Solic. Questions_W91QF4-23-R-0020.docx.pdf

Attachment #03

DLI End of Training Language Instruction FY23 Questions and Answers

W91QF4-23-R-0020 0001

Section B

1. The pricing for each Post DLPT Training CLIN in Schedule B lists the Unit as “Job”.

Would the Government confirm that Offerors should submit pricing as a daily rate for each class of a course? See Amendment.

2. Please confirm that the “job” can be considered to mean “week” for us to provide weekly pricing for the services considered. See Amendment.

3. This contract requires on-demand language instruction across multiple languages with no fixed assignment timeframe. In light of limited qualified personnel in the Monterey area and nationwide challenges with hiring teaching professionals, would the government consider a separate cost reimbursable CLIN for travel expenses associated with temporarily relocating instructors to Monterey for assignments? No.

If so, will the government provide a “plug” dollar figure in the solicitation to ensure even comparison across all bidders? N/A

In lieu of cost reimbursable travel expenses, will the government consider virtual learning in the event resources are not available in the Monterey area? As a general practice, no. This is command driven. All virtual instruction will be on an as needed basis.

Section L

4. Please confirm that the management and staffing plan shall include the sample table listed at the bottom of the page (without labor hours) only and the staff matrix is to be placed in Volume 3 only. See Amendment. Staff matrix no longer required.

5. Please confirm that Letters of Commitment are only required for proposed key personnel that are not currently employed by the Offeror. A letter of commitment is required for all proposed key personnel listed in the proposal. See Amendment page 34.

6. There appears to be no specific requirements in Section L or M for traditional management plan topics/elements to be provided within the 10 pages allotted to the Management and Staffing Plan section.

Please confirm that Offerors are required to address their management approach in the Management and Staffing Plan, and how it will be evaluated under Section M, Factor 2.

If so, would the Government consider increasing the page limit for the Management section from 10 to 15 pages? See Amendment.

7. The Section L requirement for addressing risks and risk mitigation plan does not have a corresponding reference under Section M.

Could the Government please confirm that the Offeror’s risk mitigation plan will be evaluated as part of the Technical Response? The offeror shall demonstrate a viable mitigation plan for each identified risk. See Amendment section M.

8. The Section L requirement for an overview of the Offeror’s hiring process does not have a corresponding reference under Section M.

Could the Government please confirm that the Offeror’s hiring process will be evaluated as part of the Management and Staffing Plan? The hiring process is part of the staffing plan and the entirety of the staffing plan will be evaluated per Section M.

Section M

9. The evaluation criteria states: “An offer can be rejected if it does not have a firm commitment from the persons that are listed in the proposal.”

How does the government intend to evaluate the whether or not persons listed in the proposal have given a firm commitment? Should vendors provide letters of commitment from each candidate? See response to question 5 and Amendment.

10. There is no Section L requirement to submit letters of commitment for proposed personnel.

Please confirm that in order to satisfy this requirement, Offerors should submit letters of commitment in an appendix outside of the page limits. See response to question 5 and Amendment.

11 Please confirm that documentation outside of the proposal narrative (resumes, letters of commitment, table of current instruction resources, and other documentation) may be submitted in an Appendix outside the page limits. Resumes, letters of commitment and tables of current instruction resources are excluded from the page count.

PWS

12. Does the Government intend for all homework to only review concepts of that day of instruction? Or may homework also include previewing for the next day’s learning content? (References section 6.1 (Assigned homework must be tailored to the student's needs and allow the student to master the new material introduced during the day's contact hours – it must be designed to re-enforce learning rather than introducing new learning.) on page 7) Homework may include preview for the next day, but the main focus has to be reinforcement of the day’s studies. These courses are more about comprehension and quality of instruction and material over quantity.

13. Will on-going class observations be scheduled or unscheduled? (References section 6.1 (The US Government reserves the right to observe on-going classes at any time.) on page 8) Unless there is an urgent need, class observations, scheduled or unscheduled, will always be coordinated with the vendor. Part of the coordination will be to discuss if a visit will be scheduled or unscheduled.

14. The PWS states: “Instructors must prove their native-like proficiency by providing an Oral Proficiency Interview score of Level 3 or above on the ILR scale or Superior or above on the ACTFL scale in the Target Language. Additionally, instructors must prove their proficiency in English by providing an Oral Proficiency Interview score of Level 2 or above on the ILR scale or Advanced or above on the ACTFL scale. Documentation demonstrating scores will not be older than 18 months.” (References section 8.1.2, Page 10) Does the Government require test score documentation for the proposed instructors with this proposal submission or can this documentation be submitted prior to an instructor teaching a course? Government requires scores prior to a course start.

If test scores are not required at the time of proposal submission, can the required table in Management and Staffing be modified to remove the two columns – OPI Scores on the ILR Scale and Year of OPI? The table in the Staffing Plan section will remain with current OPI scores required. It would show they have people on-hand who could teach if there were a requirement close to the contract’s period of performance start date.

Official scores/documentation could be sent later.

15. The PWS states: “The contractor shall prove that there is at least one instructor with the qualifications in each language in Appendix A. It is preferred that the contractor also provide proof of the ability to provide at least one instructor with the qualifications in each language additional language identified in Technical Exhibit #2.” (References section 8.1.2, page 11) Appendix A and Technical Exhibit 2 are the same list of languages. Please confirm to which list vendors should provide resumes and that there are no additional languages.

See staffing plan in Section L and the table for the list of resumes required. The languages listed in Appendix A and Technical Exhibit 2 are the only languages needing instruction.

Miscellaneous Questions

16. Will the Government be providing a Standard Form (SF), such as an SF 18 or SF 30 for this solicitation? No.

17. Would the Government please confirm that “Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO)” refers to the CO at the time of the solicitation, and that “Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)” refers to the CO currently assigned to or at closeout of the referenced contract? Confirmed.

18. Typically language instructors are exempt from SCA and the wage determination as learned professionals. Does the government consider language instructors an SCA-covered labor category? It is the offeror’s responsibly to tell the Government if the Fair Labor Standards Act is applicable or not.