MODIFICATION
R -- Collaborative Website SES Personnel
- Notice Date
- 5/21/2010
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541511
— Custom Computer Programming Services
- Contracting Office
- Center Acquisition Innovation Frederick;Department of Veterans Affairs;7485 New Horizon Way;Frederick MD 21703
- ZIP Code
- 21703
- Solicitation Number
- VA79810RQ0106
- Archive Date
- 6/20/2010
- Point of Contact
- Russell Grabill
- E-Mail Address
-
ct
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Collaborative Website Requirement VA798-10-RQ-0106 A.Remove the last sentence under Instructions for Preparation of Quotes, Price Quotation, which currently reads as follows: Offerors must also include in this part copies of their GSA contracts that include the services offered and GSA pricing. B.Remove the following paragraph found under Preparation of Quotes, Factor 5: (a) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s). C.Questions and Answers 1.We are considering a subcontractor, and wondered if they must be constrained to 49% of the work, or less? Government Response: This is an unrestricted RFQ which contains no set-aside for any socio-economic group. Therefore, subcontracting is unrestricted pending approval of the Contracting Officer. 2.We offer our software on the GSA Schedule. Should that be the price we quote for our software? [Our services are not on schedule.] Government Response: This requirement is being solicited open market and therefore, references to GSA Schedules have been removed (see A., above). 3.How many SES members would we be working with? Government Response: Approximately 400 4.How many SESers are likely to use the website? Government Response: Our goal is that all 400 will eventually use the site. 5.Does VA want to host the website or should the contractor host it? Government Response: The design is for VA to host the website with content provided by the contractor. 6.For how many option years should the contractor expect the website to be active beyond the first year? Should pricing for the option years be provided as well? Government Response: Pricing for options years was not requested although it is likely that contractor involvement in the website would be needed. 7.Upon the completion of Stage II, does the VA want to operate the website itself, or have the contractor operate it? Government Response: VA wishes to operate the website. 8.Does the VA want to manage the care and feeding of the website (i.e., loading participants, loading content, etc.) or should the contractor perform these functions? If the contractor is to perform the functions, please indicate some levels of effort likely to be required of the contractor, such as loading xxx documents, etc. Government Response: We envision that the contractor would perform this function, at least initially. The level of effort will be proportionate to the content design that is provided by the selected contractor. 9.If the contractor is to host the website, please characterize the types, sizes and quantities of VA best practices and other documents the VA is likely to want loaded onto the website. Government Response: This is not defined at this time and will be largely determined by the results of the assessment. 10.Does this solicitation require that all personnel working on the project be physically located at that location? Since this work is for the assessment, establishment, piloting, and maintenance of a collaborative capability, will the government consider a solution that incorporates the use of remote workers, particularly during the later phases of the program where the capability is being maintained? There is significant precedence for large scale Communities of Practice within in the Department of the Army to be remotely facilitated and managed. Government Response: Physical location would seem relevant during the initial stage so the project although this is not an absolute requirement. 11.Is there any deliberation on this site being accessible to the general public or at least other government agencies in the future (impacts technology selection)? Government Response: Not at this time. 12.Do you have an estimated number of community participants including SES, political, and GS 15 positions? Government Response: The Government will attempt to provide this information prior to due date of proposals. 13.How many approval layers are there in this project, i.e., program manager, division, and Secretary-level? Government Response: Generally two levels (occasionally three): Program Manager, Deputy Assistant Secretary (and Assistant Secretary) 14.How many VA project team members are there and what are their ranks? Government Response: GS 15 and SES 15.Does this project have the Secretary's buy-in or does it have buy-in from the VA SES (impacts strategy phases and, to a lesser degree, technology buy-in)? This is an important question which can save VA time and money because our strategy can be constructed in such a way as to begin to develop consensus and buy-in from the start versus one in which the project is presented as a fait accompli and we're there just to gather information. Government Response: The objective is to secure meaningful input and buy-in from the primary users. 16.Who is the VA program manager tasked with implementing this initiative? If you are not able to provide a name please provide the person's level? Government Response: GS 15 17.Did the Assistant Secretary or the Human Resources and Administration staff work with an outside vendor to prepare this RFP or create this community web site initiative? If so, with whom? Government Response: The concept for this initiative is based on research conducted into other examples of Collaborative initiatives. 18.Since this is a new requirement there is no incumbent, however, will this be acquired under any other existing IDIQ or other contracts in addition to the open competition? Government Response: No. This is the only procurement action being pursued for this requirement. 19.Has a budget been authorized and allocated for the community web site initiative for FY 2010 and FY2011? If so, what is the budget? Government Response: A budget has been authorized and allocated for this initiative. The amount of that budget is Government proprietary information. 20.How did VA develop the project timeline? Government Response: It is an estimated timeline. 21.What are the current cross-agency communication vehicles in place, (i.e., email, listserv, intranet, newsletter) and which VA office is responsible for these communication vehicles? Government Response: This is information we hope to gather through the assessment process. 22.Under the deliverables section it states that the contractor will be responsible for text edits including grammar and formatting. Will we be responsible for writing any content? Could you please clarify who will write the content for the collaborative web site pages that are not SES user generated pages? For example, there may be an "about" page or a "terms of use" page to help SES members utilize the site properly. Who will write these? Government Response: The contractor should assume they will be responsible for developing ALL content for the site in conformance with VA standards. 23.Many communities have a dedicated resource that monitors user comments, uploaded documents, etc. Even in a professional environment the community manager may be looking for inappropriate posts or attacks on another user. I doubt this will be the case with the VA SES site but when there is no policeman sometimes even minor slights can get out of control. Inappropriate posts aside, there may be a need for a community monitor to make sure that classified documents are not accidentally posted or that other sensitive information is prematurely posted. All communities have ground rules and my experience has taught me that professional communities have a few more ground rules than a public social networking site. Who will monitor the community to make sure the rules are followed? We understand, if chosen, we'll be assisting VA in monitoring metrics but will the contractor be responsible for anything beyond metrics and functionality fine-tuning? Government Response: Monitoring the community for inappropriate posts is not a component of this work. 24.We utilize various project management software tools internally, including SharePoint. When the RFP states create an online project dialogue does VA envision using one of our internal tools or would we need to provide a specific solution? If a specific project communication solution, please define. This question is referring to VA project team and New Target project team communication, schedule management, and the like and not the actual software used to build the collaborative site. Is there a requirement for us to use a certain project management, document sharing, or scheduling software during the project? We typically use Microsoft Project, SharePoint or a similar program called AutoTask (which we use is based on complexity and project size) to communicate and share documents with our clients. Does the VA have a project management software requirement? Government Response: There is no requirement at this time for the contractor to use a specific project management software. 25.Are there any data integration components to authenticate members of the online community? Does VA have a database of active employees parsed by their rank? Government Response: Yes 26.Will online community members be able to access the community from outside the VA while travelling or at home? Or is it contemplated to be an "onsite" internal community? Government Response: Yes to the first question; No to the second. 27.Will the site require video or audio content beyond basic uploading and downloading? In other words, will the video or audio play within QuickTime or Windows Media Player or would you like it to play within a browser? Government Response: This has not been determined. 28.Will there be different levels of community access based on rank, e.g., GS 15 will have read only access while an SES member can read and post information? Government Response: To be determined. 29.The solicitation does not specify a particular contract vehicle, does this imply that we can use any appropriate one or does the VA have a preference? Government Response: This will be a firm fixed price contract. 30.The solicitation does not specify the type of contract (FFP, T&M, etc) for the CLINs. It would appear to be FFP, can you please verify this? Government Response: This will be a firm fixed price contract. 31.Is there an incumbent that is currently performing work related to the requirements in the RFQ? If so, can you provide the name? Government Response: There is no incumbent. 32.If there is not an incumbent, has a particular firm already worked with VA to develop the requirements for this RFP and/or project estimates? If so, can you provide us the name of the firm? Government Response: No, there is no other firm that has already worked with VA to develop the requirement. 33.Under Factor 1 - Past Performance, the RFQ states that the Offeror must identify no more than 2 contracts. In the same paragraph it also states that if a teaming arrangement is formed, each party should submit a minimum of 2 contracts for past performance but not more than 5. These would appear to conflict. Can we submit 2 past performance contracts for each party in a teaming arrangement and meet the requirements? Government Response: Yes 34.Under factor 4 - Socio-Economic status, the RFQ states that SDVO Offerors receives full credit, VO offerors receive partial credit and Offerors with SDVO or VO's as subcontractor will receive some consideration. Can you please clarify the distinction between partial credit and some consideration? Does the proposed share of work between an Offeror and their SDVO or VO subcontractor affect the credit afforded for this factor? Government Response: Partial credit would equate to half the credit given for full credit. Some consideration would equate to about one fourth of full credit, dependent upon the extent to which the SDVOSB or VOSB will be supporting the effort. 35.Has the VA already identified a collaborative software tool that the vendor should use? Or a set of tools it owns that we should select from in preparing a response? Government Response: No 36.Will the government please confirm rates can be taken from multiple schedules if the Contractor is utilizing subcontractors for the RFQ? Government Response: This requirement is being solicited open market and therefore, references to GSA Schedules have been removed (see A., above). 37.Will the government please clarify what is meant by the following statement contained in the SOW: "As such, the contractor shall assist the VA in conducting an assessment of political and career Senior Executives from the VA to take ownership, facilitated by the contractor that will form the basis of a clear plan for how to create an online community with the functionality it needs." Government Response: The contractor will be expected to assess the existing communications practices and need/interests of the target populations utilizing methods geared to generate ownership by the executives over the design of the final product. 38.Will the government please clarify what kind of content is going to be available for the Pilot outlined in the Statement of Work? Government Response: That will be defined by the assessment; a general description of content is provided in the purpose and scope sections of the RFP
- Web Link
-
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/VA/AFMLOVASS/VASSMD/VA79810RQ0106/listing.html)
- Record
- SN02157288-W 20100523/100521235735-9546fc3f577fcc059d2e61fb97bd8efd (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 |