Loren Data's SAM Daily™

FBO DAILY ISSUE OF FEBRUARY 11, 2007 FBO #1903
MODIFICATION

R -- Strategic Management Support Services

Notice Date

2/9/2007
 

Notice Type

Modification
 

NAICS

541611 — Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
 

Contracting Office

Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, Headquarters TSA, 601 S. 12th Street TSA-25, 10th Floor, Arlington, VA, 22202, UNITED STATES
 

ZIP Code

00000
 

Solicitation Number

HSTS03-07-R-ACQ913
 

Response Due

2/20/2007
 

Archive Date

3/7/2007
 

Point of Contact

Quyen Diep, Contract Specialist, Phone 571-227-2997, Fax 571-227-2913, - Marvin Grubbs, Contracting Officer, Phone 571-227-1581, Fax 571-227-2913,
 

E-Mail Address

Quyen.Diep@dhs.gov, Marvin.Grubbs@dhs.gov
 

Small Business Set-Aside

Total Small Business
 

Description

This is a combined synopsis and solicitation procurement and a total small business set aside. The Request for Proposal (RFP) number HSTS03-07-R-ACQ913 is to establish multiple Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) to obtain Strategic Management Support Services for the Transportation Security Administration. **************************************************************** This procurement will be conducted using the Transportation Security Administration Acquisition Management System (TSAAMS). Interested parties may learn more about the Acquisition Management System at http://fast.faa.gov. TSA is exempted from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) by the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA ? Public Law 107-71) and empowered to use TSAAMS by the same authority. **************************************************************** All interested vendors must contact TSA's Office of Acquisition (OA) for a copy of the RFP, which contains the instructions, Statement of Work, Past Performance Survey, and Non-Disclosure Agreement. The RFP contains all Evaluation Factors that will be used by TSA in considering the technical merit of each response. The RFP also contains instructions on the format of responses, including page length. All interested offerors are hereby made aware that in order to be considered, they must submit a technical and price proposal that covers all aspects of the SOW, not selected parts of the SOW. However, TSA is willing to consider the merit of any proposed subcontracting or teaming arrangements meeting the Limitations in Subcontracting requirements. TSA's primary point of contact is Ms. Quyen Diep, who can be reached at 571-227-2997 or e-mail at Quyen.Diep@dhs.gov. If Ms. Diep is not available, please contact Mr. Marvin Grubbs at 571-227-1581 or e-mail at Marvin.Grubbs@dhs.gov. Please contact Ms. Diep NO LATER THAN February 9, 2007 to receive a copy of the RFP via e-mail only. Any questions about this synopsis/solicitation shall be directed in writing to Ms. Diep. The deadline to submit a technical and price proposal is indicated in the RFP letter and will not be extended unless the Contracting Officer determines that an extension is necessary to maintain the competitive nature of the procurement. **************************************************************** AMENDMENT 05 TO RFP HSTS03-07-R-ACQ913: The purpose of this amendment is to publicize responses to questions submitted on February 8, 2007. ***Question 1: The Statement of Work indicates that each TSA program is ordering support services individually, in varying degrees, and using a variety of separate contracts and statements of work. Please provide the names of the referenced incumbents who are currently supporting TSA. Answer 1: There is no incumbent for TSA-wide strategic management. There have been individual contracts for specific programs but the specific contractor names will not be released as many are large businesses that have no bearing as a potential prime contractor on this small business set-aside. ***Question 2: Will U.S. Department of Energy Q and/or L clearances satisfy the evaluation criteria in the RFP Section III.2 to have current security clearances, or the ability to obtain clearances, at the required level immediately upon task order award? Answer 2: Varying clearance levels at other agencies will satisfy the ability to obtain clearances as an evaluation factor. Security clearance requirements, if applicable, will vary with each resultant task order. ***Question 3: Regarding the evaluation criteria in the RFP Section III. 5, Past Performance, is there a limit to the number of relevant projects that the offeror can include in the proposal for evaluation? Answer 3: There is no limit to the number of recent relevant projects that the offeror can include. ***Question 4: Will TSA use a weighted average to evaluate the proposed price, based on the labor mix proposed by each offeror, or will all labor categories proposed be considered equal in weight? Answer 4: No, a weighted average will not be used. ***Question 5: How many awards does TSA anticipate as a result of this solicitation? Answer 5: To be determined. ***Question 6: Do Resumes count on the Page Limit? Answer 6: No. ***Question 7: There is conflicting language regarding the Past Performance Surveys and the Past Performance References. On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, paragraph 1 the language reads for Past Performance: ?Describe your firm?s relevant past performance on at least three relevant and recent past performance examples of similar scope and size to assess the Offeror?s experience meeting requirements as stated in the SOW.? Does the government want the Prime describing in Volume 1 Technical Response Section three past performances references of similar scope and size to assess the Prime?s experience in meeting the requirements of the SOW? Does the government want three past performance Surveys for the three past performances references described above? Answer 7: Page 6 of 24 of the RFP states, ?To streamline the Government's past performance evaluation process, the offeror shall provide the Past Performance Survey (Attachment 2) to each of the references included in their proposal for completion?. The Past Performance Surveys are intended to be used by each reference to assess the offeror?s current or prior work with them. As the SOW details TSA?s requirements rather than the reference?s requirements, the reference is not being asked to assess the offeror?s ability to meet the requirements of the SOW. *** Question 8: On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, Paragraph 2 the language reads: ?Please provide company names and a point of contact for each reference listed.? Please clarify which reference the government was referring. Is it past performance reference or past performance survey cited in page 6 paragraph 1? Where does the government desire the contact information to be listed? Is this information duplicative of the information cited for past performance references? Answer 8: The language refers to past performance references. The required information for each reference must be provided in the proposal; where that information is provided is at the offeror?s discretion. The Past Performance Surveys are intended to be used by each reference to assess the offeror?s current or prior work with them. *** Question 9: On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, Paragraph 2 the language reads: ?For any subcontractor or partner performing a critical element of the work, please furnish at least three references for similar projects.? Please clarify the government definition of ?critical elements? of work. Is there a limitation on the number of references to be submitted in the response? Answer 9: ?Critical element? in this case refers to work and/or tasks that are considered non-administrative (filing, copying, typing, etc.). Additionally, work and/or tasks that, if not performed satisfactorily, would result in failure to meet the requirement. There is no limit to the number of recent relevant projects that the offeror can include. ***Question 10: On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, Paragraph 2 the language reads: ?For any subcontractor or partner performing a critical element of the work, please furnish at least three references for similar projects?. How is the government defining ?critical element?? Is this by critical task area (30 surveys 3 per each of the 10 task areas), or by company (3 surveys per company)? Does this include subs and/or team partners; or do the 3 Surveys needed only apply to the Prime? Answer 10: Please see the response to Question 9 above in reference to the term ?critical element?. Past performance surveys are required for both the prime and subcontractor performing a critical element of the work. ***Question 11: On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, Paragraph 2 the language reads: ?You should also provide a description of the work performed, the dollar amount and the duration of the project. Each past performance reference shall include: 1. Company Name, 2. Contract Number, 3. Contract Description, 4. Contract Amount and Type of Contract, 5. Length of the referenced projects, 6. Period of Performance, 7. Retention rate of employees when working on listed projects, 8. Name, address, e-mail address (if available), telephone number, and fax number of the customer, 9. Size and complexity of the project, 10. Whether all options, if applicable, were exercised. Does the government desire this information to be included in Volume 1 Technical Section or in an appendix? Is there a limitation on the number of references to be submitted under this requirement? Does the past performance references apply against the Volume 1 page limitation? Answer 11: The required information for each reference must be provided in the proposal; where that information is provided is at the offeror?s discretion. The information for the references is not included in the page limitation. ***Question 12: On page 6 of 24 of the RFP, Paragraph 4 the language reads: ?To streamline the Government?s past performance evaluation process, the offeror shall provide the Past Performance Survey (Attachment 2] to each of the references included in their proposal for completion.? Is the past performance surveys required only of the Prime/Offeror?s past performance references? If a Small Business Prime had 4 subs or teaming partners, then the language on this page seems to result in potentially a minimum of 15 references requiring 15 Past Performance Surveys. Is this the intent of these paragraphs? Could the language related to subcontractors, partners and the associated Past Performance References and Surveys be clarified or further quantified? Answer 12: Please see the responses to Question 9 and 10 above. ***Question 13: There is conflicting language regarding OCI in RFP and SOW. Section XI of the RFP, page 19, Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), allows for Contactors and their Subcontractors to address alternate approaches to avoid actual or potential OCIs through the submission of a conflict of interest mitigation plan. The OCI language in Attachment 1 ? Statement of Work, page 8 of 8 is conflicting in that it states that ?An OCI mitigation plan will not be considered?. In order to eliminate this conflict, would it be possible to revise the first paragraph of ?Organizational Conflict of Interest?, Attachment 1- Statement of Work (page 8 of 8), to the following: ?This procurement contains a potential OCI. A Task Order awardee and all subcontractors providing services under that award will not be allowed to compete for any integration or implementation requirement outcomes related to work within that Task Order SOW. The Contractor shall address any actual or potential OCI in accordance with Article XI of the RFP/BPA?? Answer 13: Offerors may submit a Mitigation Plan for each resultant task order. On page 8 of the Statement of Work (Attachment 1 of the RFP), the sentence ?An OCI mitigation plan will not be considered? is hereby replaced with ?An OCI mitigation plan will be considered on an individual basis for each task order?. ***Question 14: Your RFP requests 3 past performance references. Is this three from each team member, or just three reflective of all team members? Answer 14: Please see the response to Question 10. ***Question 15: Reference Volume II, Price Proposal: Does the Government want offerors to propose both government-site and contractor-site labor rates? Answer 15: Yes. ***Question 16: Reference Volume II, Price Proposal: Does the Government want one rate per labor category or desire proposed rates for each year of the BPA allowing for an annual increase? Answer 16: Our expectation is rates will be provided for each year of the BPA duration. ***Question 17: Reference Volume I, Past Performance: We are proposing multiple team members. Does the Government require 3 past performance references from each team member proposed or a minimum of three references for the team (other than the primes references)? Answer 17: Please see the responses to Question 9, 10 and 12 above. ***Question 18: In your instructions for submission requirements for Volume 1 ? Past Performance Only, we have interpreted your instructions as requiring three references from each subcontractor as well as the Prime. Your answer to question # 10 in your January 31st amendment seems to make the inclusion of past performance summaries for teammates within Volume 1 optional. Answer 18: Please see the response to Question 9 above. Please review Question 10 under the Amendment 1 (posted January 31, 2007). ***Question 19: Is the inclusion of a Subcontractor?s Past Performance summary within the 15 page technical response a requirement or optional? Answer 19: Yes. Past performance reference information is not included in the page count limitation. ***Question 20: Is it necessary to have a summary with the information designated on page 6 of 24 in the technical response for each Past Performance Survey that is being separately submitted? Answer 20: Yes. ***Question 21: Could a prime contractor or their subcontractor/team partners awarded this contract participate as a prime contractor or a subcontractor/team partner on TSA?s Integrated Hiring Operations & Personnel (IHOP) Program? In other words, is any work that will be performed under the SMSS going to restrict companies, due to a conflict of interest, from working on the IHOP Program? Answer 21: Offerors are expected to review the requirements of any solicitations they plan to propose on and/or any current work with TSA and other DHS components to better anticipate potential conflicts of interest. ***Question 22: The Instructions on page 2 of Attachment 2-Past Performance Survey provide ratings and descriptions of: Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Unsatisfactory, and Not Applicable (NA). The corresponding questionnaire (on page 3 and 4) provide column-heading ratings as follows: Outstanding, Satisfactory, Marginal, Unsatisfactory, and NA. ?Good? may not mean the same as ?Satisfactory? and ?Acceptable? may not mean the same as ?Marginal?. Will you provide a new survey that will address this discrepancy? If so, will the due date of the past performance survey be adjusted? Answer 22: On page 3 and 4 of the Past Performance Survey, please replace the ?Satisfactory? rating with ?Good? and replace the ?Marginal? rating with ?Acceptable?. A new survey will not be provided.
 

Place of Performance

Address: Transportation Security Administration, 701/601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA

Zip Code: 22202

Country: UNITED STATES
 

Record

SN01229276-W 20070211/070209220422 (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 |