CEHO Combined Solicitation Answers.docx

CEHO combined answers to Solicitation Questions – Historical Support Services (W912HQ26QA023)

1. Can we include work we are actively conducting for USACE under the current BPA as past performance?

Answer: YES.

2. Is there a number of past performance examples we need to provide (or are limited to)?

Answer: At least two.

3. 3.2.2 states, “The draft work plan will be required to be provided to USACE within five (5) business days after kickoff meeting. USACE will have five days to review the plan. The Contractor will submit a final work plan within five days of receiving USACE's comments.” Will this be true of all BPA calls or can this be superseded?

Answer: CEHO can readily extend that period when needed or appropriate.

4. Is an offeror who proposes personnel for a subset of the PWS labor categories considered responsive to this solicitation? Or are you expecting a response from one or multiple offerors who propose personnel for the entirety of the labor categories?

Answer: We’re collecting resume information at this stage – that will be part of our final evaluation. Please provide resumes that are representative of personnel who will be provided for the anticipated call(s) – it does not need to be for the entirety of the labor categories.

5. Labor Categories and Named Personnel: Based on the Government's clarification that an offeror is not required to propose all Appendix A labor categories, for each labor category that an offeror elects to propose, must the offeror identify a specific individual and submit that individual's resume at the Master BPA stage? Or may the offeror demonstrate its capability to recruit/provide qualified personnel for certain categories when responding to future BPA Calls?

Answer: Similarly to the answer (4) above, we prefer that offerors provide resumes that are representative of personnel who will be provided for the anticipated call(s). Capability to recruit is not a substitute.

6. One Individual for Multiple Labor Categories: May the same individual be proposed under multiple Appendix A labor categories if that individual's education, experience, and other qualifications meet or exceed the requirements for each applicable labor category?

Answer: Yes.

7. Key Personnel: Section H2 refers to Government approval of changes in “key personnel” and directs offerors to the key positions displayed in Appendix A. Please clarify which specific Appendix A labor categories are considered Key Personnel for purposes of the Master BPA proposal.

Answer: Key personnel are all those listed in Appendix A.

8. Labor Rates/Pricing at Master BPA Stage: The solicitation states that prices will be negotiated/proposed for individual BPA Calls; however, H5 refers to labor categories and “prices set forth in the BPA.” Please clarify whether offerors are required to submit labor rates or other pricing with the Master BPA proposal. If labor rates are required, please identify the required pricing format and whether such rates will serve as ceiling rates for future BPA Calls.

Answer: Labor rates are not required at this stage; they are for BPA calls.

9. Writing/Work Samples: For Appendix A labor categories requiring writing samples, finding aids, design samples, interview transcripts, or other work samples, may one representative sample be used to satisfy the sample requirement for more than one proposed labor category or individual when the sample is applicable to each, or are separate samples required for each proposed individual/labor category?

Answer: Yes, the work sample may apply to multiple requirements. Please note if that is the case in your proposal.

10. Past Performance Projects: Is there a minimum or maximum number of relevant past performance projects that an offeror should submit for the Master BPA? If no maximum applies, may an offeror submit multiple recent and relevant projects demonstrating different portions of the PWS scope (for example, historical research/writing, archival research, and museum/collections support)?

Answer: We’re looking for recent and relevant past performance from the past three years. There is no minimum or maximum number of projects.

11. Past Performance for Ongoing Contracts: May an ongoing federal contract within the three-year recency period be submitted as relevant past performance when substantial performance has occurred but the contract has not yet been completed? If so, may the Government client evaluate performance completed to date on the PPQ?

Answer: Yes, past performance can be from an ongoing contract.

12. Proposal Organization: Does the Government have a preferred order or format for organizing the Master BPA proposal—for example: Technical Approach, Key Personnel/Resumes, Work 2 Samples, Relevant Past Performance, and PPQs—or may offerors establish their own organization provided all solicitation requirements are addressed?

Answer: We prefer the order of the first two factors as outlined in Section L, V.: 1) Technical Approach and 2) Past Performance – however offerors may address the requirements in any order.

13. Section B (p. 2) and Clause H1.6 (p. 37) state that prices will be proposed and negotiated per individual BPA Call. However, Clause H5 (p. 40) specifies that upon receipt of an RFBCP, "the contractor shall provide a proposal... utilizing the labor categories and prices set forth in the BPA". Does the Government require fully burdened labor rates (FBLRs) for the 21 labor categories to be submitted with the Master BPA proposal due September 21, 2026, or is pricing strictly deferred to individual BPA Call solicitations?

Answer: No, these rates will be for the BPA calls.

14. Section L.V (pp. 54–55) and Section M (p. 58) outline evaluation factors for Technical Approach and Past Performance, but Section L contains no instructions, format requirements, or evaluation criteria for a Price Volume at the Master Agreement stage. If pricing is required for the Master BPA submission, will the Government provide a standardized pricing template and confirm whether pricing will be evaluated for reasonableness?

Answer: Pricing is required for BPA calls, not the Master Agreement

15. Sections 2.6 and 2.7 (pp. 7–8) indicate that travel outside the Washington, DC metropolitan area is cost-reimbursable under the Joint Travel Regulations (JTR). Will individual BPA Calls include separate Cost-Reimbursable (no fee) CLINs for authorized travel and material/shipping costs, or must offerors encapsulate these direct expenses within Firm-Fixed-Price task deliverables?

Answer: BPA calls will include separate line items for travel and materials.

16. Clause H2 (p. 38) states that the Government reserves the right to approve changes in key personnel during the agreement and refers to "key positions as displayed in PWS in Appendix A, Labor Categories". Please confirm whether all 21 labor categories listed in Appendix A are classified as Key Personnel, or clarify which specific roles (e.g., Project Manager, Supervisory Archivist, Supervisory Project Historian) carry mandatory Key Personnel status.

Answer: All labor categories are key personnel.

17. Appendix A (pp. 21–29) specifies substantial evaluation samples for multiple labor categories—including three finding aids/project descriptions for Supervisory Archivist, two DACS finding aids for Archivist, three writing samples each for Supervisory Project Historian, Project Historian, and Historian, lists of 10–20 interviews and 3–5 transcripts for Oral Historians, three display samples for Museum Specialist, two writing samples for Archaeologist, and three design samples for Graphic Designer. Are offerors required to submit these extensive work samples with the Master BPA proposal on September 21, 2026, or will work samples be evaluated only at the BPA Call level when specific labor categories are ordered?

Answer: Evaluation samples are required as part of the Master BPA proposal.

18. Section L.V.1.b (p. 54) evaluates the offeror's capability to provide qualified personnel that meet or exceed PWS standards. Does the Government require named resumes and signed Letters of Intent/Commitment for all 21 labor categories within the Master BPA proposal, or will general staffing plans and qualification matrices suffice for the base award?

Answer: See Answer 5 above.

19. Several labor categories in Appendix A (such as Supervisory Archivist and Editor) explicitly define professional experience substitutions for advanced degrees, while others (such as Digital Archivist, Project Historian, and Archaeologist) do not. Will the Government consider qualifying equivalent professional experience in lieu of specified master's degrees for all labor categories where extensive, direct federal experience is demonstrated?

Answer: Yes, we can consider equivalent professional experience.

20. Section 2.6 (p. 7) states that "Unless otherwise noted, the Contractor will provide all of the equipment necessary to perform the work under this contract". However, PWS 3.2.7 and 3.2.8 require digitization and archival processing of fragile, oversize, and historical USACE collections. Will the Government provide on-site specialized scanning hardware (e.g., planetary, overhead book, large-format map scanners) at CEHO facilities in Alexandria, VA, or must the contractor furnish and transport specialized scanning hardware to Government sites?

Answer: The government will not provide on-site scanning hardware for historical collections. However, in digitization and archival BPA calls, the contractor will be able to transport the collections to their facility for processing.

21. PWS Sections 3.2.7, 3.2.11, 3.2.12, and 3.2.13 require contractor integration with CEHO network shared drives, XML/EAD tools (e.g., Oxygen), library cataloging software (e.g., EOS, OCLC), and web hosting environments. Will the Government provide contractor personnel with required software licenses, seats, and network accounts, or must the contractor procure independent enterprise licenses?

Answer: The government will not provide software licenses. The contractor must procure licenses for widely-available formats.

22. PWS Section 3.2.14 (p. 12) states the contractor will provide archaeological support and prepare in-depth reports. Does this scope entail active on-site archaeological fieldwork, Phase I/II surveys, and shovel testing on USACE project sites, or is the effort confined to archival research, National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106 compliance reviews, and desk-based cultural resource assessments?

Answer: Site visits may be required for documentation, but we are focusing on cultural resource assessments, not shovel testing.

23. Section 4.1.7 (p. 15) requires the contractor to develop an OPSEC Plan within 90 days of contract award and maintain a certified Level II OPSEC coordinator. Must offerors identify and provide verification of a certified Level II OPSEC coordinator within their proposal submission, or must this credential be formalized within 90 days following Master BPA award?

Answer: The certification can be completed within 90 days of award.

24. Section 4.1.4 (p. 14) outlines requirements for Common Access Cards (CAC) requiring Tier 1 investigations, while Appendix A explicitly mandates a Secret clearance for the Digital Archivist (p. 23). Please confirm whether Secret clearances are required for any of the other 20 labor categories, or if Tier 1 favorable adjudication satisfies performance requirements for non-digital archivist personnel.

Answer: Only the digital archivist needs to be able to obtain and maintain a Secret clearance.

25. Section 1.0 (p. 4) indicates support will extend to CEHO in Alexandria, VA, all USACE enterprise organizations, and the U.S. Army Engineer School at Fort Leonard Wood, MO. Section F2 (p. 31) states that "The majority of the work will take place at the Contractor's facility". Can the Government provide an estimated percentage breakdown of remote/contractor facility work versus required on-site performance at Alexandria, VA, and Fort Leonard Wood, MO?

Answer: No – this will depend on the specific BPA Call.

26. PWS Section 3.2.5 (p. 9) notes that "The Contractor may also be tasked with publishing historical products". Please clarify whether "publishing" is limited to layout, typesetting, proofing, and delivering camera-ready electronic packages (e.g., press-ready PDFs, ePub files) for Government printing, or if contractors will be required to fund and execute commercial physical printing and binding runs under this BPA?

Answer: “Publishing” could be ready-to-print PDF files and/or products for digital publication. A rare BPA call might require the contractor to actually arrange for physical printing.

27. PWS Section 3.2.10 (p. 11) notes that exhibit installation "may include the fabrication of display cases, mounts, signage, and lighting". Will exhibit fabrication tasks be solicited as turnkey design-build efforts where the contractor procures and builds physical casework, or will USACE provide standard exhibit structures with the contractor providing graphic skins and mounting?

Answer: It depends on the specific BPA call, but there may be requirements for customized display products.

28. Appendix A establishes separate positions for Supervisory Archivist vs. Supervisory Museum Specialist, and Archivist vs. Museum Specialist/Technician (pp. 21–28). For BPA Calls encompassing cross-functional records and material artifact collections, will the Government permit contractors to cross-utilize qualified personnel across these overlapping labor categories to prevent duplicative project management and supervisory costs?

Answer: Yes, if personnel meet all the requirements of both categories, the same person can fulfill both positions.

29. Section 4.2.1 (p. 16) states that a finalized QCP will be accepted 30 days after contract award, and Deliverable A5 (p. 17) lists the QCP as a deliverable. Section L.V.1 (p. 54) does not list a QCP under proposal evaluation factors. Please confirm that offerors are not required to submit a completed QCP within the September 21 proposal submission, but rather within 30 days post-award.

Answer: Yes, a quality control plan can be developed and submitted within 30 days of an award.

30. Section L (pp. 51–56) does not specify page limits, margins, font sizing, or page layout rules for Factor 1 (Technical Approach) or Factor 2 (Past Performance). Please clarify: What are the maximum page limits for Factor 1 and Factor 2? Are resumes, writing samples, finding aids, and commendation letters exempt from page limits? What are the formatting parameters (e.g., minimum font size, margins, file type)?

Answer: There are no page limits. Try to use 11-point font or higher. Combined PDF files are preferred.

31. Will the government exclude cover/title pages, table of contents, acronym pages, resumes/letters of commitment, submitted CPARs and PPQs, and Appendices from page count limits?

Answer: there are no page count limits.

32. Section L.I (p. 52) requires proposal submission via email to Giuseppe G. Mirizzi. What is the maximum email file size (in megabytes) accepted by the agency's email gateway, and will the Government permit proposal delivery via DoD SAFE or multiple partitioned emails if file sizes exceed server limits?

Answer: I think attachments should be around 20MB. DoD Safe is okay for larger file sizes. Please notify Giuseppe Mirizzi of DoD Safe dropoff.

33. Can the government email system accept zipped files/folders (as part of the submission) or does the government system strip those attachments?

Answer: Yes, we can accept .zip files around 20MB or less.

34. Sections L.V.2.a and L.VI (pp. 54–56) instruct offerors to demonstrate recent and relevant past performance from the previous three years and provide completed PPQs. How many past performances project references (minimum and maximum) is an offeror required or permitted to submit?

Answer: See Answer to question 10 above.

35. Section L.VI (p. 55) provides Form PPQ-0 for client references, while noting that the Government may utilize CPARS. Will the Government accept completed, finalized Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARS) in lieu of submitting a separate PPQ-0 for projects where official CPARS evaluations already exist in federal databases?

Answer: No, we need the NAVFAC/USACE PPQ for each project the offeror includes in its proposal for the past performance evaluation factor. f the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires.

36. Section L.V.2.a (p. 54) states offerors must demonstrate business or personnel experience across PWS Section 3 tasks. Will the Government evaluate the past performance and qualifications of proposed key subcontractors and team partners with equal weight to that of the prime contractor?

Answer: Yes, we will equally consider the past performance and capabilities of proposed key subcontractors.

37. Section L.V (p. 55) states: "It is our intent to award an agreement (BPA) to all responsible and responsive offerors whose proposals conform to this solicitation and meet or exceed all minimum technical and qualification requirements". Conversely, Section L.V (p. 54) and Section M (p. 58) reference a "comparative evaluation" where award will be "most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered". Please clarify whether the Master BPA will be awarded to all qualifying, technically acceptable offerors meeting minimum qualifications, or if proposals will be comparatively ranked under a subjective Best Value Tradeoff.

Answer: It is our intent to award a BPA to all SBs that demonstrate they are fully capable and have solid past performance.

38. In support of the scope requirements, what systems or software is currently in use by CEHO for management of collections?

Answer: We are currently using ContentDM – but may consider other cataloging software in the future.

39. The government states “The prime Contractor will manage work distribution to ensure there are no Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) considerations.” Can the government define examples of what it considers an OCI consideration that might be applicable under this BPA support?

Answer: See examples in FAR 9.508.

40. The government states “The Government anticipates that much of the work required will be in the Washington metropolitan area. Unless otherwise specified, services provided in the District of Columbia, as well as in the neighboring jurisdictions in Maryland and Virginia, including the Office of History's office in Alexandria, Virginia, will be considered local and the Contractor will not be reimbursed for travel expenses in those areas.” Will the government explicitly define what it considers as local travel (e.g. 50 mile radius of Point A) in reference to “local”?

Answer: No, the local area is generally as described in the quoted section of the question above.

41. The government states “Unless otherwise noted, the Contractor will provide all of the equipment necessary to perform the work under this contract.” Will the government explicitly describe what equipment/materials will be provided to perform the work under this contract? If no equipment/materials will be provided, can the government provide a list of currently utilized equipment/materials that are being used to provide the same services required in the BPA in order to allow offerors to adequately plan costs for acquiring?

Answer: No – generally the contractor needs to provide all the equipment and materials, and we do not have a list of all the equipment currently being used.

42. Will the government provide “plug” numbers/amounts for pricing travel/ODCs?

Answer: No

43. Can we include work we are actively conducting for USACE under the current BPA as past performance? YES.

44. Is there a number of past performance examples we need to provide (or are limited to)? At LEAST TWO.

45. 3.2.2 states, “The draft work plan will be required to be provided to USACE within five (5) business days after kickoff meeting. USACE will have five days to review the plan. The Contractor will submit a final work plan within five days of receiving USACE's comments.” Will this be true of all BPA calls or can this be superseded? CEHO can readily extend that period when needed or appropriate.