SPECIAL NOTICE
99 -- The purpose of this Special Notice is to provide comments and recommendations received from industry as a result of the PreSolicitation Conference held at Ft. Leavenworth KS on 17 July 2008.
- Notice Date
- 8/8/2008
- Notice Type
- Special Notice
- NAICS
- #541690
— Other Scientific and Technical Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- Department of the Army, Army Contracting Agency, North Region, ACA, Fort Leavenworth, ACA, NRCC, Fort Leavenworth, 600 Thomas Avenue, Unit 3, Fort Leavenworth, KS 66027-1417
- ZIP Code
- 66027-1417
- Solicitation Number
- W91QF408R0010
- Archive Date
- 11/6/2008
- Point of Contact
- David Westall, 913-684-1635<br />
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- CAC and Fort Leavenworth Support Services IDIQ Contractor Comments/ Recommendations 1.Page Limitation: concur with 100 page technical volume without tables and appendices and excluding management page count. With 20 plus tasks, inclusion of management plan in technical volume page count would not leave enough room to adequately address all of the tasks. 2.Recommend a cross reference matrix be added to the page exclusion. Recommend that remaining volumes be page independent. 3.Comment: Functional Area 10: Software VV&A page 16 is not listed on pages 1 and 12 as one of the functional areas. 4.Recommend add Software VV&A FA10 to the lists on pages 1 and 12. 5.REF: B.6.1.1 Education and Experience We recommend the following modifications to the general descriptions of the levels of proficiency in this section to allow for substitution of experience for a formal degree. Senior: Possesses a Masters degree or higher in a discipline closely related to the work being performed. Possesses at least ten years of experience directly related to the work being performed. Performs advanced level of work such as designing systems or plans for studies and analysis for complex tasks. Capable of performing as a team lead with overall responsibility for planning and executing tasks. May supervise Journeyman and Junior level personnel. Six (6) years of additional experience may be substituted for a Masters degree. Journeyman: Possesses a Bachelors degree or higher in a discipline closely related to the work being performed. Possesses at least three years of experience directly related to the work being performed. Performs routine levels of work such as designing systems or plans for studies and analysis for less complex tasks. Executes designs/plans to accomplish tasks. Capable of working independently with general oversight by a Senior. May supervise Junior level personnel. Four (4) years of additional experience may be substituted for a Bachelors degree. Junior: Possesses an Associates degree or higher in a discipline closely related to the work being performed. Possesses less than three years of experience directly related to the work being performed. Performs routine levels of work to accomplish tasks. Works closely with and is supervised by Journeyman or Senior level personnel. Two (2) years of additional experience may be substituted for an Associates degree. 6.REF: L.3.2 Evaluation Factor 2: Technical approach for each Functional Area in the PWS We recommend that you remove Subfactor B (Risk Identification and Management Plan) from this factor and incorporate it as part of Subfactor B Quality Control Plan (part of the Management and Quality Control factor) or make it Subfactor D within the Management and Quality Control factor. 7.REF: L.3.3 Evaluation Factor 3: Management and Quality Control Should resumes be required as part of this factor, we recommend the following: The resumes are to be representative in nature and not attributable to a particular person. Offerors are limited to no more than 10 resumes, not to exceed 3 pages each. The resumes are not included in the page count, but rather treated as an appendix to the Management and Quality Control volume. 8.REF: Evaluation Factor 4: Small Business Subcontracting Plan Given the undefined nature of the CAC IDIQ tasks at the IDIQ level, we recommend requiring submission of a Small Business Participation Plan, with a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (consistent with the percentages committed to in the Participation Plan) to be submitted at the task order level. We recommend replacement of the existing Section L language with the following: 3.4.1 Proposal Requirements: Large businesses shall submit a Small Business Participation Plan that describes: The nature of the work relative to the SOW the Offeror may anticipate subcontracting to Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small Business, Woman-Owned Small Business, HUBZones, and Historically Black Colleges/Universities and Minority Institutions at the task order level. In percentage terms, include your overall small business participation goal along with your subcontracting goals for each socio-economic category identified above. As set forth below, all awardees will be responsible for meeting the Governments Small Business Participation goal of not less than XXX% of the total funded amount of all task orders awarded under this IDIQ contract over the life of the contract. Offerors shall describe efforts that will be taken to meet or exceed the overall Small Business Participation goal of XXX%. Offerors shall also describe efforts they will take to meet or exceed their proposed subcontracting goals for each of the socio-economic categories specified in section 3.4.1.1. NOTE: The Small Business Participation Plan is separate from the Subcontracting Plan required by FAR Part 19.7 and DFARS 219.7. Large Business Offerors shall not submit a Subcontracting Plan as required by FAR clause 52.219-9 with their proposal. Subcontracting Plans required by FAR clause 52.219-9 will be submitted as applicable at the delivery/task order level. The utilization goals for this acquisition and for use in the development of the plans are listed in the following table: INSERT TABLE BASED ON FINAL SUBCONTRACTING GOALS ESTABLISHED. 9.The Section M evaluation criteria would then be modified in accordance with this revision. 10.REF: 3.4.1 Proposal Requirements We recommend clarification of the Small Business Subcontracting Goals. The following table was presented in the draft RFP, Section L released on July 17th: 11. Small Business Subcontracting Goals Small Business24.0% Small Disadvantaged Business3.0% Woman Owned Small Business6.5% Hub Zone3.5% Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business 3.0% Traditionally, the Small Business percentage in the first row represents the overall total goal for a procurement. The remaining categories represent a subset of that overall goal with the remainder to be allocated by the Offeror. The verbal explanation presented at Industry Day suggested that these numbers are to be added together forming an overall small business participation goal of 40%. We have two recommendations regarding this table: Make the first row reflect the overall goal for the procurement, consistent with the way the information is traditionally presented. Establish minimum goals consistent with the Armys FY 2009 goals and encourage Offerors to exceed the minimum goals for enhanced evaluation of their respective participation plans. 12.REF: Evaluation Factor 5: Price In order to streamline the evaluation at the IDIQ level, and avoid substantial burdens on our small business team members, we recommend revising subsection 3.5.1 Proposal Submission as follows: 3.5.1 Proposal Submission: Loaded Labor Rates for the base period and each option year listed in Section B shall be provided for the prime offeror only. Rates for subcontractors will be negotiated at the task order level, as applicable. 13.REF: M.2.1 Evaluation Factor 3: Management and Quality Control We recommend that Factors 2 and 3 be reversed given the overall importance of our management approach and business processes at the IDIQ level vice the technical aspects of our approach, which will be much more important at the task order level. We further recommend that M.1.5 be revised as follows: Relative Importance The evaluation to determine acceptability will be based on a complete assessment of each Offerors proposal. Proposals shall be evaluated on the following five factors, where factor 1 is more important than factors 2, 3, and 4; factor 2 is more important than factors 3 and 4; factors 3 and 4 are of equal importance. & 14.FA for IT support: Like the V&V this may want to be removed as a stand alone functional area. A lot of the other functional areas have IT requirements imbedded or implied, but they are fairly specific to that functional area. If a TO was going to be purely IT, it may be a candidate for a small business award, or would likely be better on an IDIQ like ITES2 where you would have access to IT specific firms. If you keep it, we only see one superficial reference to IT Security in the IT support section and think that that is an important aspect of may IT related tasks. 15.FA for Knowledge Management. Think that you should add; Conduct Knowledge Needs Assessments to help define KM priorities and SW/HW requirements. 16.We also think that you should do away with the publication production FA. Since you had specifically said that it was not the printing, but the preparation and that is really part of the FAs that include producing documentation as a deliverable, and as a stand alone task that would also be something that would normally be easy for a small business. 17.On the labor category side, nothing was mentioned of a need for a system architect or business analyst function in the labor categories. The IT Systems Engineer seems to be a catchall, but there are several functional areas that require architecture type skills so we think that should be added. There is a good example of a description in the GSA IT schedule. Lack of a business analyst role is a definite shortcoming. Acknowledge that the list is not all inclusive but we think these two LCATs are rather significant at the IDIQ level. 18.Would recommend that you include experience as well as education: Junior: AA or 3 years direct experience Journeyman: BS or BA or 5 years direct experience Senior: Masters or BS or BA and 5 years direct experience 19.We would recommend that he give each section a page limit, 20 for past performance (10 max at 2 pages each), 30 for management, 20 for small business and 3 pages max for each functional area for technical. We would also recommend that be scored in term of value in that order. Since technical will be more important at the task order level we though it might be rated lowest. In fact for STOCII there was not a technical volume, so you may want to think about a slight larger management volume and no tech section. 20.We would recommend you publish a template (see attachment) for the past performance and limit each to two pages. It will make it easier to evaluate if they have common items in the template. PERFORMANCE INFORMATION A. Company Name: B. Program Title: C. Contract Specifics: 1.Contract number: 2.Contract type: 3.Period of performance: May 4.Contract value: D. Period of Performance: 1.Original date: 2.Current scheduled date (if applicable): 3.How many times changed: 4.Primary cause of change: E. Brief Description of Effort: Agency Supported: U.S. Army National Simulation Center Scope of Participation: Prime X 1st Tier Sub 2nd Tier Sub Other__ F. Primary Points of Contact: (Please provide current information on all individuals) 1. Customer program manager: (If scope of participation was as Office, a subcontractor, or a commercial equivalent contract, provide Contractors project manager or employees information)Name: Office: Address: Phone: E-mail: 2. Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) or Contract Administrator (if commercial)Name: David Westall Office: Northern Region Contracting Center Address: Ft. Leavenworth, KS 66027 Phone: 913-684-1635 E-mail: David.Westall@us.army.mil G. Address your execution of the program in terms of cost, schedule, and performance Cost. Schedule. Performance. H. CAC IDIQ Fnctional Areas addressed by this program: 21.Reference paragraph 1.1.1, page 4 of 13. During Industry Day, it appeared the NRCC preferred that the various parts be bounded separately versus bound in one document. I believe the rationale was the parts maybe distributed separately to reviewers. Could you clarify? 22.Reference 1.3.1. Please clarify which version of Microsoft Word is acceptable. Most of our computers have migrated to MS Office Suite 2007. We recognize some offices are still using MS Office 98 to 2003. 23.Reference 2.3. We recommend page counts be designated for each part versus 100 pages as a whole. This would correlate better to NRCC's intent to disseminate parts separately. As for the number of pages, I am conscious that the more pages you allow, the good idea folks have a tendency to expand to it. From my experience, a 100 page count is feasible with the exception that any graphics such as process maps, organizational charts, risk management matrices, certs, resumes and past performance are exclusive of page count and listed as appendices. 24.Additionally, I would recommend you state the minimum font accepted as there is a tendency to reduce the font to add the bulk.
- Web Link
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=4718661b5bffc01a4416baaea4e53794&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Record
- SN01635730-W 20080810/080808224043-4718661b5bffc01a4416baaea4e53794 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |