Amendment 0002 Answers to Questions.pdf

W911S022R0001 Amendment 0002

Industry Questions and Answers

No Source Document Comment / Discussion Question(s) Government Responses

1 RFP Attachment 2

- DD 254

Combined Arms

Center (CAC)

Omnibus, block

13, para. 10g

A designated representative from the TRAC Security

Office will ensure required employees are NATO briefed prior to access being granted.

Is TRAC the correct security office.

Should it be CAC?

No. The DD254 has been updated in para 10g. ‘TRAC’ has been replaced with ‘Cognizant’.

2 RFP Attachment 3

- Leavenworth KS

Wage

Determination

Wage Determination No.:

2015-5105

Revision No.: 16

Date Of Last Revision:

12/27/2021

Should this Wage Determination be replaced by: Wage Determination No.:

2015-5105 Revision No.: 17

Date Of Last Revision: 03/15/2022.

Yes, Wage Determination No.: 2015-

5105 Revision No.: 16 Date Of Last

Revision: 12/27/2021 has been replaced with Wage Determination No.: 2015-

5105 Revision No.: 17. Date Of Last

Revision: 03/15/2022.

3 Solicitation, para

L.4.3.1.4.1, page

"Each task order performed under an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract shall be considered a separate past performance reference unless the Offeror can demonstrate that the

Offeror received more than one task order award consecutively for the same requirement that required the same level of performance."

Can an offeror provide past performance at the IDIQ contract level citing multiple task orders with relevant work scope as a single past performance citation?

No, unless the Offeror can demonstrate that the Offeror received more than one task order award consecutively for the same requirement that required the same level of performance (Ref: Request For

Proposal (RFP), para L.4.3.1.4.1.).

4 Solicitation, para

L.4.3.1.3, page 43 of 50

"Offeror shall include in

Offeror’s Proposal Volume

III, Tab D a chart or schedule describing all such changes in the organization of the

Offeror and Teaming Partners over the past five (5) years.

As part of this explanation, the Offeror shall show how these changes impact the

If an offeror or teaming partner has undergone an organizational change in the past five years, such as acquiring a company, but there is no impact to the relevance of any identified past performance effort, is the offeror still required to identify all organization change history information?

Yes, the offeror is required to provide information regarding the organization structure change for any identified past performance efforts (Ref: Solicitation, para L.4.3.1.3.).

relevance of any identified past performance efforts."

5 PWS, page 37, Specified Labor

Categories, and

RFP Attachment

5, Pricing

Workbook

PWS Attachment 1, Specified

Labor Categories, includes the following BLS LCATS that are not reflected in the Pricing

Workbook:

17-1021 - Cartographer and

Photogrammertrist

19-3022 - Survey Researcher

19-3091 - Anthropologist

19-4061 - Social Science

Research Assistant

25-1066 - Psychology

Teacher, Postsecondary

25-1199 - Postsecondary

Teacher - Other

27-3043 - Writer and Author

Request confirmation that those specified labor categories are / are not required to be included in the Pricing

Workbook, and the estimated hours for each.

Attachment 1, Labor Categories and

Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational

Classifications, labor categories are not required to be included in the Pricing

Workbook.

Attachment 1, Labor Categories and

Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational

Classifications, are general definitions of what the Government would consider skilled personnel; education and work experience that could be required in order for a Contractor to be successful.

Note: More specific skills, education, and work experience may be required depending on the TO. There may also be labor categories that arise at the TO level that are highly specialized. In this case, the Request for Task Order

Proposal will include the necessary information (i.e.: BLS information) in order to establish a baseline and conduct price analysis (Ref: Performance Work

Statement (PWS) ATTACHMENT 1 –

LABOR CATEGORIES, Para A.1.1. –

A.1.5)

6 RFP, page 18, Clause 52.222-42

Statement of Equivalent Rates lists an excess of 40 Labor

Categories at an equivalent rate of GS-15. This appears to be disproportionately high given the amount of actual

GS-15 Government employees on Fort

Leavenworth.

Can the Government provide insight as to its statement of equivalent rates? Are these rates based on actual salaries of contractor personnel, or perhaps on the loaded rates charged for these LCATS by current contractors?

These rates are based on Government estimates only. This statement is for information purposes only: this is not a wage determination (Ref: RFP, FAR

Clause 52.222-42 – Statement of

Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires

(MAY 2014)).

7 Solicitation, para

M.3.5.7, page 50 of

"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, may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance."

If an offeror does not provide a relevant past performance, that addresses one or more of the specified Functional Areas

(1, 2, or 4), how will the lack of an associated performance reference impact the overall Past Performance rating?

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, 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’ (Ref:

RFP, Para M.3.5.6)

8 PWS, C.5 Specific

Requirements, para C.5.2

Functional Area 2, pg 20 of 41

"Training, Education, &

Exercise Development, Management, Support, &

Leader Development. The

Contractor shall conduct training, training and education development, training management, and leader development support services at any echelon for the

USACAC. The following fields of work are associated with this functional area:"

Did the government intend for the functional area to include Exercise

Development, Management, Support?

The paragraph following the title does not include exercise development, management or support as work the contractor shall do. Additionally, the fields of work described in paragraphs

C.5.2.1 through C.5.2.7 do not include exercise development, management, or support functions. The fields of work described relate to Training, Training &

Education Development, Training

Management, & Leader Development only. Can the government provide clarification regarding the potential for exercise development, management, or support under Functional Area 2?

The title of the FA has been updated to alleviate confusion. The FA title is now

“Development, Management, Support of

Training, Education, Exercises, &

Leader Development”.

9 Sec. L.3.3, pg. 40 of 51

Sec. L.4.1.5

Cover Sheet. Each volume shall contain a cover sheet clearly identifying the volume number, title, solicitation number, date, the Offeror's name, DUNS number, Cage

Code, and Business Size.

Based on SAM's recent change from

DUNS to Unique Entity Identifier Code does the Government require the DUNS number or the UEI code in places where it references a requirements for the

DUNS number?

The Government requires the Unique

Entity Identifier (UEI) Code in lieu of

DUNS number. The RFP has been updated to require UEI code in all sections where DUNS code is referenced.

TAB F, Subcontractor

Information. The Offeror shall disclose all teaming partners/subcontractors the

Offeror proposes using for performance of services. The

Offeror shall provide the following information for all proposed teaming partners/subcontractors:

Company Name, address, CAGE Code, DUNS number, and business size and socio-economic status. If Offeror is submitting as an 8(a) Joint

Venture, the Certification of

Compliance required in 13

CFR 124.513(j) shall be provided in this TAB.

10 L.4.5.3.2 L.4.5.3.2. Offerors shall use

1,920 hours for a productive labor year, as reflected in

Attachment 5. An Offeror may decide to deviate slightly from the 1,920 productive labor year hours in its technical execution, but for purposes of price evaluation the Government will use the

1,920 amount. If an Offeror decides to deviate from the

1,920 productive labor year hours, it shall fully describe its reasoning in the Price

Narrative, Volume V Tab B, and the calculations shall be clearly shown in the Pricing

Workbook.

Considering the provided hours are for the purpose of price evaluation, allowing offerors to deviate will prevent the

Government from an apples to apples comparison between offers. Recommend the Government revise to remove the ability to deviate from standard man/yr and provided hours by labor category.

The deviation language has not changed.

For purposes of price evaluation the

Government will use the 1,912 amount, as stated in the updated solicitation. If an

Offeror decides to deviate from the

1,912 productive labor year hours, it shall fully describe its reasoning in the

Price Narrative, Volume V Tab B, and the calculations shall be clearly shown in the Pricing Workbook (Ref: RFP, Para L.4.5.3.2.).

11 Attachment 1 -

LCATS; A1.4

"Contractors may deviate from the definitions above when responding to task order solicitations so long as the deviations are clearly identified in their task order proposal. For example, a

Contractor might label a position as “Senior”, but the position does not require a

MA/MS degree. Likewise, a

Contractor might label a position as “Junior” even though the position requires more than 5 years’ experience. Deviations shall be clearly identified in proposals submitted in response to task order solicitations."

Are bidders permitted to use the

LCAT/bill rate corresponding to the position title/label? For example, if a position is labled as "Senior," but does not require a MA/MS degree, can the position be bid using the Senior LCAT rate?

Specific positions, requirements, and/or certifications will be defined at the TO level.

Questions should be directed to the

Administering Contracting Officer at time of

RTOP issuance.

12 C.1.12.7 Key

Positions and

Point(s) of Contact

(POC)

Requirements, A1.3 Senior; and

A1.5

PWS section C.1.12.7 requires offerors to submit resumes at the base contract level, of the individual and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract(s) who shall have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the TO workforce and shall have full authority to commit resources and make decisions for the contractor(s). The Labor

Category and qualifications required for these individuals are that of a Senior Project

Management Specialist, defined in Attachment 1 of this PWS. Attachment 1 of

The Government has identified the

LCAT for the key personnel positions on this solicitation to be Senior Project

Management Specialist whereas on the previous CAC IDIQ solicitation (still in its period of performance) it was defined as Program Manager. In amendment 2 of the 2016 CAC IDIQ solicitation (e.g., W911S0-16-R-0002), the government reduced the educational requirement of the LCAT for the key personnel positions from requiring a Master’s degree to requiring a Bachelor’s degree.

The government reduced the educational requirement of the key personnel of a contract with nine (9) Functional Areas with an estimated ceiling of $231M and increased the educational requirement on this solicitation which has seven (7)

PWS C.1.12.7. has been updated to lower the base contract requirement to

Intermediate Project Management

Specialist, as opposed to Senior.

the PWS Defines the

Qualifications of the Senior to be: Over 10 years of experience and a MA/MS degree. Typically works on high-visibility or mission critical aspects of a given program and performs all functional duties independently. May oversee the efforts of less senior staff and/or be responsible for the efforts of all staff assigned to a specific job. Section A1.5 provides the following functional description for

Project Management

Specialist: Analyze and coordinate the schedule, timeline, procurement, staffing, and budget of a product or service on a per project basis. Lead and guide the work of technical staff.

May serve as a point of contact for the client or customer.

Functional Areas with an estimated ceiling of $145M. When mapping labor categories and benefits, it does not seem justifiable to increase the requirement on a contract that is now significantly smaller in size. By making the Project

Management Specialist a “Senior” is clearly an elevation in educational requirements, when the number of

Functional Areas and overall dollar value of the contract has decreased is not consistent and makes some current CAC

Program Managers unqualified. We request the government change the

Project Management Specialist key personnel requirement from “Senior” to

“Intermediate”. If the Government is not inclined to change the key personnel requirement from “Senior” to

“Intermediate”, we request the government change the education requirement for “Senior” to be “BA/BS in place of the MA/MS degree” or include additional years of experience in please of the "MA/MS" degree.

13 PWS C.6 PRS # 4: Minimum

Acceptable Standard (MAS)/

Performance Threshold is defined as "No more than one report is 2 days late".

Can the Government clarify its

Minimum Acceptable Standard (MAS)/

Performance Threshold as to what is meant by "no more than one report" as

PRS # 4 has been defined as the submission of one QCP at the IDIQ level?

It is anticipated that this deliverable requires two submissions, the initial, and a revision after receiving the

Government’s comments. One of those two submission is allowed to be up to 2 days late before it becomes an NCR and

CPARS reportable deficiency.

14 PWS C.7.1 Deliverables Because the QCP is defined as a deliverable in PWS C.1.11 and is also defined in PWS C.6 under PRS # 4, shouldn't the QCP be listed as a

The PRS clearly identifies the PWS section that defines the QCP requirements and delivery information.

To avoid unnecessary duplication of deliverable in this section as Section

C.7.1.3?

information, the QCP will not be added to paragraph C.7.1.

15 DD254 CUI

Addendum #1

A security classification guidance (SCG) will be provided to address the potential aggregation and compilation of controlled unclassified information

(CUI) to a classified level.

When will the SCG be provided to bidders?

This information will be provided at time of award.

16 PWS Sec C, C.1.10.1

The Joint Personnel

Adjudication System (JPAS) has been deprecated.

Does the government mean the Defense

Information System for Security

(DISS)?

Yes, the updated PWS reflects the

Defense Information System for

Security (DISS).

17 RFP Section

L.4.2.4

L.4.2.4 Tab D bullet number 5 states: "Process to replace personnel within 5 business days of departure"

Is that a requirement to start the recruitment process within 5 days of position vacancy or to have a replacement within 5 days? If the latter, this requirement is probably unattainable and an unrealistic “time-to-fill” requirement. In an “ideal world of recruiting practices,” offerors could easily post a job position requisition, conduct interviews, extend offers, and have a vacancy filled within 5-days.

However, offerors are not operating in a

“perfect world”. Offerors are currently operating within the constraints caused by the “mass exodus” of workers as a result of the pandemic. This is evident in all industries and has caused candidate sourcing timelines to significantly increase. Moreover, the 5-day timeline also does not account for any required security clearance requirements. The estimated time to receive an interim clearance from a newly initiated investigation is 3-6 weeks. Another factor to take into account is the professional courtesy of a resignation notice. While, not mandatory, providing

The requirement is to complete the recruiting and corporate on-boarding of a replacement candidate, or provide a temporary backfill, within 5 business days of a vacancy. The Government acknowledges that obtaining a Common

Access Card, and other Government specific in-processing tasks are not included in this timeframe. In the previous acquisition of the CAC

Omnibus, a majority of the SB offerors were able to meet this requirement.

Therefore, the Government believes it is both reasonable and realistic.

2-weeks’ notice when leaving a position is customary among a professional workforce. Taking into account all of these factors, replacing an employee within 5 days is unrealistic. We request the Government provide a more realistic timeframe for vacancy replacement.

Based upon experience in the current professional working environment, our recommendation is a minimum of 20 business days.

18 RFP Section

L.4.5.3.2

L.4.5.3.2. Offerors shall use

1,920 hours for a productive labor year, as reflected in

Attachment 5. An Offeror may decide to deviate slightly from the 1,920 productive labor year hours in its technical execution, but for purposes of price evaluation the Government will use the

1,920 amount. If an Offeror decides to deviate from the

1,920 productive labor year hours, it shall fully describe its reasoning in the Price

Narrative, Volume V Tab B, and the calculations shall be clearly shown in the Pricing

Workbook.

Juneteenth holiday was added this year.

Should the proposed productive labor hours be reduced by the additional 8 hours of paid leave that is to be provided to employees?

Yes. The RFP and Pricing Workbook have been updated to reflect a productive labor hour usage of 1,912 hours.

19 RFP Section

L.4.3.1.3

Organization Structure

Change History: The

Government states, "To facilitate this relevancy determination, the Offeror shall include in Offeror’s

Proposal Volume III Tab D a chart or schedule describing all such changes in the

Can the Government clarify and specifically specify that it is only requiring the documentation and presentation of Organization Change

History for only those Offerors and/or

Teaming Partners that have provided

Past Performance citations at Tab E in the Past Performance Volume since the

Government's concern is only related to

Yes, the offeror is required to provide information regarding the organization structure change for any identified past performance efforts (Ref: Solicitation, para L.4.3.1.3.).

organization of the Offeror and Teaming Partners over the past five (5) years. As part of this explanation, the

Offeror shall show how these changes impact the relevance of any identified past performance efforts."

"how these changes impact the relevance of any identified past performance efforts"?

20 RFP, Section I -

Contract Clauses

& RFP

attachement 5 -

Pricing

Workbook_with

RFP Updates

The Government list the

Labor Categories (LCATs)

(Employee Class) and the

Monetary Wage (GS Grade and Step) identifying the classes of service employees expected to be employed.

However, the government has listed only 75 LCATs in the

RFP table and the Attachment

5 has 78 LCATs.

Would the government provide the similar information for the missing

LCATs (Business Operations Specialist

- Other - Associate; Editor - Senior;

Training and Development Specialist -

Senior)?

Clause 52.222-42 – Statement of

Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires

(MAY 2014) chart has been updated to include missing LCATs - Business

Operations Specialist - Other -

Associate; Editor - Senior; Training and

Development Specialist – Senior.

21 NA NA Will there be an Unrestricted Pool on the

CAC MATOC?

No, there is no unrestricted pool on the

CAC Multiple Award Indefinite-

Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (MA IDIQ) contract.

22 NA NA What is the anticipated number of SB awards?

The Government contemplates awarding a target of seven (7) IDIQ contracts as a result of this solicitation; however, it reserves the right to award more, less, or none at all (Ref: RFP, Para M.1.1.)

23 NA NA What happens to previously awarded

Unrestricted contracts upon their final expiration, if they are intended to be recompeted?

Previous unrestricted contracts conclude upon their final expiration. New requirements that fall within the CAC

Omnibus scope will fall under the new

CAC Omnibus MA IDIQ.

24 L.4.3.1.1. Tab B –

Consent Letters

L.4.3.1.1. Tab B – Consent

Letters. In Volume III, Tab B of its Proposal, the Offeror shall provide Consent Letters

Will the govt provide a sample consent letter, or template, as part of the final solicitation package?

No, Consent Letters are not Government documents so there is no template to provide.

authorizing the release of past performance information executed by a subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint

25 L.4.3.1.2. Tab C L.4.3.1.2. Tab C –

Commercial Client

Authorization Letters. In

Volume III, Tab C of its

Proposal, the Offeror shall provide a Commercial Client

Authorization Letter authorizing the Government to request information from the Commercial Client regarding the Offeror's and/or or Teaming Partner’s performance when

Commercial Clients are used.

Will the govt provide a commercial client authorization letter template as part of the final solicitation package?

No, the Commercial Client

Authorization Letters are not

Government documents so there is no template to provide.

26 L. 4.3.1.4. Tab E L. 4.3.1.4. Tab E – Past

Performance References. In

Volume III, Tab E of its proposal, the Offeror shall identify three (3) recent and relevant past performance references the Offeror, and/or it’s Teaming Partner(s), performed as a Prime or as a subcontractor.

Will the govt provide a template for past performance references as part of the final solicitation package?

No, the requirements for past performance references are listed in

RFP, Para L.4.3.1.4. Tab E – Past

Performance References.

27 L.4.5.4.5 L.4.5.4.5. TAB D – Total

Compensation Plan for

Professional Employees

(TCPPE). A Total

Compensation Plan for

Professional Employees

(TCPPE) shall be provided for the labor categories deemed as a 'Professional Employee' by the Government in accordance with FAR

If we do not use subcontractor rates to establish IDIQ ceiling rates for the 6 labor categories deemed as a

'Professional Employee', will subcontractors be required to submit a

TCPPE?

No, subcontractors are not required to submit a TCPPE if the Prime does not use subcontractor rates to establish IDIQ ceiling rates (Ref: RFP, L.4.5.4.5.)

provision 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

The Offeror shall describe its

TCPPE in the price narrative, and shall clearly indicate how the Offeror will be able to provide uninterrupted high-quality work and will show ability of the proposed compensation structure to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel to meet mission objectives.

Professional Employee labor categories are marked with a

‘(PE)’ in the Fixed Price

Labor tab of Attachment 5.

28 Attachment 4 Past

Performance

Cover Letter and

Questionnaire 1-6

Will the government provide a final

(non-draft) version of the PPQs?

Yes, Draft watermarks have been removed from PPQ template and a final version has been included with this amendment.

29 W91QF422R0001

The Government has stated within

Section M.1.1 that this is a LPTA

Source Selection Process. They subsequently state in Section M.1.2 the

Government intends to award contracts to SB Offerors whose proposals represent the Best Value to the

Government, as determined by the

LPTA evaluation criteria described herein. All non-price evaluation criteria are "acceptable/unacceptable" (i.e.

pass/fail) based as expected with a

LPTA source selection. What is the basis of including the Best Value representation statement when none of the evaluation criteria allow for best value to be represented?

FAR 15.101 – Best Value Continuum states, “An agency can obtain best value in negotiated acquisitions by using any one or a combination of source selection approaches. In different types of acquisitions, the relative importance of cost or price may vary.” The referenced source selection approaches are (1)

Tradeoff process, and (2) Lowest price technically acceptable source selection process.

30 W91QF422R0001

Section M.3.5.7 states the evaluation ratings for Offeror Past Performance to be either Acceptable or Unacceptable.

When considering then determination of an "unacceptable" past performance rating, the Government states this is based on "not having a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort." Given the context of Section

M.3.5.6, whereby Offerors determined to have unknown past performance will be considered "Acceptable", what is the incentive for Offerors to submit any past performance references at all?

DOD Contracting Officer’s are required to follow the principles and procedures in Director, Defense Procurement and

Acquisition Policy memorandum dated

April 1, 2016, entitled “ Department of

Defense Source Selection Procedures,” when conducting negotiated, competitive acquisitions utilizing FAR part 15 procedures located at PGI

215.300.

31 W91QF422R0001

45 of 50, L.4.5.4.6

This section states that in completing

Attachment 5, Pricing Worksheet, once all information has been provided, enter the total billable labor rate for the listed labor categories. Offerors must then calculate the total value for each labor category for each year using the

"estimated hours provided." The Fixed

Price Labor tab lists 5 columns, "Total

Price@Burdened Rate", one for each of the five (5) performance years. Could the Government confirm it want

Offerors to use Column B hours

(totaling 1,389,830) as listed per category for each year totaling

6,949,150 for the 5 years of performance?

No, the Column B hours totaling

1,389,830, is the total estimated hours for the 5-year ordering period. ‘All 5 years’ was added to Column B.

32 Attachment 5

Pricing Workbook

Fixed Price Labor tab

Using the Instructions to Offerors in

Section L.4.5.4.6, it appears the

Government want Offerors to use the estimated labor hours listed in Columns

B of the Price Worksheet in each year of performance. However the title of

Column B suggests the hours listed are

These are the total hours over the 5 year period. See answer to Question 31.

over the 5 year period, not for each year.

Could the Government clarify if

Offerors are to use Column B hours consistently in EACH year of

Performance to provide a total evaluated price?

33 Attachment 5

Pricing Workbook

Fixed Price Labor tab

This tab lists "See Note 2 and See Note

3" in row 5. No explanation to these notes can be found in the Pricing

Worksheet. Can the Government clarify what these notes mean and provide?

‘Note 2’ and ‘Note 3’ references were removed from RFP Attachment 5 –

Pricing Workbook.

34 W91QF422R0001

44 of 50, L.4.5.3.2

This section states the "Offerors shall use 1,920 hours for a productive labor year, as reflected in Attachment 5.".

Attachment 5 does not use this number as its basis in Column B. Could the

Government clarify the hours to be use in Attachment 5 to calculate individual labor categories for each period of performance?

See answer to question 18 regarding productive labor year hours.

Pricing Workbook Column B reflects an updated number of hours to account for the above mentioned change, and also now states to assume the yearly hours are the total hours divided by 5.

35 Attachment 5

Pricing Workbook

Fixed Price Labor tab

Could the Government clarify the difference between its request to use

1920 hours as reflected in Attachment 5

(under Tab B, volume IV, Price, Instructions of Offerors) and the hours listed in Column B which are to be used in calculating "Total

Price@Burdenened Rate"?

The hours have been updated to 1,912.

See answers to questions #10 and #34.

36 W91QF422R0001

Please confirm Offerors are NOT to complete Section B with its submission and only provide this data as part of

Attachment 5?

Correct, Offerors are NOT to complete

Section B of the RFP with its submission. Offerors shall provide this information as part of its Attachment 5 submission.

37 W91QF422R0001

B.1.4 states, " The maximum program ceiling amount of this contract is

$145,150,000.00." If Offerors are to use the estimated hours provided in Column

B of the Pricing Worksheet for each performance year the total evaluated

The Government disagrees. The ceiling is established using the Government’s estimated usage and values based on various resources. The ceiling is reasonable to the Government at this time.

price submitted by Offerors would greatly exceed this amount. Could the

Government clarify the hours to be used against each labor category in each performance year to help determine an

Offerors total evaluated price?

38 L.4.5.3.2 The government states that offerers shall use 1,920 hours for a productive labor year; however, the Federal Government recently added an additional holiday

(Juneteenth) that would reduce this basis to 1,912 hours. If IDIQ awardees have to account for the additional holiday on

Task Orders, the billable rate may exceed the contract rate given the difference in productive hour basis. Will the government update the productive labor year to 1,912 hours to account for the actual 11 Federal Holidays?

See answer to question 18.

39 L.4.2.4 Do resumes count against the overall

Volume page count?

No, RFP, Para L.3.9.2. has been revised to exclude resumes from the page count.

40 L.4.2.4 Tab D, Factor 1

The Government states "process to replace personnel within 5 days of departure". Can the Government please provide clarification if they expect replacement personnel to be assigned within 5 days of a vacancy developing or the process to fill the vacancy have begun within the 5 day period.

See answer to question 17.

41 Column B Lines 8-

Says total estimated hours is 5 years.

Should that be one year of hours per labor category or is that total combined hours for all 5 years per labor category?

See answer to question 31.

42 Notebook The Notes Tab that was on the draft workbook is missing on the final issued

Attachment 5. The final Attachment 5 refers to Note 2 but there is no Note 2 with the final issued document. Can the

See answer to question 33.

Government reissue Attachment 5 with the Notes?

43 L.4.3.1.4 Tab E Does the Government consider Past

Performance in one Functional (1, 2 or

4) (hence 1 for FA1, 1 for FA2 and 1 for

FA4) as sufficiently meeting the Section

M acceptability requirement or does each of the 3 submitted Past

Performances have to support all three evaluated Functional Areas (1, 2 and 4)?

Each Past Performance reference does not have to cover all three evaluated functional areas. the Offeror shall identify three (3) recent and relevant past performance references the Offeror, and/or it’s Teaming Partner(s), performed as a Prime or as a subcontractor as it pertains to FAs 1, 2, and 4 (Ref: RFP, Para L.4.3.1.4.).

44 L.4.5 It is understood that Labor ceiling rates are to be established for use on Task

Orders. From our experience the Labor categories do not include all the labor categories necessary to accomplish all the tasks within the functional areas.

Will award winners be able to propose additional labor categories when need for the task orders?

Yes but please reference PWS

ATTACHMENT 1 – Labor Categories and Bureau of labor Statistics Service

Occupational Classifications, Para A1.2.

The following are general definitions of what the Government would consider skilled personnel; education and work experience that could be required in order for a Contractor to be successful.

Note: More specific skills, education, and work experience may be required depending on the TO. There may also be labor categories that arise at the TO level that are highly specialized. In this case, the Request for Task Order

Proposal will include the necessary information (i.e.: BLS information) in order to establish a baseline and conduct price analysis.

45 Page 42, L.4.2.4 Q: Resumes for the Program Manager and Alternate Program Manager as required in RFP L.4.2.4 were not specifically listed as excluded from page count within RFP L.3.9.2. Can the

Government confirm that required resumes can be submitted as a separate attachment and excluded from page count?

See answer to question 39.

46 Page 42, L.4.2.5 Q: L.4.2.5 prescribes that Offerors submit a table summarizing their sources of expertise (prime and/or teaming partner) for the specified FAs and includes a sample that lists specific PWS

Task Areas. The instructions also allow

Offerors to “edit the chart as needed.”

However, not all PWS areas are listed in the Government’s sample table. Can the

Government confirm that Offerors are only required to address the PWS Task

Areas currently listed in the sample chart

(5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.4.3, 5.4.3.1, 5.4.3.2, and

5.4.3.3)?

The table summarizing the Offeror’s sources of expertise is intended to be a quick reference of the Offeror’s coverage of the functional areas and its subtasks. The table has been updated to clarify it includes the subtasks of each functional area.

Functional area 5.4 was intentionally expanded in the table as it contains more defined subtasks than the other functional areas.

47 Page 23, C.5.4 Q: Paragraph C.5.4 appears to expand the scope of the USACAC Omnibus

IDIQ to include non-USACAC entities, specifically TRAC. To allow Offerors to propose accurate pricing, will the

Government please clarify if they intend to support TRAC requirements on the

USACAC IDIQ? If so, will those projected requirements include only

TRAC-Leavenworth or potentially

TRAC-WSMR and TRAC-Lee?

The scope of this acquisition includes

TRAC activities at Fort Leavenworth.

This currently includes TRAC-HQ and

TRAC-Leavenworth. Specific task order requirements for these activities may include ancillary support for other

TRAC locations.

48 Page 23, C.5.4 Q: In order to ensure accurate pricing of proposed Labor Categories, will the

Government clarify whether other non-

USACAC entities (NETCOM, IMCOM, e.g.) will have access to the USACAC

Omnibus IDIQ?

No other Agencies are authorized to use this vehicle. Section G of the RFP has been updated.

49 PWS Page 37, A1.5; RFP Page

18-20, Clause

52.222-42

Q: The Statement of Equivalent Rates outlines a grade structure that does not reflect the current market rates on Fort

Leavenworth and USACAC. For instance, it lists both a “Photographer –

See Answer to question 6.

Associate” and a “Photographer –

Intermediate” as GS 15, 10+, which is significantly higher than current market rates based on Offeror’s knowledge of the Leavenworth area and does not include guidance on the Senior or SME levels. Further, there are labor categories found in the Omnibus PWS, Paragraph

A1.5 “Specified Labor Categories,” such as “Anthropologist,” that are not found in the Statement of Equivalent Rates. To ensure that Offerors can utilize current market rates to provide accurate pricing for each relevant labor category, will the

Government please remove the

Statement of Equivalent Rates?

50 Page 44, L.4.5.3.2, Col. B

Q: The Government states in Section L, “Offerors shall use 1,920 hours for a productive labor year, as reflected in

Attachment 5,” however in col. B of the

Pricing Matrix, the hours listed over 5 years do not all represent 1,920 hours per year per LCAT. Can the

Government please confirm that

Offerors should base their Total

Evaluated Price off the total estimated hours that are included in Column B of

Attachment 5 Pricing Workbook?

See answer to question 35.

51 Page 50, M.3.6.1 Q: M.3.6.1 indicates that Total

Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated by adding CLINs 0001 and 0002, and the 52.217-8 extension. The provided pricing template and Section B provide estimated NTE costs of $7,561,974.00 for CLIN 0002. Can the Government confirm whether the travel

Yes, the given Travel NTE amount of

$7,561,974.00 is for the entire 5 year

Ordering Period.

$7,561,974.00 plug is for the entire

IDIQ PoP?

52 Page 47, M.1.1 Q: Paragraph M.1.1 states this acquisition will be solicited, evaluated, and awarded using Lowest Priced

Technically Acceptable (LPTA) criteria.

Will the Government please clarify if

LPTA criteria is projected to extend to individual task orders on the IDIQ as well, or is there potential that task orders may be competed under Best Value

Trade Off criteria? Clarifying these issues is critical to accurate pricing of proposed Labor Categories that Offerors project to use for task order competition.

Reference RFP, Para G.3.4. and G.3.4.4.

53 L.4.3.1.4.1 &

M.3.5.3.2

In paragraph L.4.3.1.4.1, the government states that each task order under an IDIQ contract will be considered a separate past performance reference unless the

Offeror can demonstrate that the Offeror received more than one task order award consecutively for the same requirement that required the same level of performance.

However, as outlined in paragraph

M.3.5.3.2., in order for a past performance reference to be relevant it must be similar in nature of work, contract type, dollar value, size and complexity to the services/products being procured under this solicitation.

Applying this rationale, a past performance reference would need to equal $145M or more to be a qualifying past performance. Generally, a single

See answer to question 3.

Also, the Government does not expect to see past performance reference values equaling $150M. The relevancy requirements have been updated in the

RFP to address this concern.

task order under a MAIDIQ will not equal the $145M dollar value the CAC

Support Services effort requires.

Would the government consider allowing offeror’s to submit multiple

TOs on a single past performance reference as long as the referenced TOs I performed under the same MAIDIQ?

54 L.4.3.1.4.1 &

M.3.5.3.2

In paragraph L.4.3.1.4.1, the government states that each task order under an IDIQ contract will be considered a separate past performance reference unless the

Offeror can demonstrate that the Offeror received more than one task order award consecutively for the same requirement that required the same level of performance.

However, as outlined in paragraph

M.3.5.3.2., in order for a past performance reference to be relevant it must be similar in nature of work, contract type, dollar value, size and complexity to the services/products being procured under this solicitation.

Applying this rationale, a past performance reference would need to mirror the size and complexity of the whole CAC MA IDIQ to be a qualifying past performance. Generally, a single task order under a MAIDIQ would not reflect the entire scope of the offerors past performance under the MAIDIQ.

allowing offeror’s to submit multiple

TOs on a single past performance

See answers to question 3 and 53.

reference as long as the TOs are performed under the same MAIDIQ?

55 L.4.2.3

M.2.

M.3.4.1 and

M.3.4.2

PWS C.5.0-C.5.7.1

RFP Section L.4.2.5 states “The Offeror shall provide its proposed methodology to perform PWS FAs 1, 2, and 4.” RFP

Section M.2 states” Award for ALL of the Work.” RFP Section M.3.4.1 states

“Provided a sound approach to providing qualified personnel to successfully perform services in all

FAs.” RFP section M.3.4.2 states “The

Government’s evaluation will focus on the offeror’s specialized experience and proposed technical approach to PWS

FAs 1, 2, and 4.”

Attachment 1 to the RFP section C.5.0 states “Individual TOs are expected to include work that will require performance in one, or a combination of, the following Functional Areas” and goes on to delineate what is required within contract scope for Functional

Areas 1 through 7 inclusive in sections

C.5.1 -C.5.7.1.

Can the government clarify if offerors should address Functional Areas 3, 5, 6 and 7 anywhere in the proposal? Or should offerors only address the functional areas being evaluated (FA 1, 2, and 4)?

The Offeror shall provide its proposed methodology to perform PWS FAs 1, 2, and 4 only for Factor 2 and Past

Performance references at Factor 3.

(Ref: RFP, Para L.4.2.5 and L.4.3.1.4)

Factor 1 and 4 shall be addressed as stated in the RFP.

56 L.4.3.1.4.3 Paragraph L.4.3.1.4.3. states “The

Offeror shall demonstrate why each past performance reference is recent and relevant. References must have been performed for six (6) months or longer during the three (3) years prior to date for receipt of offers. Evaluation will focus only on work experience already

Correct, offeror’s should submit past performance references with active work at any point during the past five years

(see answer to question 76 for this update) as long as there were 6 months or more of performance completed under the contract.

performed. Yet-to-be performed work, experience prior to the last three (3) years, and work performed for less than six (6) months will not be considered.”

Can the government clarify the description of recency? As worded, only contract performance occurring between 03 MAY 2019 - present are considered recent. Or can offeror’s submit past performance references with active work at any point during the past three years (03 MAY 2019-present) as long as there was 6 months or more of performance completed under the contract (for example, a contract with a period of performance ending in

September 2019 within the specified time constraints but starting in 2015)?

Periods of performance occurring prior to the five (5) year cutoff will not be considered, and anything performed for less than six (6) months will not be considered.

57 L.4.2.5 / M.3.4.2 Can the government clarify if specialized experience (Factor 2) is subject to a specific timeframe?

Paragraph L.4.2.5 and M.3.4.2 do not mention experience parameters related to time; however, the table in L.4.2.5 requires POP.

No, there is no specific time frame.

58 M.3.5.6 / Table

M.2

Paragraph M.3.5.6. 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, 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, See answer to question 30.

‘unknown’ shall be considered

‘Acceptable’.

changing this to an evaluation criterion of “Neutral?” It seems unfair to give an acceptable rating for past performance that is not available or sparse. Given the way this is currently written, an offeror can receive an acceptable rating on past performance without submitting anything.

59 C.4.1 The first sentence states “The contractor shall furnish all facilities, materials, supplies, services, vehicles, temporary workplaces and equipment not furnished by the Government in section C.3 necessary to perform work required under this contract.”

Can the government clarify what vehicles and equipment it expects the contractor to provide given that the PWS tasks in section C.5 Specific

Requirements appear to be services related and not time and materials related?

There are no anticipated, specific vehicle or equipment requirements. However, there may be ancillary equipment or transportation requirements defined at the task order level.

60 C.5.0 The last sentence of paragraph C.5.0 states “However, work may be required outside of those listed that are still within this contract’s intended scope of work.”

Can the government clarify what work outside the PWS task areas in section

C.5 Specific Requirements are included in the scope of work without modifying the contract?

This will be determined at the task order level.

61 B.3 & A.1.5 There is a discrepancy of the IDIQ

Labor Categories between what is listed in the RFP (B.3) and the PWS (A1.5).

Eight Specified Labor Categories listed in the PWS A1.5 table are not included in the RFP table B.3 Labor Category listing. The Labor Categories that are missing in the RFP listing include:

• 11-9033 Education

Administrators, Postsecondary

• 17-1021 Cartographer and

Photogrammetrist

• 19-3022 Survey Researcher

• 19-3091 Anthropologist

• 19-4061 Social Science

Research Assistant

• 25-1066 Psychology Teacher, Postsecondary

• 25-1199 Postsecondary Teacher

– Other

• 27-3043 Writer and Author

Can the government confirm that the eight Labor Categories in A.1.5 will not be used?

No, this cannot be confirmed. Specific labor categories will be dictated at the task order level as stated in PWS A1.2.

62 Section I-K Several Contract Clause References listed in the RFP have been superseded by newer versions. For example, 52.204-8 - Annual Representations and

Certifications was updated in JAN 2022;

however, in Section K the solicitation references the MAR 2020 version.

Can the government clarify if offerors should include the new, updated FAR references or should offerors use the earlier versions listed in the RFP?

The RFP has been ‘refreshed’ to update applicable clauses and provisions. The following were updated as a result of this refresh:

1) 52.204-8

2) 252.211-7007

3) 252.204-7019

4) 252.204-7020

63 52.222-42 52.222-42 Statement of Equivalent

Rates for Federal Hires (May 2014)

Yes, the table has been updated.

Employee Class: “Business Operations

Specialist - Other – Associate” appears to be missing from the list. Is the

Government willing to provide the

Monetary GS Grade and Step for this labor category?

64 PWS A1.5 The Bureau of Labor Statistics Service

Occupational labor category (below) is not identified as a separate labor category in RFP Attachment 5. Is this intentional? Please advise.

SOC No. & SOC Title: 17-1021

Cartographer and Photogrammetrist

Functional Description:

Research, study, and prepare maps and other spatial data in digital or graphic form for one or more purposes, such as legal, social, political, educational, and design purposes. May work with

Geographic Information Systems (GIS).

May design and evaluate algorithms, data structures, and user interfaces for

GIS and mapping systems. May collect, analyze, and interpret geographic information provided by geodetic surveys, aerial photographs, and satellite data.

Yes, this is intentional. Specific labor categories will be dictated at the task order level as stated in PWS A1.2.

65 PWS A1.5 The Bureau of Labor Statistics Service

Occupational labor category (below) is not identified as a separate labor category in RFP Attachment 5. Is this intentional? Please advise.

SOC No. & SOC Title: 19-3022 Survey

Researcher - Plan, develop, or conduct surveys. May analyze and interpret the meaning of survey data, determine survey objectives, or suggest or test question wording.

Yes, See answer to question 64.

66 Section L.4.2.5 1. The solicitation provides guidance to provide

“proposed methodology to perform PWS FAs 1,2, and 4”. The table provides that the “Offeror shall also include the below completed table summarizing its source of expertise….”for the specified FAs”. These selected FAs constitute only 3 of 7 tasks expected to be performed under the

CAC MAIDIQ.

expanding current experience and expertise across all 7 of the FAs within the Table and/or including additional page space for the Offeror to demonstrate their ability to perform and experience in performing the execution of tasks across all FAs?

No. See answer to question 55.

67 Pricing

Worksheet, Column K.

1. While we believe the worksheet adequately captures “true” costs associated with recruiting and retaining personnel, we do have concerns regarding Column K

(Health and Life

Insurance). Depending on whether a labor category (LCAT) is considered an ‘Exempt’ or ‘Non-exempt’ position significantly impacts that percentage. This is especially true if an outlier of a few Non-exempt positions is accurately captured under the Services Contract Act, that action would inaccurately flow through the remainder of LCATS.

Would the government consider dropping Column K, allow individual capture by LCAT of a percentage used, or provide more definitive guidance for this expense/benefit for this category?

No, At a minimum the Government requires this information, however

L.4.5.4. States “It may be necessary for

Offerors to revise the number of rows or columns to reflect differences or nuances in the offeror's accounting and estimating systems or to meet the requirements located in Tab D.

However, it is requested that the general format be maintained as much as possible for price analysis and contract administration purposes.”

The reverse would potentially occur when a percentage applied against Column K would not accurately capture

SCA guidelines but the majority of the proposed

LCATs.

68 Section L.4.1.6. 1. We could not find instructions for the completion of the DD

Form 254.

If previously provided, would the government please re-submit the attachment with instructions on completion of the DD Form 254?

No instructions were previously given.

The Contractor is only required to address its compliance to the DD Form

254 in Tab G of Volume I at this time.

Awardees will be contacted directly for necessary information in order for the

Government to finalize the DD254.

69 Attachment 4

Will the government provide an updated

Attachment 4 with the Contracting

Officer/Contracting Specialist data updated on the cover letter and the

“DRAFT” watermark removed from

PPQ?

See answer to question 28.

70 Page 50, Para.

M.3.5.6

M.3.5.6 states, “In the context of acceptability / unacceptability, ‘unknown’ shall be considered

Acceptable.” FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv) states “In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance.”

Providing an acceptable rating for non-existent past performance would be considered a favorable rating. Did the

Government intend to state, “unknown shall be considered Neutral”?

Unknown is considered to be neutral.

M.3.5.6 has been updated to include this reference.

71 Page 42, Para.

L.4.5.3.2;

L.4.5.3.2 states, “Offerors shall use

1,920 hours for a productive labor

See answer to question 18.

Page 4, Para.

C.1.6.4 year.” PWS C.1.6.4 specifies 11 Federal holidays. Should the actual productive labor year specify 1,912 hours?

72 Fixed Price Labor

Tab

Row 5 - See Note 2, See Note

3, etc.

In the RFP Attachment 5 - Pricing

Workbook - Fixed Price Labor Tab in

Row 5 it has several comments "See

Note 2", "See Note 3", can the

Government please identify what those

Notes reference in the documents?

73 L.4.3.1.3

In…