B09_SA_-_Amendment_2_-_Attachment_F_-_Questions_and_Answers_0002.pdf

RFP No. 140D0424Q0069 Attachment C

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS*

# RFP Section Question Response Change to

RFP?

Description of Change

Technical/ Contractual

1 Section 5.5.1 Page

Our understanding is that Modern EHR system will be running on Oracle Cloud. With kind of data volume transfer between EHR transaction system and 4DW, is there a concern about latency & egress charges if 4DW is expected to run on cloud platform other than Oracle?

Latency & cost are always a concern when evaluating a production system.

No NA Technical

2 Section 5.3 page 27 What are the key performance indicators (KPIs) that the data warehouse will help measure?

There are a variety of KPIs that could be developed from the data located within a centralized data warehouse.

No NA Technical

3 Section 5.5 Page 35 What data integration tools or platforms are currently in use or preferred?

This is a new system so there are no tools currently in use. The cloud hosting environment currently in use is Azure Government Enclave, FedRAMP High.

No NA Technical

4 Section 5.3 page 27 What is the expected data volume growth over the next 1-3 years?

For CDR and Cold Storage – 0.5 to 1 TB.

For VNA – 3 to 10 TB.

No NA Technical

5 Section 5.9 Page 44 What reporting tools or BI platforms are currently in use or preferred?

In the IHS environment, QLIC and Power BI are relatively common.

No NA Technical

6 Section 5.3 page 27 Are there any previous attempts at building a data warehouse, and what were the lessons learned?

There was a prototype developed to provide a proof of concept for 4DW that gave positive indication that the concept was viable.

There are other data warehouse systems in use in IHS but they were designed to cover data sets that were less

No NA Technical comprehensive than the 4DW Scope and did not lend themselves to a broader scope.

7 3 Will the Cold Storage Archive (CSA) Service data ever require any types of transactional or cross reference to current records in the system?

There will need to be traceability between data in CDR and what is stored in the Cold Storage.

No NA Technical

8 3 Will the Clinical Data Viewer be for the sole purpose of viewing data without a need for transactional actions required.

(Transactional activities would include record correction and/or edits)

The Clinical Data Viewer is a read only environment.

There will be some need for transactional actions to provide for security purposes/activity audits.

No NA Technical

9 3 Appx how many legacy eHR systems will be included in the data migration and estimated total volume of data per data set?

The current estimates are that approximately 200 legacy EHR systems will be included in the data migration and contribute to the volume of data. Average size of current clinical data sets is less than 100 GB.

No NA Technical

10 Section 5.3.1 page

This RFX has an AoA component, is IHS concerned with the potential for a protest by locking down the AoA to one cloud (Azure), when there are better alternatives platforms/solutions available for your stated requirements?

Especially when there are alternatives solutions that have a differentiated technical value and potential economic savings that haven't even been presented that would align with having a solution that runs where your future EHR will be deployed?

The AoA for CSP has been removed from the PWS. Yes Updated

PWS

(strikethrough and highlighted yellow)

Technical

11 Section 5.5.1 page

Has IHS been briefed on how this potential 4DW solution will be supported and aligned with your future Oracle Health EHR development and deployment architecture?

To date, there have been high level discussions. No NA Technical

12 Section 5.5.1 Page

Has IHS considered the potential benefits to the Tribal community to have one data model across both EHR and 4DW systems as they move forward, and holistic analytics view for that patient that the clinician can see regardless of where the data is stored?

One of the goals of this project is to avoid vendor lock-

in. The ETL mapping process will provide the harmonization of the disparate data models present amongst various EHR systems.

No NA Technical

13 Section 5.5 page 35 Has IHS considered the complexity of integrations, syncing of data, network egress charges and other architecture dependencies by architecting a multi-cloud solution that isn't best of breed? Who is responsible for providing those technical alternatives if Azure is the only option available for consideration that would address those concerns?

Yes, these factors have been considered. No NA Technical

14 Attach A, PWS, 5.3.1, page 27

Does the Government prefer AWS or Azure?

This is a new system so there are no tools currently in use. The cloud hosting environment currently in use is Azure Government Enclave, FedRAMP High.

No NA Technical

15 General What is the technology stack currently in use?

This is a new system so other than the designated Azure cloud environment there is no technology stack in use.

No NA Technical

16 Global Is there an incumbent presently doing this work? If so, would you

This is a new requirement and only a small portion (the prototype) was on a current contract (task order

No NA Contractual please provide name and contract number?

140D0422F0528 using GSA MAS for IT, SIN 54151HEAL – IT Professional Services)

17 Global Would the Government please consider granting a one-week extension due to the two federal holidays (Juneteenth and 4th of July) falling between now and the response due date?

Yes Yes Updated RFP Contractual

18 Volume I, Section 6:

Factor C: Past Performance pg. 7

To provide enough project detail in the PPQs, will the Government please include an extra page for section L or a continuation page?

Attachment D – Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is being included as a Word document.

Yes Updated Attachment D

Contractual

19 Volume I, Section 6:

Factor A: Technical Approach

Prompts exclude; Section 5.1 in its entirety, 5.3 (top level requirements), 5.3.2, 5.3.3, and

5.3.4. Does the government

intend for offerors to include responses to these sections within Factor A? If so, where?

Section 5.1 should be discussed in response to Factor B, Prompt B.1.

Sections 5.3.2, 5.3.3, and 5.3.4 can be discussed in response to Factor A: Sub-Factor Prompt A.5.

Yes Updated RFP Technical

20 General How does the Government intend to mitigate organizational conflicts of interest and promote fair and equitable competition if companies involved in developing requirements and building the 4DW Data Warehouse prototype are permitted to bid on this solicitation?

Should the work contemplated by the PWS give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest, the Offeror will be required to identify any actual/potential OCIs, and the Contracting Officer’s determination will be made on a case by-case basis. This will be done through the evaluation of submitted OCI Mitigation Plans during the evaluation phase which may require resubmission and evaluation as necessary throughout the life of the contract.

No NA Contractual

21 PWS 5.3.1.11 pg. 29 Passage: Employ a 4DW environment support tool suite (ESTS) to provide for the management, operations, The intent of this section is to implement tooling that helps monitor the various components of the system to ensure that data migration services, once initiated, continue to operate as designed throughout the lifecycle of any given migration.

monitoring, and sustainment of the DMS.

Can the Government please clarify/specify intent and anticipated technologies for a 4DW environment support tool suite?

22 RFP Volume I, Section 6: Factor C:

Past Performance

pg. 7

Would the Government confirm that Offeror past performance (PP) and/or experience includes sister company/affiliate PP/experience as permitted by 13 CFR 121.103 and FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iii) by way of a meaningful relationship commitment stated within its proposal between the Offeror and supporting entity?

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation. Successors can submit predecessor past performance records as part of the three (3) relevant past performance records as indicated in RFP Volume I, Section 6: Factor C: Past Performance pg. 7

No NA Contractual

23 B08_SOL_-

_Attachment_B_- _Pricing_Spreadshe et

The Government has labor categories “Clinical Analyst, Senior” and “System Administrator, Senior” listed with hours in each POP tab, but has not provided labor category descriptions for these categories.

Can the Government please provide the labor category descriptions for these?

Please see updated pricing spreadsheet with labor category descriptions included for the Clinical Analyst, Senior and System Administrator, Senior.

Yes Updated Attachment B

– Pricing Spreadsheet

Technical

24 Volume II, Section 2: Price Proposal, a.

Can the Government confirm that in order to meet the requirements for Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing data the offeror is allowed to submit a Cost Narrative in Microsoft Word?

Yes, that will acceptable. No NA Contractual

25 Bo8_SOL-

_RFP_140D0424R0

069_IHS_4DW_fina l.pdf ; Section 3 Proposal Content / Submission Requirements ;

Volume I General,Technical, Management and Personnel, and Past Performance, Page 3

RFP section states: “40 pages (Technical) (10 Pages Management and Staffing) 10 Pages Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) 10 Pages Performance Requirements Summary (PRS)” Question: Can the Government please clarify the page count for Volume I?

For instance: Does Volume I have a 40 page limit with Technical limited to 10 pages, Management and Staffing limited to 10 pages, QASP 10 pages and PRS limited to 10 pages.

The total page count for the technical proposal has been updated to 50 pages, which includes Factor A and Factor B. 10 pages for the QASP and 10 pages for the PRS do not count in the 50 pages of the technical proposal.

Yes Update RFQ Section 3 Table

Contractual

26 Bo8_SOL_-

_RFP_140D0424R0

069_IHS_4DW_fina l.pdf; Volume I, Section 6: Factor B:

Management and Staffing Approach;

Factor B: Sub-factor Prompt B.4 – Quality Assurance, RFP section states “(t)he draft QASP and PRS are not counted toward the Technical Volume I page limit; however, neither must not exceed 10 pages.”

Question 1: Can the Government please clarify the Page limit for the PRS? Question 2: Can the Government please clarify the page limit for the QASP?

Question 3: Can the Government please clarify if the page limits for the PRS and QASP are included in the Technical Volume I page limit?

The total page count for the technical proposal has been updated to 50 pages, which includes Factor A and Factor B. 10 pages for the QASP and 10 pages for the PRS do not count in the 50 pages of the technical proposal.

Yes Updated Factor B:

Sub-factor Prompt B.4 – Quality Assurance

Contractual

27 Volume II, Section 2: Price Proposal, b.

The Government requires that subcontractor rate information be provided.

#1: Yes, subcontractors are required to submit the same level of detail as the prime contractor.

Yes Update pricing spreadsheet

Contractual

Question 1: Are the subcontractors required to submit the same level of detail as the prime contractor?

Question 2: Can the Government please add a column into Attachment B to accommodate for whether a rate is a subcontractor or prime contractor rate?

#2: Yes, Attachment B – Pricing Spreadsheet will be updated

28 Volume II, Section 2: Price Proposal, g.

Section g. states “Offerors must indicate those labor categories, if any, which fall under the auspice of the Service Contract Labor Standards (SCLS)”. SCLS/WD rates are determined at the locality level. Without specific labor category locations, it would be impossible for the Offeror to determine which schedule is applicable.

Question: Will the Government please define which labor categories are SCLS eligible and specific locations so Offerors can make sure they are meeting local minimum wage standards?

This is dependent on what each Offeror believes is SCLS. The Government is not asking Offerors to know the wage standards now. This will be included in the award.

No NA Contractual

29 4. EVALUATION

BASIS FOR

AWARD p.13

The evaluation criteria stipulate that the contract will be awarded to the Offeror that “provides a technically acceptable proposal at a fair and reasonable price”.

Question: Will the Government please clarify this is a best value

Confirming this will be best value tradeoff. No NA Contractual tradeoff and NOT a LPTA evaluation?

30 B08_SOL_-

_Attachment_A_-

_IHS_4DW_PWS,

6.2 Key Personnel

The Government provides a listing of key personnel and the qualifications associated with the key personnel. However, these labor categories do not directly map to labor categories listed in the Government provided Attachment B.

Question: Can the Government please update Attachment B to be consistent with the PWS, or modify the PWS to name labor categories consistently?

The Labor Categories in Attachment B – Pricing Spreadsheet have been updated to match Attachment A - IHS 4DW PWS and the RFP

Yes Updated Attachment B

– Pricing Spreadsheet

Technical

31 RFP 3. PROPOSAL

CONTENT /

SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS:

Volume I, Section 5:

Technical Assumptions; 2nd paragraph, last sentence (RFP p. 5)

AND VOLUME II,

Section 1: Price Assumptions, 2nd paragraph, last sentence (RFP p. 8)

Vol. 1, Section 5 requirement states: Assumptions regarding the basis of the proposed level of effort or the mix of labor must be included in Volume 1.

Vol. II, Section 1 requirement states: Any assumptions regarding the basis of the proposed level of effort or the mix of labor affecting price must be included in Volume 2.

Question: Would the government please confirm proposers should include assumptions on LOE and mix of labor in both Volumes, the only difference being that if price/cost is affected, that needs to be explained in Volume II:

Confirming Offerors should include assumptions on LOE and mix of labor in both Volumes with the only difference being that if price / cost is affected it should only be explained in Volume II: Price.

Yes Updated Volume I, Section 5:

Technical Assumptions of the RFP.

Contractual

Price in the appropriate response section?

32 RFP 3. PROPOSAL

CONTENT /

SUBMISSION

REQUIREMENTS:

p.3, bullets beneath the table

Would the government please confirm the use of 11x17 pages for proposal requirements such as the schedule or architectural/technical schematics be acceptable? If so, would 11x17 pages in such instances count as 1 page or 2 pages in the overall page limit for the section?

No No NA Contractual

33 RFP Section 3, Volume I, Section 6:

Technical Proposal,

p. 3

Would the government please consider excluding architectural schematics and/or technically descriptive diagrams from the technical section page count?

No No NA Technical

34 PWS 5.1

Project earned value management is referenced: does ‘project’ reference the EV at the deliverable project level, or at the entire program level?

EV will be measured at both the deliverable project and at the program levels.

No NA Technical

35 PWS 5.1

Project earned value management is referenced: should this happen in the IHS EVMS or in the contractor EVMS?

The IHS designated tool is required. The contractor has the option of tracking in their system as well.

No NA Technical

36 Attachment B, Overview tab

Comment: Formulas in Column I are incorrect and inflate Labor, ODC, and Travel costs.

The formulas are incorrect and will be updated. Yes Updated Attachment B

– Pricing Spreadsheet

Contractual

37 PWS 5.2.5

PWS Section 5.2.5.2 states that 4DW shall use the DHITMO CCB. Please confirm under

5.2.5.3 that 4DW should develop

DHITMO change control processes will be used to guide the development of specific processes, procedures, and methods used in 4DW. The DHITMO change its own CC guide and SOP, and not leverage those of DHITMO.

control board will be responsible for decisions affecting 4DW scope, schedule, or cost.

38 PWS 5.2.9

Does IHS have an established Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) and supporting components that the 4DW will integrate with or should the 4DW be considered standalone and include the necessary components to support ZTA? In particular:

• Cloud identity store (e.g., AD in the cloud)

• MFA (where PIV integration is not possible)

• Audit logging, (e.g., cloud native central logging vs forwarding to established central IHS logging)

• Vulnerability Management (cloud native vs provision for established IHS services)

• Baseline management (e.g., STIG, CIS

Benchmark. Cloud native vs provision for established IHS services.)

IDS/IPS monitoring (cloud native vs established IHS services)

IHS is in the process of developing ZTA at an enterprise level. 4DW should support ZTA while utilizing the enterprise components when they are available.

No NA Technical

39 PWS 5.2.9 #6

This mentions the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), however, security impact assessment (SIA) and risk assessment (RA) were not specifically mentioned.

Should those artifacts be considered as part of the normal

Yes, SIA and RA are considered normal components of the SSP process development.

development and system security plan processes?

40 PWS 5.2.9 #7

Has IHS determined if the 4DW will be considered a new system of records or be considered an extension of the existing 09-17- 0001 Medical, Health, and Billing Records Systems system of records?

The final on this has not been decided yet. For planning, we have been anticipating that it will require a new SOR.

No NA Technical

41 PWS 5.14 #5.1

Please confirm that the “deliverables” referenced here do not include reports, which are addressed in the previous metric (“99% or greater timely compliance of submitting reports, as stipulated in the contract”).

That is correct. No NA Technical

42 PWS 5.14 #5.2

Does the “8 hours” refer to 8 business hours (i.e., 1 business day) or 8 clock hours?

8 business hours. No NA Technical

43 PWS 5.14 #5.2

Does “30 days” refer to 30 business days or 30 calendar days (i.e., 1 month)?

30 calendar days. No NA Technical

44 PWS 5.14 #5.9

How are we to measure “visual user indication” – does that refer to a subjective measure by the end user?

In this context, a “visual user indication” would be a visible element indicating that work is progressing before the full visual experience is available.

No NA Technical

45 PWS 5.14 #5.10

What means will be used to determine – or how will IHS determine – what is “statistically relevant”?

As tests are created to exercise the various aspects of the system utilized they will be related to the base requirement. The number of tests completed divided by the total number of tests available would equal the test coverage metric. Statistically relevant would be 80% or greater.

46 PWS 5.14 #5.11

Does IHS have a preference for how they would “observe” this data?

Ideally, this would be available real-time via dashboards with drill-down and search capability.

No NA Technical

47 PWS 5.14 #5.11

Does the “2 hour” refer to 2 business hours or 2 clock hours?

2 clock hours. No NA Technical

48 PWS

3. Scope of Work

Bullet point # 4

Is this requirement limited to electronic Clinical Quality Measures or a wider scope, including other quality/performance measures, such as CRS, GPRA, GPRAMA, etc.?

CDR could be a data source for a broad set of quality measurements.

No NA Technical

49 PWS

5.4.3

Bullet point # 2

Does the RFP include an initial DMP Reporting Table? Will it be developed as part of the contract work?

The DMP Reporting Table will be developed as part of the contract work. As this is a new system, there is no current DPM Reporting Table.

No NA Technical

50 PWS 5.9 Bullet point # 7 Page 45

Is IHS targeting HL7 v3 CCDA as one of the data sources for CDV or the specified HL7 v2.x?

CCDA’s are not considered a primary source of data for the clinical data viewer at this time.

No NA Technical

51 PWS

5.9

Bullet point # 6

Which remote system is intended for querying by CDV? Is the CDV connection scoped to CDR, CSA, and HIE Gateway or is it directly communicating with external data sources, EHRs?

Clinical Data Viewer data sources would be the CDR, VNA, and HIE Gateway.

No NA Technical

52 PWS

6.2- Key Personnel

Would the government consider allowing 15+ years of experience working on health data information systems in lieu of the requirement of a CPHIMS

No No NA Technical certification for the Privacy and Security Program Lead position?

53 RFP, Section 6. / Item (c)(7) / Page 52

Will the Government please confirm the incorporation of the applicable Executive Order (EO) 14026 (Increasing the Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors) via the revised FAR 52.222-55 (Minimum Wages for Contractor Workers Under Executive Order 14026) for contracts awarded after January 30, 2022.

Confirming FAR 52.222-55 will be checked Yes Updated RFP Contractual

54 RFP, Section 6. / Item (c)(8) / page 52

Clause 52.222-41 is checked;

Clause 52.222-55 is not checked.

Per the FAR, 52.222-55 and 52.222-62 must be applicable if 52.222-41 is checked. Will the Government confirm the incorporation of the applicable Executive Order (EO) 13706 (Paid Sick Leave Under Executive Order) via the FAR 52.222-62 for contracts awarded after January 30, 2022?

Confirming FAR 52.222-62 will be checked Yes Updated RFP Contractual

55 Attachment A / 4.2.

Place of Performance / page

The PWS lists the place of performance as both designated contractor facilities and IHS offices or another site designated by IHS as needed. Will staff be able to complete the work remotely (home office setting) or will an actual project site required?

Assuming the home office setting is within the United States, most work can be completed remotely. There will most likely be some in-person meetings to facilitate planning, design, management, etc.

56 Attachment A / 5.3 Task 3 / page 27

The Government states that Cloud Services would be provided. Does the proposal need to account within the ODC line of the Attachment B Pricing Spreadsheet for other software services/licenses that would reside within the cloud environment (i.e.: Snowflake, Looker, Splunk, etc.)?

Yes No NA Technical

57 Attachment A / 6.2:

Key Personnel /

Will the Government provide what type of Cloud Certification is needed for the Cloud Solution Architect?

The PWS states Cloud Certification. As a reminder, the cloud hosting environment currently in use is Azure Government Enclave, FedRAMP High.

No NA Technical

58 RFP, Section 3. / General/ page 3

Will the government confirm if the offeror can provide Section 1:

General, cover sheet requirements (items 1-19), in a table after a Title Page? Or if the government would like this information in lieu of a Title Page of Volume I?

Confirming the offeror can provide Section 1: General, cover sheet requirements in a table after a Title Page

No NA Contractual

59 RFP, Section 3. / Submission Requirements / page

Page limitations are outlined in the submission requirements table. Will the government please clarify the pages counts for the Volume 1? It is our understanding that the page counts are as follows:

- Factor A Technical Approach page limitation 40 pages

- Factor B Management and Staffing Approach page limitation is 10 pages

- QASP page limitation is 10 pages

The total page count for the technical proposal has been updated to 50 pages, which includes Factor A and Factor B. 10 pages for the QASP and 10 pages for the PRS do not count in the 50 pages of the technical proposal.

Yes Updated RFP Contractual

- PRS page limitation is 10 pages Total page limitation for Volume I - Section 6, Factors A and B, QASP, and PRS is 70 pages?

RFP, Section 3. / Submission Requirements / page

If the Factor A-Technical Approach is limited to 10 pages, will the Government expand the page limitation to sufficiently respond to the 5 sub-factor prompts?

Factors A and B page limitation is 50 pages. Yes Updated RFP Contractual

RFP, Section 3. / Submission Requirements / page

Factor C-Past Performance, requires submittal of Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Attachment D or in lieu of PPQs, CPARS can be submitted.

In what section should copies of CPARS be provided?

CPARS should be submitted as a part of Volume I No NA Contractual

RFP, Section 3. / Factor C / page 7

In accordance with 48 CFR 15.305(a)(2)(iii), the government may rely on company past performance and project experience of sister companies that meaningfully contribute to performance of the contract (GAO found in GM–Bulltrack, B-

414591.6 (Comp. Gen. Oct. 30, 2018)). Will the government please confirm that offerors are able to use sister company past performance for their proposals?

Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation. Successors can submit predecessor past performance records as part of the three (3) relevant past performance records (see Volume I, Section 6: Factor C:

Past Performance of the RFP)

No NA Contractual

63 B08-SOL---RFP-

140D0424R0069- IHS-4DW-Final-

Could you please clarify the page count for Volume 1: General? Is the technical approach to be no more than 40 pages or does the total Volume 1 have a 40 page

The total page count for the technical proposal has been updated to 50 pages, which includes Factor A and Factor B. 10 pages for the QASP and 10 pages for the PRS do not count in the 50 pages of the technical proposal.

Yes Updated RFP Contractual

O1XdWgAikUh7.pd f" limit? Additionally, how should the QASP be labeled? Should it be a Factor within Volume 1?

Recommend reviewing Factor B: Sub-factor Prompt B.4

– Quality Assurance of the RFP.

64 B08-SOL---RFP-

140D0424R0069- IHS-4DW-Final- O1XdWgAikUh7.pd f"

Is Factor C, Past Performance the same as PRS, the Performance Requirement Summary?

No. Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) is a component of the QASP. The PRS is a report on the contractor’s actual performance of program management services in accordance with the contract. Whereas past Performance is an external rating of the contractor’s performance on previous governmental contracts.

No NA Technical

65 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Attachment D

Attachment D is not in a fillable format. Could the government please provide a pdf that is in a fillable format for Attachment D?

Yes, a Word version will be provided Yes Attachment D

– Past Performance Questionnaire

(PPQ)

Contractual

66 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ), Attachment D

Assuming that Attachment D is the past performance. Can the government clarify specifically what the page count limits are for this? The PDF stands at 4 page, and the instructions seem to indicate the Past Performance is limited to 10 pages, which if there are 3, would exceed this limit

PPQs and CPARS do not have page limits. No NA Contractual

67 5.3 Task 3: Establishment of the 4DW Environment says: The establishment of the 4DW environment is one of the initial work packages to execute.

The contractor shall assess the 4DW prototype for re-use or replacement. The “establishment” of the 4DW environment includes, but is not limited to, the following

To initiate the planning for development of alternative methods to achieve the required results.

tasks...Item 1. Assess the Government-furnished 4DW prototype to determine its viability for meeting the Government-specified capabilities and require ments. ." What are the next steps if the vendor determines that the 4DW does not meet "Government-specified capabilities and requirements"?

68 5.3 Task 3:

Establishment of the 4DW Environment

What is the software platform for the current 4DW prototype?

Azure Data Factory .Net, Synaptic, CosmoDB, Azure API, Azure API for FHIR.

No NA Technical

69 5.8 Task 8:

Enterprise Master Patient Index Service (EMPI)

Task 8 says to "Establish and maintain an EMPI database".

Please confirm, is it IHS' intent to replace the current 4DH EMPI through this contract?

No, this will not be a replacement for the current 4DH EMPI, though 4DH may be deprecated when the RPMS system is deprecated.

No NA Technical

70 5.9 Task 9: Clinical Data Viewer (CDV)

Task 9 says to " Establish a capability to view, in read only mode, electronic health records stored in the CDR-DB, and the IHS HIE Gateway-DB. The HIE Gateway is the server or services that connects the IHS Health Network to a national HIE network, such as eHealth Exchange." Please confirm, is it IHS' intent to replace the current 4DH Clinical Viewer as part of this contract?

No, this will not be a replacement for the 4DH Clinical Viewer.

71 5.7 Task 7: Vendor Neutral Archive (VNA) Services

What are the annual net new study volumes?

For planning, we are using 1TB/year for new study volumes. We expect to have better statistics in the future.

No NA Technical

72 5.7 Task 7: Vendor Neutral Archive (VNA) Services

How many legacy studies will be migrated?

Approximately 50TB worth. No NA Technical

73 Key Personnel Years of experience and education required. What specific cloud certifications is the government looking for.

The PWS states Cloud Certification. As a reminder, the cloud hosting environment currently in use is Azure Government Enclave, FedRAMP High.

No NA Technical

*Note: Only fill out the following columns: RFP Section (please include the section, paragraph, and page number that your question refers to), and Question. Contractor may add additional rows, if necessary. Please do not add/remove columns or change column width. Please keep this in MS Word.