Q&As.docx
DOCX document 26 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Education Support Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- W912J2-19-R-0010
About this file
Q&As
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| W912J2-19-R-0010-P00001_Solicitation_Training_Team.pdf | ||
| W912J2-19-R-0010_Solicitation_Training_Team.pdf | ||
| Vendor_Cost_Breakdown_Worksheet_Educational_Support_Services.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
W912J2-19-R-0010 - Education Support Services
Q: Who is the incumbent contractor providing this service to Govt. currently? What is the contract number, the contract value and the Period of Performance? Is the scope of the incumbent contract the same as this RFQ?
A: LEADING SOLUTIONS, LLC, W912J2-18-P-0063, $304,234.40, 22 Sep 18 – 21 Sep 19. This contract was for one (1) training team lead instructor and three (3) training team instructors. Other than one more training team instructors the scope is the same.
Q: In the absence of any specific number of trips etc., to be able to accurately estimate the travel cost, do we use the Plug-In number of $37,500 for travel CLIN 0003?
A: The Government will determine the amount of CLIN 0003, which is anticipated to be $37,500. This CLIN will not be considered when evaluating the price of proposals.
Q: Is this a LPTA or a Best-Value Trade-off procurement? Page 10 - 11 of 58 - 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014) indicates a Best Value. However, the FdeBizOpps posting and PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS - Page 57 - 58 states outlines that it is LPTA. Moreover under LPTA - Past Performance is either "Acceptable" or "Unacceptable". No Past Performance is deemed Neutral or Unknown and in context of LPTA, it is Neutral or Unknown is Acceptable. Will the Govt. kindly clarify this?
A: This procurement is LPTA. Provision 52.212-2 has been revised. Additionally past performance has been removed as an evaluation factor. The proposal instructions have also been revised.
Q: Would the Government consider adopting a "best value" or "best value tradeoff" evaluation approach for this solicitation?
A: No, this is LPTA. Se comments above also.
Q: The Proposal Instructions on page 57 of the RFQ describe the Management Capability as needing to "clearly outline the offeror's capability to meet the requirements of the [PWS]" and that "[w]ithin the Management Capability plan, the offeror shall have a detailed plan of action for recruiting and replacing unfilled positions". Is this language meant to imply that this section should contain an approach to each of the requirements in PWS § 5 and also a plan for recruiting and replacing personnel? If so, would the Government consider increasing the page limit for this section (currently 5 pages) to allow responses to more adequately address each of the PWS requirements?
A: No, five pages should be enough to adequately demonstrate technical capability of meeting the Performance Standards of the Performance Requirements Summary (Technical Exhibit 1 of the PWS), and recruiting and replacing plan.
File details come from the government source that posted it.