Response_-_Vendor_Questions_Matrix_-_RFP_12314419R0003_-_UCFE_-_2nd_set.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 27 KB Posted Feb 22, 2019

Attached to: Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees
Solicitation number: 12314419R0003
Issued by: Department of Agriculture Office of Procurement and Property Management

About this file

From the source

2nd set of Questions

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
SF30_12314419R0003_Mod_2.pdf	PDF	Mar 12, 2019
SF30_12314419R0003_Mod_1.pdf	PDF	Mar 4, 2019
FY18_UCFE_Executive_Summary.xls	XLS spreadsheet	Mar 4, 2019
Response_to_Vendor_Questions_-_ADP_-_RFP_12314419R0003.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Feb 22, 2019
Vendor_Questions_Matrix_-_RFP_12314419R0003_-_UCFE.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Feb 6, 2019
Solicitation_(incl._SF1449)_-_12314419R0003.pdf	PDF	Feb 6, 2019

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Vendor Questions

USDA SSLoBS RFP #12314419R0003 Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees

Vendor Submitted Questions Matrix

Vendor Name:

Question #	Document Reference	Page Number	Section	Vendor Question	Government's Response
1	RFP #12314419R0003	2	3. Objective	“There should be an “Executive Summary” report used by senior management reflecting such items as Disputed Claims Percentage (target>85%)." Is this benchmark figure correct? Disputed Claims Percentage is a metric that tracks the total number of protestable separations within the total claims for a given period, not the number of claims an employer or their vendor elected to protest that had been "deemed protestable. From the numbers currently provided by USDA's contractor it would appear in FY'17, would be around 12% Moreover, the figures indicate only 3% (442 claims) of those true protestable separation reasons were actually protested. While it is clear there is a tremendous opportunity to increase savings by more thoroughly processing and protesting claims, an 85% DCP likely would not be an attainable goal based on the static amount of annual layoffs with the USDA.	Objective is to ensure that claims deemed protestable are in fact protested. Government objective is to ensure that the majority of those claims are protestable do in fact get protested. We are looking to reduce the number of "not protested" claims that were or could be deemed "protestable" in the future. Target should not to be interpreted as a hard requirement percentage but merely a possible goal number. No vendor will be rated for performance based on reaching any specific number related to Disputed Claims Percentage, but more based on review of those Disputed Claims to see if they were protestable and if not, why not.
2	RFP #12314419R0003	2	4.Scope	"170 USDA and Government agencies serviced by the NFC..” How many of the 170 agencies within the USDA are currently being serviced with the existing contractor?	49 are currently utilizing services.
3	RFP #12314419R0003	3	5. Specific Requirements (1)	Please confirm claim transition process- claims for the covered federal employees regardless of agency are first received by the NFC, and then distributed to according agencies and then the current vendor or sent to directly to vendor via NFC?If possible please provide a process workflow illustration or explanation.	Claims are sent directly to the vendor. NFC does not act as a clearing agent for UC claims.
4	RFP #12314419R0003	3	5. Specific Requirements (7)	This section and latter sections reference NIST 800-171 and FISMA security standards, but then also indicate in (9) in the same section that a "comparable or compliant" standard is acceptable. Would a SOC 2 Type 2 compliant hosting environment be considered acceptable?	If this is a Non-Federal System that is being Hosted by a SOC 2 Type II certified Organization then, Yes! Since this is a higher certification than our SSAE 18 audit (SOC Type I) then it would be acceptable
5	RFP #12314419R0003	4	5. Specific Requirements (9)	See previous question relative to item (9).	same as above
6	RFP #12314419R0003	4	5. Specific Requirements (10)	Please confirm “industry standards” as it relates to NIST, Federal Security or the Unemployment Cost Management Industry?	All PII must be safeguarded. If this is a Non-Federal System that is being Hosted by a SOC 2 Type II certified Organization then, Yes! Since this is a higher certification than our SSAE 18 audit (SOC Type I) then it would be acceptable.
7	RFP #12314419R0003	5	5. Specific Requirements (18)	Please confirm that the USDA wishes to have a point of contact wit who has direct access to the audit log or that the USDA will also have direct read-only access to the logs?	POC only.
8	RFP #12314419R0003	6	5.Specific Requirements, B.CLAIMS PROCESSING, (9)	Is the USDA referring to the NASWA UI SIDES system? If not, can the USDA please provide further detail regarding the Federal Interstate Connection System (ICON) in terms of integration, accessibility and requirements? It is not an immediately identifiable or common system used within the UCM industry. If possible, please provide with integration or API files so scope and cost can be properly defined.	Federal agencies do not utilize the SIDES system. Please refer to the NASWA website for ICON information.
9	RFP #12314419R0003	6	5.Specific Requirements, B.CLAIMS PROCESSING, (12)	If no responses required from information already available (re-opened claim) is the contractor required to notify agency POC?	Yes. It is anticipated that USDA/NFC will provide a 3-tier level of personnel contacts for notification of specific non-response issues. Vendor may provide possible optimal solutions as part of their response.
10	RFP #12314419R0003	7	5.Specific Requirements, B.CLAIMS PROCESSING, (15)	Can notification of documents be provided with encrypted link to a secure, proprietary software platform ? Each agency POC would have their own designated user name and password to be provided per terms indicated in the proposal.	Yes.
11	RFP #12314419R0003	8	D.STATE CHARGE DETAIL PROCESSING, (1)	Under the NFC/USDA UI Claims Process, would a new contractor be required to register as addressee of record for each individual state UI agency for every agency covered in the USDA contract? If so, please provide a list of total agencies to be covered within the USDA with all the states associated for each. Or would the registration be enacted at the NFS level and accordingly ratified with each state UI agency? Please confirm.	Yes. Vendor will act as agent for each agency in any location when a contract for support exists. See paragraph four of item 2 BACKGROUND, pg 1 of SOW. A three-month transition period is anticipated to assist in this process. List of all agencies will be provided to vendor that is awarded the contract. Additional information would be provided during transition phase.
12	RFP #12314419R0003	9	F.TRAINING, (2)	“The contractor shall provide semi-annual training…” Historically have these trainings deployed to all of the 170 agencies on a semi-annual basis? , Attachment A “5YR Claims average summary indicates only 5 trainings were deployed in a 5YR period. Does this insist that trainings will occur in a central location for all agencies to attend?
Training has consisted of webinars and on-line system utilization reference materials forwarded to agency POCs. Vendor has the option to propose any combination of training methods they feel would be most effective.
13	RFP #12314419R0003	10	F.TRAINING, (4)	Are quarterly PMR meetings conducted with each individual agency or in a centralized fashion with all agencies present? There is no indication of volume of PMR meetings conducted in 5YR average or FY17 numbers.	Quarterly and annual meetings are anticipated with NFC. These may take the form of VTC or PhonConf with annual on-site meetings.
14	RFP #12314419R0003	11	I.LENDER / VERFIER / AGENCY SERVICES (2)	Does the USDA NFC payroll department have the capability to expand to create additional earnings categories? The existing file format in "ATTCHMENT D" is limited to 5, which is very limited given the size and scope of all the agencies, roles and compensation types throughout the USDA. This very likely is causing issues for verifiers/lenders and creating more stress and cost for the USDA and it's employees.	The file formats provided are what will be utilized for this RFP and for forseeable future. Future modifications would be coordinated with the vendor.
15	RFP #12314419R0003	16	Quote Due-Date and Delivery	As the proposals are being submitted directly via email to the appropriate contact, to confirm, are the three volumes to be separated as three (3) individual attachments in PDF format?	Yes, each volume should be a Separate PDF with each volume name - Vol I - Technical Response, Vol II - Past Performance, Vol III - Price. Price should be sent in spreadsheet format and PDF per instructions.
16	RFP #12314419R0003	21	13.4.1 Factor 2-PAST PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FACTORS	“Offerors will provide past performance on a minimum of (3) three and up to (5) five similar projects ". As verifications are handled through our partner, (similar to Equifax UCM and ADP "The Work Number") would a combination of up to five (5) that include both Unemployment Compensation Services and Employment/Social Service Verification be sufficient? Or would (3) three relative to each service discipline be required?
Maximum of five total references indicating vendor past performance is all that is required. Composition of references is up to vendor.
17	RFP #12314419R0003	21	13.4.2 Factor 3 - PRICE, (3)	To confirm, Volume III or any other Volumes or attachments will not require hard copy submissions to the appropriate contact?	Electronic Copies for all Attachments are acceptable
18	RFP #12314419R0003	23	Attachment A, “5YR CLAIMS AVERAGE SUMMARY”	Can USDA please provide year over year number of transactions (Claims and verifications processed) for each category? If possible please identify what percentage of Employment verification requests are "Work History Requests". This will enable UTCA to properly identify trends in activity and price as appropriately and competitively as possible.	Information provided is the average over previous years. Values proivded can be utilized for calculations. See Att A, "Line 2" for Work History Requests.
19	RFP #12314419R0003	23	Attachment A, “5YR CLAIMS AVERAGE SUMMARY”, (12) “Management Reports”	Are the management reports as listed prepared and delivered individually by the current contractor, or are they self-generated by the individual agencies via software application?	Prepared by vendor. Proposals may offer additional options.
20	RFP #12314419R0003	23	Attachment A, “5YR CLAIMS AVERAGE SUMMARY”, (12) “Lender/Employment Verification” and "Social Services Verification"	Please confirm the current cost per verification being assessed to verifiers for both "Lender/Employment" and "Social Services" verifications by the current contractor.	Cost information is proprietary information.
21	RFP #12314419R0003	24	Attachment B, Additional Government Information, (FY17 DATA)	“DEEMED PROTESTABLE - 594”. Is the current contractor indicating that the 594 claims listed in this category, are comprised from the separation reasons listed before that category? Similarly, why would 142 of the protestable reasons not be “Not Protested”?
Yes. Rationale for not protesting is unknown at present. This partially could be due to lack of support by the government previously, but can't be fully determined at this time.
21	RFP #12314419R0003	24	Attachment B, Additional Government Information, (FY17 DATA)	Please provide the total benefit charges incurred in FY17 for each separation reason and relative to "Not Protested" and "Protested" categories. This information will be required to properly meet the RFP Objective as indicated on page 1, section 3. , "to minimize annual cost to agencies...."	See attached Executive Summary spreadsheet as this is the best information we have at this time.

National Finance Center: Pete - Frank - is this OK with you to release?

22	RFP #12314419R0003	24	Attachment B, Additional Government Information, (FY17 DATA)	“DECISIONS RECEIVED – 930”. Is this figure representative of all first level (initial) determinations? If so are they from claims filed and determined in the fiscal year, or any decision received during the fiscal year that may have previous claim effective dates?
Figure includes decisions from both current FY and prior year decisions.
23	RFP #12314419R0003	24	Attachment B, Additional Government Information, (FY17 DATA)	“Number of Vendor Represented Hearing - 0”. Does current contractor provide hearings representation for the USDA agencies? If so, why were no hearings attended in 2017? Do the agencies incur a per hearing fee under current contract? Is there a base or escalation clause in hearings covered by existing contractor?	It is required per current contract. Unknown. Yes. No.
24	RFP #12314419R0003	42	Enclosure 1, Unemployment Compensation Claims Processing for Federal Employees, Section 1 - Contract Clauses, 22.AGAR 452.216-74 CEILING PRICE (FEB 1998)	"The ceiling price of this contract is $2,500,000.00." Is this an accurate and updated figure or a legacy amount from Feb. 1988? Please confirm the current contractor annual pricing structure.	Current vendor pricing structure is proprietary information. Vendor responses will be evaluted on the basis of "Best Value to the Government."
25	RFP #12314419R0003	NA	Supplemental Question/Information Needed	Please provide updated claim totals to reflect claims filed per agency relative to the recent government shutdown dated December 22, 2018 until January 25, 2019.	Information is currently unavailable. It should be noted that all federal employees received back pay. Therefore, any claims made/paid are required to be reimbursed.
26	RFP #12314419R0003	NA	Supplemental Question/Information Needed	Pending requested shutdown claims data, is the USDA/NFC receptive to having pricing escalation clauses to cover excessive, unanticipated claim activity?	Vendor may propose any option they feel is necessary to meet organizational requirements.
27
28

File details come from the government source that posted it.