Establishing good communications right from the start of a relationship, whether between a husband and wife or a Contracting Officer (CO) and contractor, is essential for the health and the success of the relationship. I worked on a proposal recently that had a number of questions submitted to the Contracting Officer by potential offerors for clarification of the solicitation. This is not unusual, as everyone knows. And, unfortunately, it’s not even unusual to get back answers to the questions that leave more questions than clarification. But, the answers provided by this CO in response to the questions of all offerors really are examples of a breakdown in communication worthy of sharing with everyone.
1. Question: There are two positions listed in the pricing worksheet [provided in the RFP]. Is that meant to be indicative of the number of personnel and positions that the agency is expecting to perform the services, or is it up to the offeror to determine the number of persons and titles performing the services?
Answer: Dynamic and as needed.
Ummm… what?
2. Question: The government solicitation states the contractor should be prepared to start this engagement beginning Monday, October 3, 2016, the beginning week of the government FY17. Is this the anticipated “Notice to Proceed” date or “boots on the ground’ date? Will all necessary procurement documentation be available and executed on this date?
Answer: Yes.
OK, I’m not sure what the offeror meant by the last question either, but it looks like the answer to that question is “yes.” What the answer is to the first question is still anybody’s guess!
3. Question: Under Section 2 Project Scope – Please define how the “Program\Project Management support vendors may be the lead team for overseeing other project managers.” Is the expectation that vendors will be responsible for managing government or other vendor staff? If so, approximately how people are expected to be managed for each vendor supplied support person?
Answer: If necessary.
Seriously? Wonder what question the CO was answering?
4. Question: Under Section 3 Requirements, item 12 – Confirm that 8 hrs. per day is a minimum as written. Is there an expectation of more than 8 hrs. per day? If so, will overtime rates be applicable beyond 40 hours per week? Confirm 24/7 availability requirement and define what constitutes this level of availability. Does a 24/7 availability include weekends and recognized holidays? Is a 24/7 availability intended in perpetuity to the contract period or is it only in emergency situations? If this is intended solely for emergencies, please define what constitutes an emergency?
Answer: No overtime pay.
The answer that was provided does answer the first question. However, the other questions regarding the definition of 24/7 availability are still valid and warrant a thoughtful answer.
5. Question: Under Section 4 Deliverables, item 6 – Is there a call center or central repository for incoming user requests? If so, how is this disseminated and assigned?
Answer: N/A – Call center and emergency doesn’t apply.
Really?! The title of the project office to be supported is: “Emergency Management and Corporate Security” so how is “emergency” not applicable? And assuming that there is no call center (a reasonable question, by the way) then how IS the request for support disseminated and assigned? Beats me!
The point, of course, to looking at this sorry example of “communications” between CO and potential offerors is this: We as COs need to take the time to carefully read and understand the questions submitted by contractors, whether during competition or during contract performance, and to give thoughtful answers to each one. When contractors submit questions to the government regarding the content of the solicitation, most of the questions are the result of intense reading, lots of discussion among contractor subject matter experts, and serious consideration as to whether or not to even ask the question. If they go ahead and ask a question it is usually because it truly isn’t clear to them as readers and as experts in the field. Reading the questions with the assumption that each contractor is trying to pry secret information out of the government, or that the offerors are just asking questions to try to slow down the government process, is misguided at best. Reading and responding to the questions hastily and with little thought, results in poor communications with the very contractor you are probably going to contract with and work with for the next several years.