MODIFICATION
R -- SPECIAL OPERATION FORCES (SOF) LANGUAGE TRAINING PROGRAM ANALYSIS & LONG RANGE SURVEY
- Notice Date
- 4/7/2004
- Notice Type
- Modification
- NAICS
- 541990
— All Other Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
- Contracting Office
- Other Defense Agencies, U.S. Special Operations Command, USASOC, ATTN:E-2929, Fort Bragg, NC, 28310
- ZIP Code
- 28310
- Solicitation Number
- H92239-04-R-0002
- Response Due
- 4/22/2004
- Archive Date
- 5/7/2004
- Point of Contact
- Valaida Bradford, Contract Specialist, Phone 910 3960560, Fax 910 4329345,
- E-Mail Address
-
bradforv@soc.mil
- Small Business Set-Aside
- Total Small Business
- Description
- AMENDMENT 0001: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS ~ SOF LANGUAGE TRAINING & SURVEY ANALYSIS (Questions answered as of 7 April 2004) 1. QUESTION: Is lack of prior contractual training experience with SOCOM a disqualifying factor? ANSWER: The answer is "Yes". The requirement was included because of the unique quality and methodology of most SOF training. Anyone not experienced in SOF training methods would require a significant train up period in order to be able to start the work required in the contract. This additional work would increase the cost of the contract as well as extending the time to accomplish contract objectives. 2. QUESTION: Please clarify the nature of the solicitation. Most statements suggest that the solicitation is for a comprehensive, empirical SOF language training needs assessment, training evaluation, training effectiveness, and utility study to provide SOF leaders with data and recommendations with which they can make effective decisions about language proficiency and training issues and resources allocation for SOF language. However, some statements suggest a greater scope to include other responsibilities like oversight (e.g., ?ensure that SOF personnel receive effective language training??) or instructional design (e.g., ?Design an integrated??). ANSWER: In general, is it the case that this solicitation is solely for a comprehensive, empirical training needs assessment, training evaluation, training effectiveness, and utility applied research program related to SOF language? If there are other responsibilities, please clarify? This is generally the case with the exception being that we want recommendations on how, what, when, where to change current programs to attain optimum results. The recommended courses of action or solution sets should account for other factors such as training time available and should identify major limitations to implementation. For example, ?add 6- to 14-months training time at DLI for all SEALS? would not be an acceptable COA. Whereas a COA such as the WARCOM indicates that without substantial growth in force structure, directives from SOCOM, and coordination with supported war fighters they cannot add the training time required to train their initial entry SEALS to ILR 2. 3. Clarification of terms: 3a. QUESTION: By ?effectiveness? of training, do you mean a model tha? ANSWER:. This is a model that produces the most proficient operator over time without regard to cost 3b. QUESTION:. By ?analyze the total cost? of training, do you mean calculate the cost per unit effectiveness (i.e., utility analysis) for each training program (i.e., for each different POI)? If you are referring to utility analysis, do you have a specific utility model in mind or just one that considers both direct and indirect cost ANSWER: This part of the project takes the effectiveness results and then ranks in order the cheapest to the most expensive all models, in use and proposed, that actually accomplish the requirements. It should also order the models in use and COAs that are put forward even if they do not achieve the requirements (there may be some cases where there is no solution, only a ?best? COA. 4. QUESTION: By ?metrics,? do you mean any valid and reliable measures necessary to evaluate the impact of training, the instructor, the organizational climate, and individual differences on training outcomes and performance from the training evaluation (e.g, Kirkpatrick) and training effectiveness (e.g., Noe & Colquitt) standpoints? Also, when you refer to metrics, do you want some metrics that are standard across all training (e.g., pre-training questionnaire) and others that are customized for the specific program?s POI? ANSWER: Metrics of primary interest: ?valid and reliable measures necessary to evaluate the impact of training and individual differences on training outcomes and performance. It is preferable to use existing, standard DOD metrics such as the OPI, DLPT DLAB, etc BUT if these are insufficient, their deficiencies should be noted and alternatives recommended with justification. Additional metrics might include ?number hours trained?, ?type of training (classroom, structured immersion, tutorial, etc), etc. I include student:teacher ratios, contact hours/day,week, month in this category and other ?parts? of the training that can be measured and that may have a significant impact on training Metrics of secondary interest: organizational climate and instructors 5. QUESTION: The solicitation suggestions that some training programs to be studied are large in scope and institutionalized (e.g., SF language training at SWCS) and others are small in scope and a highly variable (e.g., pre-deployment training at a small unit or a special training program like BITS). Is this correct? ANSWER: Correct. 6. QUESTION: Given the highly variable nature of some training, it makes a finite research proposal and estimates (e.g., travel) impossible for some studies. Given the variable nature and scope of some studies, would you consider and look favorably on a proposal that proposed specific institutional and standardized studies as appropriate and a flexible payment system for variable, special or unforeseen studies? ANSWER: Correct, so this approach is necessary. 7. QUESTION: Do the desired deliverables for this project include the companion surveys to the focus group study conducted as part of the SOF Language Transformation Strategy Development Project? Are there any other special studies that should be considered? ANSWER: -the first deliverable will be an online survey the results of which will be used in addition to the focus group study results to provide a single, integrated analysis. 8. QUESTION: To conduct many of these studies, the cooperation of the units, commands, PERSCOM, DLI, and other entities (e.g., DMDC) not directly under the control of SOFLO will be required. Can SOFLO ensure this cooperation ANSWER: No, the SOFLO is not imbued with such God-like powers. 9. QUESTION: If a proposed study does not take place or is cancelled due to factors outside the control of the contractor or SOFLO or USASOC, will there be a mechanism or study ?kill fee? to reimburse the successful contractor for any loss or expenditures? ANSWER: The government, in conjunction with the vendor, will determine when a part of the study is too hard or impossible to complete. At that point the vendor would be reimbursed for actual, reasonable costs incurred. 10. QUESTION: Having worked with research projects in the SOF community, it usually requires a lot of time (and travel) to gain acceptance and support for, to plan, and to execute these projects. The solicitation suggests many of these projects require time to set up, especially ones that require original data collection. Is there flexibility on the timetable for the projects to accommodate the involvement other entities? ANSWER: Ideally the vendors? proposals should include an initial, broad brush look at the programs to be researched and layout a methodology for accomplishing all of the major tasks. For example: First we will study and report on training at SWCS (year 1), then at AFSOC(year 1.5) and then at ?.. OR we will initiate studies simultaneously at SWCS, AFSOC, WARCOM etc and provide reports at the end of Year 2 whereupon we will begin work on SF NG, SF AC, and PSYOP RC and report in year 3.5. The vendor can plan it out in any effective manner?the vendors? proposed methodology if any will be used as a component of evaluating the vendors? actual understanding of SOF and language training (technical). 11. QUESTION: As a part of the project, are you looking for the successful firm or investigators to publish research findings in peer-reviewed scientific/academic and present findings at scientific/academic conferences to disseminate the research into the public domain? If so, is past performance in this area one of the decision criteria? ANSWER: The quality of the research and findings should be sufficiently solid, scientific, and valid to be defensible within academia AND science. Previous success of this nature is part of the ?Past Performance? eval criterion. 12. QUESTION: In a previous SOF language solicitation, the project lead or principal investigator/analyst was required to have an earned Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology because of the discipline?s focus on training and performance and its high standards of data analysis and applied research methodology, does this solicitation have the same requirement ANSWER: Yes 12. QUESTION: In a previous SOF language solicitation, the project lead or principal investigator/analyst was required to be a member of the American Psychological Association in good standing, is this a requirement for this solicitation? ANSWER: No, but it is a discriminator. 13. QUESTION: In a previous SOF language solicitation, the project lead or principal investigator/analyst was required to be ?an expert in their field as evidenced by an academic appointment and/or peer-reviewed publications in addition to the PhD,? does this solicitation require investigators with the same expert status related to training evaluation/effectiveness, relevant data analysis techniques, language proficiency measurement, longitudinal data analysis, and surveying? If so, do you want copies of the peer-reviewed conference papers and journal articles? ANSWER: Yes and yes. 14. QUESTION: Should the successful firm or investigators have existing research relationships and credibility within the SOF community, the military research/language communities (e.g., Army Research Institute, Defense Language Institute, etc.), and the academic research community (e.g., ACTFL, etc.) to facilitate the project and acceptance of its findings ANSWER: The government will not pay the vendor to cultivate such contacts?the vendor must be ready to begin work upon award. 15. QUESTION: The solicitation mentions providing past performance for at least two SOF training projects. Would you prefer projects related specifically to training needs assessment, training evaluation, training effectiveness, or proficiency measurement? Because the project seems to involve a lot of surveying and data analysis, does the successful firm need to provide past performance for these types of projects in the SOF community as well? ANSWER: We will accept no more than five such examples per vendor. Examples featuring SOF and training evaluation/effectiveness are most desireable 16. QUESTION: Are firms that provide language training/instruction, language learning tools, and other related products/programs that are to be evaluated eligible to bid on this project? ANSWER: Yes 17. QUESTION: Are there any ?other? special knowledge, skills and other attributes that the project requires of the successful investigators or firm? ANSWER: -knowledge of current, best means of teaching/learning languages -expertise in statistical analysis 18. QUESTION: Is this only a research and analysis of SOF language training programs? ANSWER: Correct 19. QUESTION: Is this a phased approach for a comprehensive SOF language program ANSWER: It is up to the vendor to decide how best to execute the research and develop and recommend solution sets or courses of action 20. QUESTION: Is the research and analysis portion to be accomplished during the first or base year? ANSWER: It is up to the vendor to decide how best to execute the research and develop and recommend solution sets or courses of action 21. QUESTION: Will the design, integration and solution implementation be accomplished during the option years? ANSWER: The solicitation in the GSA site may be misleading. Implementation is not part of the contract. The solution set(s) is (are) to be designed in an integrated fashion. The solutions must fit in with other training/operational requirements and/or identify shortcomings/recommendations for changes to entire programs as needed. 22. QUESTION: Should the RFP response include the design, integration, and solution implementation activities? ANSWER: The vendor will design/develop/recommend training programs to optimize language proficiency for SOF. The programs must be feasible, effective, and cost efficient. The vendor will not design or implement language training nor will the vendor implement recommended solutions set(s). 23. QUESTION: What is the government?s preferred approach ANSWER: none 24. QUESTION: When was the last research and analysis conducted? ANSWER: A SOCOM wide focus group research project was conducted in FY04 and the report was completed Apr04 25. QUESTION: Will the last research and analysis conducted be provided as GFI? ANSWER: Pending DCSAC approval, the SOFLO will provide copies to qualified vendors 26. QUESTION: Why is the government conducting this project (s)? ANSWER: To improve both the effectiveness and the efficiency of languge training for SOF 27. QUESTION: Do you have examples of the standard 2-page resume required? ANSWER: SOFLO does not SOLICITATION: The US Army Special Operations Command, Fort Bragg North Carolina has a requirement to provide a Language Training Program Analysis and Long-Range Surveying Device for the Special Operations Forces Language Office at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. The contractor shall provide all labor, equipment, materials and transportation unless stated in the specifications. This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial item prepared in accordance with the format in FAR Subpart 12.6 as supplemented with additional information included in this notice. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONSTITUTES THE ONLY SOLICITATION; QUOTES ARE BEING REQUESTED AND A WRITTEN SOLICITATION WILL NOT BE ISSUED. All quotes shall reference the Request for Quotation number H92239-04-R-0002. Solicitation document and incorporated provisions and clauses are those in effect through FAC 2001-20. It is the Contractor's responsibility to be familiar with all applicable clauses and provisions. The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is 541990. The size standard is $6,000,000. This requirement is a total 100% set-aside for small business. A firm fixed price contract will be issued with a base period and four option periods. A Pre-proposal Conference is scheduled for Thursday, 8 April 2004, 1:00 p.m., HQ USASOC, Bldg E-2929, DCSRM Conference Room 252, Fort Bragg, NC. The contractor shall provide the following: All personnel and services necessary to conduct the survey program of research analysis of the current Special Operations Forces (SOF) language training programs. Ensure that SOF personnel receive effective language training to achieve the language skill levels necessary to effectively meet the requirements of their missions. Design an integrated program which means a program that addresses all needs start to finish to provide SOF personnel effective language training. This would integrate initial, sustainment, and enhancement training for all flavors of SOF (Army/Navy/AF) and all components (AC/RC). Currently some SOF receive institutional training in their qualification courses and then sustainment and enhancement training at the unit. Most SOF get 100% of their training at the unit. So, the integrated program would take into account all other (non-language) SOF training requirements and propose a solution that is integrated both in terms of initial, sustainment and enhancement language training and in terms of the qualification and at unit training that SOF go through. The contractor shall provide a survey process that will utilize commonly accepted industry methodologies and practices to conduct the survey, which will analyze, but not be limited to, such factors as initial acquisition, sustainment and enhancement language training programs throughout the US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). As a minimum, the process will assess available historical data; the relationship between service member Defense Language Aptitude Battery (DLAB) and their subsequent language proficiency; instructor qualifications and training materials; instructional methodologies; a longitudinal study of factors effecting skills retention; utility of computer-based and Distributive Learning in language training; and initial acquisition training at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (JFKSWCS). Results: This work will create a systemic approach and data to aid in military decision making on the following: a) best methodology for efficient and cost effective conduct of SOF Foreign Language acquisition and sustainment training, b) best way to select individuals for specific language to be taught, c) metrics required to effectively monitor and adjust training programs. Note: all assertions/conclusions must be supported. Projects: (there may be separate projects, a single project or several-the vendor may determine that certain SOF can be "lumped" together: Provide empirically based research that documents the effectiveness of existing and new techniques for providing initial acquisition, sustainment, and enhancement language training. The research will analyze the total cost (instructors, materials, overhead, travel, training time, training development, etc.) of initial acquisition, sustainment, and enhancement language training used by USSOCOM. This training is done through military institutions, unit language labs, academic institutions, distributed learning, one-on-one tutoring, and a host of other methods. This information will then be used to compare results in terms of Defense Language Proficiency Tests (DLPT) scores, training time, DLAB scores and target scores. All training methods and types considered must be feasible (e.g. very few SOF personnel can or will attend 4 hours of class after their normal duty day to acquire a new language). We also need recommendations on what metrics are needed and when/where they should be measured. Specifically, the final product should address the following: 1.What is (are) the most cost effective initial acquisition, sustainment, and enhancement language training method(s) or type(s) for RC Army SF? AC Army SF? AC Navy SOF? AC Air Force SOF? RC Army CA? AC Army CA? RC Army PSYOP? AC Army PSYOP? The contractor shall provide a Statement of Work and a DD Form 1423, Contract Data Requirements List with their proposal. The contractor shall include their management and technical approach in achieving the objectives; an explanation of the labor mix proposed, as well explain their material and travel line. Standard two (2) page Resumes are required and will be reviewed along with cost proposals. PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions are applicable to the acquisition. Full text clauses and provisions are available at farsite.hill.af.mil. 52.212-1, Instructions to Offers-Commercial Items; 52.212-2, Evaluation Commercial Items, with the following evaluation factors inserted in paragraph (a) of the provision: "In order to participate, Contractor shall be required to provide the Government with personnel and services to provide base plus four option years research and analysis surveys of the varied language training efforts conducted within the command.? Quotes shall be evaluated as to compliance with stated requirements. A best value award will be made to the responsible offeror submitting an offer found to be most advantageous to the government. The Basis of Award and evaluation factors are, in descending order of importance: (1) Management ? Address the human resources in the essential personnel areas by title and labor categories. Address why personnel are appropriate for the task, security concerns and discuss how the effort will be managed; (2) Cost/Price; (3) Technical & Past Performance? Provide a plan that will meet the objectives as stated in the solicitation including the schedule, activities and documentation; identify any essential government personnel that you will interface with and how you will address the concerns; explain the labor mix with qualifications in meeting the various objectives and address the risk associated with the contract type selected and why it is key to successful performance. Provide past performance records from at least two Special Operations Forces training projects involving similar technical requirements and scale. 52.212-3, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items and Defense Federal Acquisition Supplement. (DFARS) 252.212.7000, Offeror Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items are applicable to this requirement and offerors shall include a completed copy of the Representations and Certifications with their bid. The following FAR Clauses are applicable to this acquisition: 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Items; 52.212-5, Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes or Executive Orders-Commercial Items, with the following clauses being applicable to the solicitation: 52.222-21, 52.222-26, 52.222-35, 52.222.36, 52.222-37,52.225-3,52.232-33,52.247-64, 52.222-41 and 52.222-42; 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns; 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, 52-217-8 Option to Extend Services, insert in the paragraph sixty (60) days , 52-217-9; Option to Extend the Term of the Contract, inserted in paragraph (a) sixty(60) days and sixty(60) days, inserted in paragraph (c) sixty (60) months; 52.237-3 Continuity of Services; Additionally, DFARS 252.204-7004, Required Central Contractor Registration; 252.212-7001, Contract Terms and Conditions Required To Implement Statutes Applicable to Defense Acquisition of Commercial Items, with the clauses 252.225-7001, 252.225-7007, and applicable. QUOTES ARE DUE: Quotes shall be received at HQ-USASOC ATTN: AOCO (Valaida J. Bradford), Fort Bragg, North Carolina, 28310, not later than 2:00 p.m. ET Thursday, 22 April 2004. Electronic submissions, to include fax and email, will not be accepted. Quotes shall be mailed or hand carried to HQ, US Army Special Operations Command, ATTN: AOCO (Contracting), Bldg E-2929, Desert Storm Drive, Fort Bragg, NC 28310. Quotes shall include: (1) letter signed by an individual authorized to bind the organization, with a schedule of offered items to include Line Item 0001, Base Period of 15 May 2004 ? 14 May 2005 or date of award as subsequent thereto, SOF Language Training Program Analysis and Long Range Survey, Line Item 1001, First Option Period, 15 May 2005 ? 14 May 2006, Line Item 2001, Second Option Period, 15 May 2006 ? 14 May 2007, Third Option Period, 15 May 2007 ? 14 May 2008 and Fourth Option Period 15 May 2008 ? 15 May 2009, (2) completed Representations and Certifications, and (3) acknowledgement of any amendments that may be issued. Any amendments that may be issued will be published in the FedBizOpps, the same as the combined synopsis/solicitation. All questions shall be submitted in writing to Ms. Valaida J. Bradford, Contract Specialist, at bradforv@soc.mil no later than 6 April 2004.
- Place of Performance
- Address: HQ USASOC, BLDG E-2929, 1 DESERT STORM DRIVE, FT. BRAGG, NC
- Zip Code: 28310
- Country: US
- Zip Code: 28310
- Record
- SN00562046-W 20040409/040407212916 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps.gov Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |