labor categories are professional labor and which categories are subject to the Service Contract Labor Standard (SCLS). | ||
| 21 | RFP p.70 (6) | Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) are requested for submission to the Government by Tuesday, October 18th, which is two weeks prior to the proposal due date. |
Would the Government please extend the submission date for PPQs to match the proposal due date?
| Yes. See answer to question 3. | |||
| 22 | ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, p. 69, paragraph II.C.2.B | Two of the Key Personnel positions have more than one FTE. For example, the Senior IT Systems Solution Architect IAT II is 11,226 hours. Do we provide 6 resumes for that role, or only one resume with the proposal? | IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 the proposal shall provide the resumes for all key personnel. If an Offeror proposes more than one employee to fill a key personnel position, then the offeror shall provide a resume for each employee who will occupy the key personnel position. For example, if an Offeror proposes six (6) personnel share the responsibilities of one key personnel position, then the Offeror shall submit six (6) resumes for that one key personnel position. |
| 23 | PWS p. 46, paragraph 5.2 | Will the Government supply the ESD Ticketing system to be used by the Contractor? If so, can the government specify the system/version? | Currently, the ESD system utilizes a SharePoint portal and Remedy as a ticketing system, which is available for contractor use. |
| 24 | PWS p. 46, paragraph 5.2 | Will the Government supply a system for IT Inventory Management and corresponding exiting Inventory data? | No. |
| 25 | ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 | The Key position Systems Engineer - Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network has a total of 16,839 hours, for a total of 9 personnel. Should we include one resume for this position with the proposal, or all 9 resumes? | See answer to question 22. |
| 26 | ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 | Is there a required minimum font size or font face for tables? Likewise, for graphics and figures? | See Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Section I, Subsection B, Paragraph 10 for font type and size, which are required for all documents with page limits. |
| 27 | Technical Exhibit 3 Projected Workload Data, p. 60 | Techincal Exhibit 3 indicates that the sum total of all hours for all positions is 147,809. However, when we sum up the hours showed in TE 3 for all positions, we arrive at 149,680. Will the Government please confirm which number is correct. | 149,680 is correct. The Technical Exhibit 3 was revised to reflect 149,680. |
| 28 | 5.1.2 p. 44 | RFP requires contractors to "possess and maintain an active Project Management Professional (PMP) commercial certification at contract start date and must be maintained throughout the life of the contract." Please confirm that, along with the individual Project Managers with active PMP certification, the offeror shall have an active organizational ISO/IEC 20000 or equivalent certification throughout the life of the contract to meet this requirement. | The contractor is required to possess and maintain Project Management Professional (PMP) commercial certification from the Project Management Institute, as well as individual PMP certification for the project manager positions. The only requirement for the life of the contract is for the contractor to have a DOD 8570-compliant (IAM / IAT) certification(s) in accordance with the requirements of the position(s), and the PMP certification. See PWS Technical Exhibits 3 and 4 for certification requirements. |
| 29 | RFP Instructions to Offerors p.68 (10) | Please confirm that the Government offerors are to use 12 point Arial size font in formatting the proposal. Recommend replacing the term "pitch" with "point", since "pitch" refers to line spacing. | See answer to question 12. |
| 30 | RFP Instructions to Offerors p.68 (10) | Will the Government confirm that offerors can use 10-point Arial family font for tables and graphics? | See answer to question 26. |
| 31 | General | On 9 Sep 2022, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense released a memorandum with the Subject: "Managing the Effects of Inflation with Existing Contracts", acknowledging the challenges businesses, specifically small businesses are experiencing with Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract with Option Years. This same concern/challenge should be considered when asking small businessed to bid on FFP contracts with Base + Option Years. Understanding that this acquisition might affect Mission Preparedness due to the ability to recruit and retain qualified personnel, will the government consider adding a clause allowing the awardee to meet with the government prior to execution of Option Years to address inflationary challenges if inflation continues to rise and cannot stablize at a 2-3% range? | No. The instant requirement is FFP as stated in the RFP 52.216-1, which is not subject to any adjustment on the basis of the contractor's cost experience in performing the contract as stated in FAR 16.201-1. |
| 32 | General | Due to the nature of the work contained in the PWS and the mission criticality of it, will the government require the Prime to have an active ISO/IEC 27001 certification and a minimum of a CMMI Maturity Level 3 assessment? | No, the information in the PWS are the only requirement |
| 33 | Technical Exhibit 4 pp. 61 & 62 | Will the Government accept a college or university degree in lieu of years of experience, i.e. Associates Degree in a relevant field of study to account for two (2) years of experience, BS/BA Degree in a relevant field of study to account for four (4) years of experience, etc.? | No, the experience and education requirement are specific to the certification requirement as outlined in Technical Exhibit 4. |
| 34 | RFP Instructions to Offerors | The RFP and PWS does not provide labor category descriptions. Can the government please provide based on the required staff allocated within the request? | Sample Labor categories are found in PWS 1.6.8 special Qualifications. It is up to the contractor to propose adequate staffing to perform the work. |
| 35 | Section L, p. 68, bullet 10 | Would the Government consider smaller font for tables, graphics, call outs to being Arial 9? | See answer to question 26. |
| 36 | PWS Technical Exhibit 1, PRS # 1 |
L C, Tab A c II. 54, 69 54 TE 1
| 69 Tab A, C ii | There is a conflict between the TE 1 PRS and L, C, TAB A, c ii. The PWS states 15 working days and section L states "provide plan to replace personnel within 30 days of departure". | See answer to question 11. | ||
| 37 | PWS Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60 Table | Can the Government detail how they came up with the estimated hours of 1871 per FTE/year? There are 11 federal holidays (88 hours) and because of the seniority of this effort majority of the workforce will have 15 days of PTO (120 hours) which comes up to 1872 productive hours per FTE/year. | The estimated hours were based on OPM, which identifies 1871 as full time productive hours - 80 Holiday, 80 Annual Leave and 56 sick. Please see attached link: |
https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-administration/fact-sheets/computing-hourly-rates-of-pay-using-the-2087-hour-divisor/
38 PWS Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60 Table Can the Government clarify what "I ITIL V4" corresponds to? Also is there an IAT requirement for this position?
ITIL corresponds to Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) version 4 or later. There is no an Information Assurance Technicians (IAT) equivalent.
| 39 | PWS 1.6.8.1. Special Requirements, p. 36 | Will the Government clarify that the total number of Key Positions are 6 (one per labor category) since there are two categories (Senior IT Systems Solution Architect and Systems Engineer Senior OS Virtualization) that have several FTEs associated with the task. | There are six (6) key personnel positions but an offeror may propose more than one individual to perform the requirement of a key personnel position. See answer to Question 22 above. | |
| 40 | Section L, p. 68, Bullet 10 | Will the Government consider allow the use of 11X17 landscape to depict the organizational chart. 8X10 landscaped and Arial 12 pitch is insufficient to provide the level of detail requested . | No. | |
| 41 | Section L Section M, p. 70, Factor 3 Past Performance paragraph 4 | Will the Government reconsider the requirement for the dollar value of at least $14 million dollars per year in order to be considered of similar magnitude. This dollar figure is well above the threshold currently supporting other TRADOC COE's and potential disqualifies significant past performances that provide similarly complex IT/Cyber experiences. This also creates an unfair advantage for Joint Ventures that will leverage their large business mentor instead of highlighting an 8(a) with the experience to support this effort. | The RFP Addendum to 52.212-1 has been revised to clarify the dollar value that will be considered for each adjetival rating defined in the 52.212-2 Factor 3: Past Performance; Past Performance Relevancy Rating table. In addition, the RFP Addendum to 52.212-1 has been revised to allow past performance references from teaming partners, subcontractors, affiliate companies, and joint venture partners. | |
| 42 | PWS 5.1.4.2, p. 45 | The Contractor shall establish and maintain a document repository for CCoE G6 SOPs, continuity books, TTPs, EIPs, packets, ensuring version control, and other KM best business practices in according with AR 25-400-2. Does KM stand for Knowledge Management? | Yes, KM stands for Knowledge Management. | |
| 43 | PWS p. 40 paragraph 2.2. | Will there be an updated Acronyms list? Several acronyms are not listed in the original acronyms list | No. An updated acronym list will not be provided. | |
| 44 | PWS pp. 54 and 69 C. (2) c. ii | |||
| Technical Exhibit 1 | The evaluation criteria in (2) c. ii. (page 69) lists "Plan to replace personnel within 30 days of departure"., however the Technical Exhibit 1, PRS #1 (Pag 54) lists the replacement requirement as "within 15 working days". Can the Government clarify which time to replace is the requirement? | See answer to question 11. | ||
| 45 | PWS pp. 60 and 61 Technical Exhibit 3 | The hours listed in Technical Exhibit 3 are 147,809 however, when individual hours are added, the total is 149,680. Can the Government please confirm which total is correct and provide and updated table? | See answer to question 27. | |
| 46 | Clause 252.219-7010, Notification of Competition Limited to Eligible 8(a) Participants - Parnership Agreement (OCT 2019), p. 22, Sub-Paragraph a (3) |
If the competition is to be limited to 8(a) concerns within one or more specific SBA regions or districts, then the offeror's approved business plan is on the file and serviced by Small Business Administration, Georgia Area District Office.
| Can the government confirm that this solicitation is not limited to one or more specific SBA regions or districts? | Yes, the solicitation is not limited to one or more specific SBA regions or districts. | |||
| 47 | Security Requirements, pp. 30 and 43, 1.6.7 Security Requirements | The PWS states (Page 30) – “at work performance start, all positions require finalized Top Secret (TS) with eligibility for TS with Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance to be maintained throughout the life of the contract.” Page 43 states “All positions will require TS/SCI clearances at start”. Do all positions require a fully adjudicated TS/SCI to start or TS with SCI eligibility? | The requirement is a Top Secret (TS) with SCI eligibility at contract start date. See PWS for changes. See also Addendum to the DD254. | |
| 48 | Technical Exhibit 3 Projected Workload Data, p. 60 | Are resumes required as Key Personnel for all FTE within each labor category or is just one FTE per labor category considered to be key? |
• Program Manager, Senior Operations Chief (1 FTE)
• IA Policy and Compliance Certified Professional – (1 FTE)
• Cyber Operations Research Analyst – Senior – SME (1 FTE)
• Senior IT Systems Solution Architect – (6 FTEs)
• Systems Engineer – Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network – (9 FTEs)
• Audio Visual Fabrication Engineer – Senior – (1 FTE)
| See answer to question 22. | |||
| 49 | Technical Exhibit 3 Projected Workload Data, p. 60 | The total estimated hours shown in Technical Exhibit 3 is 147,809 hrs (79 FTEs = 1,821 hrs/FTE). However, when the hours are added up, the actual cumulative total is 149,680 hrs (80 FTEs) Can the government confirm the actual number of FTEs? | See answer to question 27. |
| 50 | Technical Exhibit 3 Projected Workload Data, p. 60 | The total estimated hours shown in Technical Exhibit 3 for Systems Administrator – Senior - OS, Virtualization, Network is |
33,678 hrs (18 FTEs). However, the Computing Environment (CE) column lists a total of only 17 technical certifications. Can the government confirm what additional technical certification(s) is required or if the total FTE count should be 17 vice 18?
The Government estimate is 18 CMEs however it is the offerors responsibility to propose and deploy the correct labor types, mix, number and hours required to satisfactorily and professionally meet all PWS requirements.
| 51 | ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 – Instructions to Offerors – Commercial Items, p. 70, Para C. Sub para: VOLUME III: Factor 3 – Past Performance. Sub para (6). | The para states PPQ “…questionnaire must be received by the contracting office 18 October 2022 at 11:00 AM ET.” Can the government please extend the due date for the PPQs? | Yes. See answer to question 3. |
| 52 | PWS p. 48, 5.2.7.1. | Unless offerors have inside knowledge of what technology comprises the VTA, offerors are challenged to provide an understanding and technical approach within the Technical volume. Can the government identify the technology stack hardware and software used in the Virtual Training Area (VTA). | VTA utilizes OpenStack but is converting to Vmware. |
| 53 | PWS p. 54, Technical Exhibit 1 PRS | PRS #1 performance standard specifies providing qualified key personnel IAW the PWS 5. Including replacements within 15 working days 100% of the time is an unrealistic performance standard in today’s environment. Would the government consider changing it to 30 days 90% of the time? | No, see answer to question 11. |
| 54 | PWS p. 54, Technical Exhibit 1 PRS | PRS #4 a Fixing STIGs within a prescribed number of days does not consider what is required to fix the vulnerability. Some require software modifications and testing or product replacement which could take more than 45 days making 100% compliance monthly unachievable. Would the Government consider removing “to be 100% STIG compliant” or use CATs are mitigated within approved POA&M time 100% of the time. | Yes, see PWS 5.3 changes. |
| 55 | PWS pp. 56 and 58, Technical Exhibit 2 CDRL A013 | Phase-In Plan is due 5 business days after award. Would the Government consider changing to 10 business days allowing the contractor to review the awarded contract and the post award meeting to take place. | No. |
| 56 | PWS p. 60, Technical Exhibit 3 | Please confirm the total of hours is 149,680 vs 147,809. After totaling all the hours in the table, it totals to 80 FTE vs 79., | See answer to question 27. |
| 57 | PWS pp. 61 and 62, Technical Exhibit 4, Figure 1 Summary of IA Workforce Qualification Requirements | The last 3 rows specify experience with certification level. Please explain how this translates to the multiple labor categories years of experience. For example, Intermediate verses Senior both require IAT II. Please confirm that the only years of experience between the levels is only number of years applying the IA Certification. | Correct, the number of years of experience applies to the IA Certification. However, it is incumbent upon the contractor to ensure its workforce has the necessary education, knowledge, certification(s), and experience to perform effectively for the level of the position (intermediate, senior, etc.) |
| 58 | Section L p. 70 C Proposal Contents, Vol II (1) | 3rd sentence states “The Offeror shall identify its demonstrated experience, and that of any teaming partners, in performing all three (3) PWS task areas. Please confirm the 3 PWS task areas are 5.1., 5.2, and 5.3 and not a., b., and c.. listed under this paragraph. | The PWS task areas are 5.1., 5.2., and 5.3. for demonstrating experience. Paragraph a, b, and c in this section are for risk mitigation. |
| 59 | Section L p. 70 C Proposal Contents, Vol II (1) | It states, “The offeror shall identify 5 recent and relevant past performance references.” Is less than 5 acceptable? |
If yes, would that imply a different page count enforcing a 3-page limit on each past performance reference?
| The offeror shall identify 3 recent and relevant past performance references. If the offeror provides less than 3, then it would not imply a different page count enforcement. | |||
| 60 | Section L p. 70 C Proposal Contents, Vol II (4) | It States, “References with a dollar value of at least $14 million dollars per year are considered of a similar magnitude”. The current contract hasn’t achieved this level of magnitude. For SB to have numerous contracts of this magnitude, let alone 1 would limit competition or force SB to heavily rely on large companies. Would the government consider changing the annual value to $7m a year to match the current contract spending. | See answer to question 41. |
| 61 | PWS p. 48, 5.2.7.1. | Unless offerors have inside knowledge of what technology comprises the VTA, offerors are challenged to provide an understanding and technical approach within the Technical volume. Can the government identify the technology stack hardware and software used in the Virtual Training Area (VTA). | See answer to question 52. |
| 62 | Section L p. 72, C proposal Contents, Vol IV (2) | Since the RFP does not provide enough data for offerors to build a Basis of Estimate for the Labor, are all offerors required to price the exact labor categories and hours identified in PWS Technical Exhibit 3? | Refer to PWS 1.6.8: The Contractor shall be responsible to propose and deploy the correct labor types, .mix, number and hours required to satisfactorily and professionally meet all PWS requirements. |
| 63 | Section L p. 72, C proposal Contents, Vol IV (2)b. | The instructions request offerors to provide fully burned labor rates for each proposed labor category for each contract year even though this is a FFP contract. Does that mean the Government will treat these rates as ceiling rates for the life of the contract? | The proposed fully burdened rates for each proposed labor category may be utilized for price reasonableness determination as described in the RFP 52.212-2. The resultant contract will be firm fixed price. |
| 64 | Attachment 3, , Pricing Worksheet CLIN Prices Tab | Please confirm vendors are to price option year 5, CLINS 5001. SF 1449 only goes to 4001 and specifies 4 option years. | See answer to question 14. |
| 65 | Attachment 3, Pricing Worksheet CLIN Prices Tab | Please correct the equation to calculate total evaluated price. | See answer to question 14. |
| 66 | Attachment 4 TCPPE | Can the Government provide instructions on how they want Attachment 4 filled out. Are we to provide an average hourly rate in row 6? | No. The Government will not provide instructions on how to fill out Attachment 4. The template is provided as an example only and should be adjusted to reflect the Offeror's proposed professional compensation plan. The RFP Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Sheet 1 should be completed for each proposed professional labor category. |
| 67 | PWS pp. 36 and 37, 1.6.8., 1.6.11 | Please confirm there are no education requirements (college degrees) and/or professional experience requirements for any of the Key Personnel positions? | All education/experience requirements are reflected in Technical Exhibit 4. |
| 68 | RFP pp. 36-37, pp. 60-61, 1.6.8, 1.6.11, Technical Exhibit 3 | The government lists Key Personnel across six (6) Labor Categories, some of which, according to Technical Exhibit 3, include multiple FTEs (Full Time Equivalents). Can the government confirm the Key Personnel requirement is for only six (6) individuals (FTEs)? | See answer to question 22. |
| 69 | RFP pp. 60-61, Technical Exhibit 3 | Total Estimated hours are listed as 147,809. However, the sum of the historical hours shows – 149,680. Can the government please explain the difference between the two figures? | See answer to question 27. |
| 70 | Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Pricing Sheet | Are Offerors allowed to revise Total Compensation Plan Pricing sheet formulas and formatting to align with Offerors cost estimating methodology? | Yes. As stated in the Attachment 4 Notes, the items listed as fringe benefits should not be considered as either mandatory or all inclusive. The Offeror should adjust the template to properly reflect all the cost elements included in the proposed compensation package. Offerors are responsible to ensure all the formulas in all worksheets are accurate and correctly reflect the Offeror's desired pricing. |
| 71 | Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Pricing Sheet | Are Offerors required to submit Total Compensation Plans for Labor Categories solely provided by Subcontractors? | No. It is not required. However, the total compensation plan for professional labor categories solely provided by subcontractors may be submitted as part of the Offeror's proposal. It may also be submitted directly to the RFP POCs by the proposal submittal date and time. If proposed, it is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure the subcontractors submit their corresponding total compensation plans by the required date and time. |
| 72 | RFP | Many companies are structured with multiple divisions or multiple legal entities that individually perform Prime Contracts but fall under a broader corporate umbrella. Recognizing such corporate structures exist across the industry, the procurement rules and numerous GAO decisions have made clear that procuring agencies may evaluate and credit an offeror with the past performance and corporate experience of affiliate companies where the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the affiliate (e.g., workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will be meaningfully contributed to contract performance. |
Would the Government please confirm the Offeror may include prime contract past performance and experience of an affiliate company so long as the Offeror demonstrates how the resources of the affiliate will meaningfully contribute to the performance of the opportunity?
Will the government please confirm Past Performance Questionnaire responses from an Offeror's affiliate(s) can be submitted and that such submissions will be evaluated equally to those Past Performance Questionnaire responses submitted by an Offeror acting as the prime contractor?
| See answer to question 6. | |
| 73 | RFP pp. 54, 69, and 76 PRS Table C.(2).c.ii.B., Element 1 |
| Page 54, PRS Table specifies the contractor has 15 working days to onboard replacement personnel. |
Page 69 specifies the contractor has 30 days to replace personnel after departure.
Page 76 specifies the contractor has 30 days to replace personnel following their departure.
Would the Government please confirm the permitted timeframe to onboard replacement personnel is 30 days?
| See answer to question 11. | |||
| 74 | RFP p. 38, 1.6.16 | Will the Government clarify whether the awarded contractor for this contract will be given a 30-day observation period as part of or in addition to the 30-day Phase-in period as specified in Section 1.6.16 Phase Out? | The Phase-In Period is 30 calendar days as stated in PWS 1.6.16 with a period of performance from 28 February 2023 to 27 March 2023. The Phase-Out period will occur at the end of the contract performance, which may occur at the end of Option Year 4 if the option is exercised. |
| 75 | Will the Government please confirm that a signed Letter of Commitment is required for all proposed Key Personnel and must be included with the resumes of proposed Key Personnel? | No. | |
| 76 | B Proposal Content 68 B(10) | The government stipulates that text, illustrations and tables must use a 12-pitch font. “Pitch” is defined as "the number of characters printed per inch." |
Please clarify that the use of Arial 12-point font is acceptable.
In addition, Arial 12 is a very large font, and is difficult to use in tables and graphics. Will the government please allow 10 point font for tables and illustrations?
| See answer to question 12 and 26. | |||
| 77 | Section 1.6.16, 38, 2 | Elaborate on Phase-in requirements (4). “Participate in joint inventories and sign for GFP IAW the Government’s transition schedule Develop and submit any required deliverables”. Is “Develop and submit any required deliverables” intended to be a part of the “Participate in joint inventories and sign for GFP IAW the Government’s transition schedule” statement, or intended to be an additional Requirement (7)? | "Develop and submit any required deliverables" is a separate task. |
| 78 | Section B Proposal Content, p. 68 10 | States that “All text shall be single spaced”. Does this limitation apply to heading spacing as well? | Spacing between headers, sections, and paragraphs may include a blank line. |
| 79 | 252.219-7010 NOTIFICATION OF COMPETITION LIMITED TO ELIGIBLE 8(a) PARTICIPANTS-- PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT (OCT 2019) |
p. 22 (3) If the competition is to be limited to 8(a) concerns within one or more specific SBA regions or districts, then the offeror’s approved business plan is on the file andserviced by Small Business Administration, Georgia Area District Office.
| Please clarify what this means. Our 8(a) business is service by the Washington DC office. Does this still qualify us for bid? | See answer to question 46. | |||
| 80 | 1.6.8 Special Qualifications, p. 36, 1.6.8.1 Special Requirements (Key Personnel) ITEM NAME IAT Level | |||
| Do we need to send Letters of Intent (LOIs) for the key personnel? | See answer to question 75. | |||
| 81 | p. 70, VOLUME III: Factor 3 – Past Performance. | Do we need to submit at least five Past performance references or can we send 3 or less? | ||
| The RFP Addendum to 52.212-1 has been revised. Three (3) recent and relevant past performance references shall be submitted in Volume III of the proposal. | ||||
| 82 | VOLUME III: Factor 3 – Past Performance. | Does each PPR have to be $14M or is it an aggregate of all five? | The Government will separately determine the relevance of each past performance reference. The Government will not aggregate the magnitude or scope of past performance references when determining relevance. | |
| 83 | 5.2.7.1, p. 48 | Can the Government confirm that heat is used for ITSM? If not, what is heat used for? | Yes, heat is used for ITSM. | |
| 84 | 5.2.7.1, p. 48 | Can the Government confirm that glance is being used for online web presentations? If not, what is glance being used for? | Glance is used to manage images inside an environment. | |
| 85 | 5.2.7.1, p. 48 | Can the Government confirm that horizon is being used for virtual desktop software? If not, what is horizon being used for? | Yes, Horizon is used for virtual desktop software. | |
| 86 | Volume III Factor 3 Past Performance, p. 70, (1) | The RFP state the Offeror shall identify five (5) recent and relevant past performance references the Offeror and/or its Teaming Partner(s) performed either as a Prime or Subcontractor utilizing Attachment 1, Past Performance Reference Sheet. Will the Government consider revising this requirement to limit the # of references that can come from a subcontractor (that will be performing at least 25% or more of the proposed work) to no more than two (2), for meeting the requirement of five (5) references? | See answer to question 81. | |
| 87 | Volume III Factor 3 Past Performance, p. 70, (4) | The RFP states that for a reference to be relevant, the effort must be similar in scope and magnitude to the services being procured under this solicitation. Scope is the measure of the services similarity to the task requirements identified in PWS Part 5. Magnitude is the measure of similarity of the dollar value that exists between the current requirement and the past performance reference. References with a dollar value of at least $14 million dollars per year are considered of a similar magnitude to the subject requirement. Magnitude will be evaluated using the dollar amount of work actually performed on the past performance reference during the three (3) years prior to the due date for receipt of offers. | ||
| For a SB Offeror to be able to provide 5 contract references valued at $14M per year with performance in the last 3 years would be extremely difficult, if not impossible because a SB that has several contracts of that size, would likely not be small under the revenue size standard for NAICS 541512. Will the Government please reduce this requirement to $7M per year? | See answer to question 41. | |||
| 88 | RFP PWS pp. 76 and 29, Element 2 Management Approach, 1.6.1 Quality Control | The evaluation criteria for the management approach states Offeror’s need to demonstrate a sound management/quality control plan. |
1) Will the Government please confirm that Offerors are required to include a draft QCP as part of their proposal in Volume I and in accordance with PWS 1.6.1, submit a final QCP 5 days after contract award?
RFP 52.212-2 Element 2, Management Approach, has been revised to remove the QCP requirement. The QCP is required five (5) days after contract award. The PWS has been revised to reflect this change.
| 89 | RFP PWS 76, 29, Element 2 Management Approach 1.6.1 Quality Control | 2) Will the Government please confirm that the draft QCP is excluded from page count? | See answer to question 88. |
| 90 | RFP Section C Proposal Contents, Volume I Factor 1, Subparagraph (8) |
RFP Section C Proposal Contents, Factor 3 Past Performance
| RFP Section C Proposal Contents, pp. 71, 78, and 79 Subparagraph (8) Factor 3 Past Performance, Quality | There are 3 places in the RFP that states the Offeror and its teaming partners are required to demonstrate compliance with FAR 52.219-9. This FAR clause is for small business subcontracting plans and is not applicable to small businesses. As this requirement is a small business 8(a) set aside, will the Government please remove these 3 references? | The RFP has been revised to remove the Small Business Subcontracting Plan requirement. | ||
| 91 | RFP Section C Proposal Contents, Volume I Factor 1, Subparagraph (2), PWS 1.6.8 and 1.6.11 | |||
| Technical Exhibit 3, pp. 71, 36 – 37, and 60, Subparagraph (2) | Will the Government please confirm that there is only 1 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Key Personnel for Senior IT Systems Solution Architect and only 1 FTE Key Personnel for Systems Engineer - Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network and that in total there at six (6) Key Personnel with one resume per position for a total of six (6) resumes? | See answer to question 22. | ||
| 92 | RFP, p. 70, Volume III Factor III Past Performance paragraph (6) | Will the Government confirm if Offerors are required to include CPARS (in lieu of PPQs) as part of Volume III and that further, CPARS are excluded from page count? | See answer to question 8. | |
| 93 | RFP p. 68, B. Proposal Content, subparagraph (9) | Will the Government please permit Offerors to include an executive summary in each Volume (not to exceed 2 pages) to allow Offeror’s to introduce itself and its team, and exclude it from page count? | No. | |
| 94 | RFP Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Sheet 1 | Is the Government requiring Offerors to complete this format (Sheet 1) for every labor category, or is the Government requesting one labor category as an example to display the company fringe structure? | The Offeror shall complete RFP Attachment 4: Employee Total Compensation Plan Sheet 1 for each proposed professional empoloyee labor category. | |
| 95 | RFP Attachment 1: Past Performance Reference Sheet | RFP Attachment 1 Past Performance Reference Sheet is in Times New Roman (TNR) 10 pt font. Will the Government please confirm that Offerors are not to modify the font size/type on this form and that it is compliant to leave the form in TNR, 10 pt font? | Yes, see answer to question 9. | |
| 96 | RFP Attachment 3: Pricing Worksheet CLIN Prices Tab | The RFP evaluation criteria for Volume IV Factor 4 Price Tab B (RFP p. 72) states that the Period of Performance is a Base + Four Options, however the CLIN Prices tab of RFP Attachment 3 includes a Base + 5 Options (CLIN 5001/5002). Will the Government please confirm the correct period of performance and provide a revision to the RFP and/or Pricing Worksheet? | See answer to question 14. | |
| 97 | RFP Attachment 3: Pricing Worksheet Labor Cost Detail Tab | Can the Government advise if Offerors are permitted to add columns to the Labor Cost Detail Tab to provide a breakdown of the proposed price for each Contract Line Item (CLIN)? | The Offeror may provide further information to support its proposed price. However, the Offeror shall provide all the information required in Attachment 3, Pricing Worksheet. | |
| 98 | PWS Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60, Projected Workload Data | The hours listed for Items 1 – 20 in the Estimated Hours column total 149,680. However, the total hours listed at the bottom of the table in the Total row are 147,809. This represents a delta of one (1) FTE. Can the Government please confirm that the total hours should be 149,680? | See answer to question 27. | |
| 99 | PWS Technical Exhibits 3 and 4, pp. 60 and 61 Projected Workload Data, IT Requirements for Certification Position Categories | In Technical Exhibit 3, the Computing Environment (CE) column states “N/A” for several of the positions that have an IAT level of IAT II as well as CSSP-A. However, in Technical Exhibit 4, the CE row for IAT II and CSSP-A states “Yes”. Will the Government please confirm that a CE certification is not required where Table 3 states “N/A”? If that is not the case, will the Government please provide the required CE certifications? | All DoD 8570 approved baseline certification requirements are reflected in TE 4 Figure 2. | |
| 100 | PWS Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60, Projected Workload Data | The number of hours provided for Item 15, Systems Administrator – Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network equates to 18 FTEs (33,678/1,871). However, the Computing Environment cell for this Item appears to indicate 17 FTEs. Can the Government please confirm the number of FTEs for Item 15? | The Government estimate is 18 CMEs; however, it is the offerors responsibility to propose and deploy the correct labor types, |
mix, number and hours required to satisfactorily and professionally meet all PWS requirements.
| 101 | RFP p. 70 Volume III - Factor 3. Volume III: Factor 3 – Past Performance (2) | In the RFP instructions for Factor 3 – Past Performance, the Government asks for the “Government point of contact responsible for monitoring performance under the contract (name, phone, email, address).” There is currently no field within the Past Performance Reference Sheet (RFP Attachment 1) to include the point of contact address—will the Government add an “address” field to the Past Performance Reference Sheet? | The RFP contains a typographical error and should state the POC information is name, phone, email address. A physical address for the POC is not required. | |
| 102 | RFP p. 70 Volume III Factor III Past Performance paragraph (2) | In the instructions for Factor 3 – Past Performance, the Government asks for the “name of effort” for each past performance reference; however, there is no place to include that information within the Past Performance Reference Sheet (RFP Attachment 1). Will the Government add a “name of effort” field to the Past Performance Reference Sheet? | The Offeror shall include the name of the effort in block 2 of Attachment 1: Past Performance Reference. | |
| 103 | RFP pp. 70 and 79, Volume III Factor III Past Performance paragraph (2) and (4), Factor 3 Past Performance; Magnitude | In the Instructions for Factor 3 – Past Performance, Paragraph (2) states that Offerors are to include “dollar value of work actually performed during the three (3) years prior”. Paragraph (4) states “magnitude is a measure of the similarity of the dollar value that exists between the current requirement and the past performance reference contract; as well as it says references with a dollar value of at least $14 million dollars per year are considered of similar magnitude. Further the evaluation criteria for Factor 3 Past Performance magnitude states that for references with a performance period that exceeds one year in length – the dollar value of the reference will be divided by the total performance period to determine if it meets the required magnitude. | ||
| Will the Government please modify the RFP to clarify that dollar value (for purposes of evaluating magnitude) will be based on the contract’s annual value which will be evaluated based on Offeror’s total contract value divided by the total number of years in the contract period of performance? | See answer to question 41. | |||
| 104 | RFP Attachment 1, Past Performance Reference Sheet | The Past Performance Reference Sheet (RFP Attachment 1) states that it may be altered but the required information listed below MUST be included. Offerors are limited to a max of 3 pages per past performance reference. To maximize page space for Offeror’s past performance narrative/detail, will the Government confirm that it is acceptable for Offerors to remove (delete) the Government’s narrative instructions in Boxes 12, 13, and 14? | See answer to question 13. | |
| 105 | Proposal Contents, Volume III: Factor 3 - Past Performance. P. 70 paragraph 6 | The Solicitation mentions that the Past Performance Assessment Questionnaires (Attachment 2) must be submitted to the contracting office by October 18th, 2022, at 11 am. However, the cover page of Attachment 2 (Past Performance Cover Letter and Assessment Questionnaire) mentions that they are due “no later than 15 days after receipt of request or November 2, 2022, whichever occurs first”. Could you please clarify as to when these PP Questionnaires are due? | Yes. See answer to question 3. | |
| 106 | PWS Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60 Table Item 14 | Will the Government please confirm for the two (2) Systems Engineer-Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network positions which require the VCAP level certification, that any of the specialized tracks (e.g. the Data Center or Network) are deemed acceptable? | See answer to question 38. | |
| 107 | PWS Technical Exhibit 3 and Technical Exhibit 4, pp. 60, 61-62, Exhibit 3 - Table Item 14 Exhibit 4 – IASAE II Experience | Will the Government please confirm that relevant experience performing information assurance roles for at least 5 years, is considered same (acceptable) as having 5 years of IASAE experience? | See answer to question 33. | |
| 108 | C. Proposal Contents, Volume I Factor 1, p. 69 (2)b. | For the Key Personnel positions, the RFP instructions require Offerors to include the proposed individual’s “civilian work experience by position held in sequential date order”. |
Can the Government please confirm that this instruction also applies to any military experience, which will also be considered to meet the minimum professional experience requirements?
| The RFP has been revised to include military experience. | ||
| 109 | RFP Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60 | Technical Exhibit 3 estimates 11,226 hours for the Senior IT Systems Solution Architect (Key Personnel role) and 16,839 for the Systems Engineer - Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network (Key Personnel role). |
| Please confirm that in addition to the other four Key Personnel identified in the RFP, only resumes for the lead Key Personnel roles of Senior IT Systems Solution Architect and Systems Engineer – Senior – OS, Virtualization, Network are required with proposal submission? | See answer to question 22. | |||
| 110 | RFP Technical Exhibit 3, p. 60 | Would the Government accept a Master’s degree in Computer Information Management instead of the IAM III certification for the Cyber Operations Systems Analyst role? | No, All DoD 8570 approved baseline certification requirements are outlined in Tech Exhibit 4 Figure 2. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .