Amendment 1 Complete.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

PAGE OF PAGES

1 1

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

00001

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

04/17/2008

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

00HCUCCD-2008-49658

5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE 2543 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE 2543 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention –PGO Acquisition and Assistance Branch 3 Team 1 2920 Brandywine Road, Room 3000 Atlanta, GA 30341-5539

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

2008-N-09699

9B. DATED (See Item 11)

04/07/2008

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (See Item 13)

CODE FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers X is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN

ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

This amendment is issued to correct and clarify RFP 2008-N-09699.

See Next Page for changes.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16A. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY ___________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE 30-105 Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

This amendment is issued to correct and clarify RFP 2008-N-09699.

1. Replace pages 48 and 49 with the attached pages 48 and 49 to add Rights in Data, Special Works.

2. Replace Page 54 Section J with the attached page 54 Section J to add four Task order #3 attachments.

3. Attachments J.12(A), J.12(B), J.12(C) and J.12(D) of Task Order #3 are included.

4. Vendors shall respond to all three of the attached task orders.

5. Replace Page 76 with the attached page 76 to change past performance details.

6. The date for response is changed to June 2, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. local time to allow for extra time to complete the three task orders.

7. All Task Order response dates shall be June 2, 2008 at 2:00 p.m. This is the same date and time as the IDIQ proposal date.

8. Vendors shall submit Task Order proposals per section L.8 (f) instructions, not the email directions in the task order attachments. The email directions will be typical of the method for submittal after award of basic IDIQ contract.

9. In Task Order #1, replace Page 1 and 17. Delete page 18. This will change the response date to June 2, 2008 and remove incorrect instructions for response of Task Order #1.

10. In Task Order #2, replace Page 1 and 20. Delete page 21. This will change the response date to June 2, 2008 and remove incorrect instructions for response of Task Order #2.

11. In Task Order #3, replace Page 1, 20, 21 and 22. This will change the response date to June 2, 2008 and remove incorrect instructions for response of Task Order #3.

Amendment No. 01

52.222-2 Payment for Overtime Premiums (Jul 1990)

52.222-3 Convict Labor (Jun 2003)

52.222-21 Prohibition of Segregated Facilities (Feb 1999)

52.222-26 Equal Opportunity (Mar 2007)

52.222-35 Equal Opportunity for Special Disabled Veterans, Veterans of the Vietnam Era, and Other Eligible Veterans (Sep 2006)

52.222-36 Affirmative Action for Workers With Disabilities (Jun 1998)

52.222-37 Employment Reports on Special Disabled Veterans, Veterans of the Vietnam Era, and Other Eligible Veterans (Sep 2006)

52.222-50 Combating Trafficking in Persons (Aug 2007)

52.223-5 Pollution Prevention and Right-to-Know Information (Aug 2003)

52.223-6 Drug-Free Workplace (May 2001)

52.223-14 Toxic Chemical Release Reporting

52.224-1 Privacy Act Notification (Apr 1984)

52.224-2 Privacy Act (Apr 1984)

52.225-13 Restrictions on Certain Foreign Purchases

52.226-1 Utilization of Indian Organizations and Indian-Owned Economic Enterprises (Jun 2000)

52.227-3 Patent Indemnity (Apr 1984)

52.227-14 Rights in Data - General (Jun 1987) *

52.227-17 Rights in Data – Special Works *

52.230-2 Cost Accounting Standards (Apr 1998)

52.230-3 Disclosure and Consistency of Cost Accounting Practices (Apr 1998)

52.230-6 Administration of Cost Accounting Standards (Apr 2005)

52.232-9 Limitation on Withholding of Payments (Aug 2005)

52.232-17 Interest (Jun 1996)

52.232-18 Availability of Funds (Apr 1984)

52.232-20 Limitation of Cost (Apr 1984)

52.232-22 Limitation of Funds (Apr 1984)

52.232-23 Assignment of Claims (Jan 1986)

52.232-25 Prompt Payment (Oct 2003)

52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer - Central Contractor Registration (Oct 2003)

52.233-1 Disputes (Jul 2002)

52.233-3 Protest after Award (Aug 1996)

52.233-3 Alternate I Protest after Award - Alternate I (Jun 1985)

52.233-4 Applicable Law for Breach of Contract Claim

52.237-3 Continuity of Services (Jan 1991)

52.239-1 Privacy or Security Safeguards (Aug 1996)

52.242-1 Notice of Intent to Disallow Costs (Apr 1984)

52.242-3 Penalties for Unallowable Costs (May 2001)

52.242-4 Certification of Final Indirect Costs (Jan 1997)

52.242-13 Bankruptcy (Jul 1995)

52.243-2 Changes - Cost-Reimbursement (Aug 1987)

52.243-2 Alternate I Changes - Cost-Reimbursement - Alternate I (Apr 1984)

52.243-7 Notification of Changes (Apr 1984)

52.244-5 Competition in Subcontracting (Dec 1996)

52.244-6 Subcontracts for Commercial Items (Mar 2007)

52.245-1 Government Property (June 2007)

52.246-25 Limitation of Liability - Services (Feb 1997)

52.247-63 Preference for U.S.-Flag Air Carriers (Jun 2003)

52.249-6 Termination (Cost-Reimbursement) (May 2004)

52.249-14 Excusable Delays (Apr 1984)

52.253-1 Computer Generated Forms (Jan 1991)

HHSAR SOURCE TITLE AND DATE

352.228-7 Insurance -- Liability to Third Persons (Dec 1991)

352.242-71 Final Decisions on Audit Findings (Apr 1984)

352.216-72 Additional Cost Principles (Jan 2006)

352.232-9 Withholding of Contract Payments (Jan 2006)

352.233-70 Litigation and Claims (Jan 2006)

352.270-6 Publications and Publicity (Jan 2006)

352.270-7 Paperwork Reduction Act (Jan 2006)

352.224-70 Confidentiality of Information (Jan 2006)

* FAR Clauses 52.227-14 Rights in Data – General or 52.227-17 Rights in Data – Special Works will be specified by Task Order.

Section J - List Of Attachments

Attachment Number

Title Number of Pages

J.01 Billing Instructions for Negotiated Cost-Type Contracts 03

J.02 SF 3881, ACH Vendor/Miscellaneous Payment Enrollment Form 02

J.03 Contractor Performance Report (Cost Type Contracts) National Institute of Health Report Standard Contractor Performance Report

J.04 Task Order Evaluation 03

J.05 Government Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (for informational purposes only)

J.06 Non-Disclosure Agreement 02

J.07 Request for Task Order #1 Comprehensive Assessment of Mammography Capacity in Defined Geographical Areas.

J.08 Request for Task Order #2 Estimating the Capacity for National and State-Level Colorectal Cancer Screening through a Survey of Endoscopic Capacity (SECAP)

J.09 Request for Task Order #3 National Program of Cancer Registries - Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS).

J.10 Section 508 Annual Report 17

J.11 VPAT Instructions 13 J.12(A) Request for Task Order #3 Attachment A 1

J.12(B) Request for Task Order #3 Attachment B 39

J.12(C) Request for Task Order #3 Attachment C 25

J.12(D) Request for Task Order #3 Attachment D 30

NOTE: Targets expressed in dollars and percentages of total contract value will be judged on findings of technical merit and on findings that the proposed costs are fair, reasonable and realistic. Additional points or a higher rating will not be given simply for higher dollar or percentages of work going to SDBs.

2. The complexity and variety of the work SDB concerns are proposed to perform. Greater weight will be given for arrangements where the SDB will be performing a greater variety of work and work of greater complexity.

3. Past performance of the offeror in complying with subcontracting plans for SDB concerns.

An offeror with an exceptional record of participation with SDB concerns will receive a more favorable evaluation than another whose record is acceptable.

4. The following ratings are indicative of the point values that will be assigned to various levels of SDB involvement. The actual scores assigned may fall anywhere within the range of –10 to +10.

Score Description +10 Extensive SDB commitments for complex and varied work in the offeror’s SDB participation plan. Excellent record in complying with prior SDB plans.

+05 Significant involvement of SDB’s in the offeror’s SDB participation plan. Successful record in complying with prior SDB plans.

0 Negligible participation of SDB’s. No past history.

-05 Some doubt exists the SDB’s will be involved in contract performance based upon information submitted.

-10 Serious doubt exists that SDB’s will be involved in contract performance based upon information submitted. Evidence exists in prior non-compliance with SDB goals.

(End of provision)

M.4 Past Performance Evaluation (Adjectival Rating System) (Jan 2000)

Past performance information will be evaluated on offerers in the competitive range in the following manner:

(a) Each offeror shall be evaluated on its past performance under current and prior contracts. By past performance, the Government means the offeror's record of conforming to specifications and to standards of good workmanship; the contractor's record of forecasting and controlling costs; the offeror's adherence to contract schedules and terms, including the administrative aspects of performance; the offeror's reputation for reasonable and cooperative behavior and commitment to customer satisfaction; and generally, the offeror's business-like concern for the interest of the customer and the degree of quality of deliverables and performance.

(b) Past performance will not be scored, but the Government's conclusions about overall quality of the offeror's past performance will be highly influential in determining the relative merits of the offeror's proposal and in selecting the offeror whose proposal is considered the most advantageous/best value to the Government.

Page Task Order #1 Page 1 Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCD) Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC) Atlanta, GA 30333

DATE ISSUED: April 3, 2008 DATE RESPONSE DUE: June 2, 2008

REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER PROPOSAL (RFTP) NO: #1

TITLE: Comprehensive Assessment of Mammography Capacity in Defined Geographical

Areas

Contract Reference: This RFTP is consistent with the purposes for which the multiple award competitive contracts for technical and support needs of NCCD wide umbrella contracts were awarded. TAMS 2008, Full and Open

Budget Format Suggestion: Contractor shall prepare a budget by phases indicated within the deliverables section of the RFTP. Individual budgets shall be prepared by phase and a total overall budget shall be prepared with contains the amount for all phases.

Funding Range:

Under $100,000 Over $100,000 but less than $300,000

X Over $300,000 but less than $500,000 (for all phases) Over $500,000 but less than $700,000 Over $700,000 but less than $1,000,000 Over $1,000,000

Overview/Background:

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death in women in the U.S. Because screening mammography is currently the most efficient way to diagnose breast abnormalities and has led to reduced mortality from breast cancer, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that women aged 40 and older undergo screening mammography every 1-2 years. In July 2006, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report regarding nationwide capacity for mammography from 2001 to 2004 indicating that mammography capacity decreased by 6%.

Although the current national capacity was adequate, one-fourth of counties had no mammography capacity. The purpose of this task order is to address the current issue of mammography capacity across the U.S. for screening mammograms. Additional information is needed on state and county-level geographic areas to assess the facilities, machines, and personnel, and their correlation with mammography screening behaviors, type of insurance coverage, and mammography cost. For this project, we will determine the number of mammograms able to be performed. This calculation will include the number of radiologists, the number of technicians, and the number of

Page Task Order #1 Page 17 all tasks in the Description of Work will be accomplished. The Contractor is to provide a detailed time line for the accomplishment of tasks.

This criterion will be evaluated according to the soundness, practicality, and feasibility of the Contractor’s technical approach for providing the services required for this task order.

C. Similar or Previous Experience:

The Contractor should provide information reflecting experience that is similar in complexity and size to the anticipated project. The contractor must document that they have 1) analyzed data from large population-based datasets; 2) used geocoding in describing health conditions or behaviors; 3) conducted similar project(s) focusing on similar low-income and underinsured populations; and 4) synthesized epidemiologic literature on breast cancer screening or similar health conditions.

Cost Evaluation: A cost analysis of the business cost proposal shall be conducted to determine the reasonableness of the proposal.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions apply to this request for task order proposal, and are hereby incorporated by reference:

Number Date Title 52.215-1 JAN 2004 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition 52.227-17 DEC 2007 Rights in Data--Special Works

Your response must be submitted in two parts: a Technical, and a Business proposal. Each part shall be separate and complete in itself so evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of the other.

Required Statements: Your proposal should indicate that the proposal is predicated on the terms and conditions of the TAMS 2008 Request for Proposal.

Offerors are required to submit a proposal in response to this request for task proposal. The Government shall not pay any cost for the preparation and submission of proposals submitted in response to this RFTP. All communications concerning this project prior to the award of a task order under this RFTP shall be with the Contracting Officer or the Project Officer.

Communications with unauthorized individuals concerning a specific RFTP prior to award may jeopardize your eligibility for award.

Page Task Order #2 Page 1 Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCD) Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC) Atlanta, GA 30333

DATE ISSUED: April 3, 2008 DATE RESPONSE DUE: June 2, 2008

REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER PROPOSAL (RFTP) NO: #2

Title: Estimating the Capacity for National and State-Level Colorectal Cancer Screening through a Survey of Endoscopic Capacity (SECAP)

Contract Reference: This RFTP is consistent with the purposes for which the multiple award competitive contracts for Scientific and Public Health Research, Evaluation and Technical Support were awarded. TAMS 2008 Full and Open

Budget Format Suggestion:

Phase I

X Over $100,000 but less than $300,000 Over $300,000 but less than $500,000 Over $500,000 but less than $700,000

All Phases

Over $100,000 but less than $300,000 Over $300,000 but less than $500,000 Over $500,000 but less than $700,000

X Over $700,000 but less than $1,000,000 (all phases)

Background:

No federally-funded national program to screen the U.S. population for colorectal cancer currently exists.

Before considering a larger national effort, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated a three-year colorectal cancer screening demonstration (pilot) program to explore the feasibility of establishing a colorectal cancer screening program for the underserved U.S. population, and to learn which settings and program models may be most viable and cost-effective in reaching this population. An important issue to be considered in planning for widespread screening is screening capacity. Since sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy, two recommended colorectal cancer screening tests, require

Page Task Order #2 Page 20 This criterion will be evaluated according to the soundness, practicality, and feasibility of the contractor’s technical approach for providing the services required for this task order.

C. Similar or Previous Experience:

The contractor should provide information reflecting recent (within the past 3 years) experience that is similar in complexity and size to the proposed project.

Cost Evaluation: A cost analysis of the business cost proposal shall be conducted to determine the reasonableness of the proposal.

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions apply to this request for task order proposal, and are hereby incorporated by reference:

Number Date Title 52.215-1 JAN 2004 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition 52.227-17 DEC 2007 Rights in Data--Special Works

Your response must be submitted in two parts: a Technical, and a Business proposal.

Each part shall be separate and complete in itself so evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of the other.

Required Statements: Your proposal should indicate that the proposal is predicated on the terms and conditions of the TAMS 2008 Request for Proposal.

Offerors are required to submit a proposal in response to this request for task proposal.

The Government shall not pay any cost for the preparation and submission of proposals submitted in response to this RFTP. All communications concerning this project prior to the award of a task order under this RFTP shall be with the Contracting Officer or the Project Officer. Communications with unauthorized individuals concerning a specific RFTP prior to award may jeopardize your eligibility for award.

Page Task Order #3 Page 1 Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCD) Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC) Atlanta, GA 30333

DATE ISSUED: April 3, 2008 DATE RESPONSE DUE: June 2, 2008

REQUEST FOR TASK ORDER PROPOSAL (RFTP) NO: #3

TITLE: National Program of Cancer Registries – Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR -

CSS) .

Contract Reference: This RFTP is consistent with the purposes for which the multiple award competitive contracts for technical and support needs of NCCD were awarded. TAMS 2008 Full and Open

Budget Format Suggestion: Budgets are requested for each year.

Under $100,000 Over $100,000 but less than $300,000 Over $300,000 but less than $500,000 Over $500,000 but less than $700,000

X Over $1,000,000 per year for 5 years

Overview/Background:

The purpose of this task order is to support the existing NPCR-Cancer Surveillance System (NPCR-CSS). The NPCR-CSS is designed to collect, process, evaluate, enhance, analyze and disseminate cancer incidence data submitted to CDC by the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) state and territorial grantees. Congress established the NPCR in 1992 by enacting the Cancer Registries Amendment Act (Public Law 102-515). This legislation authorizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to provide funds to states and territories to improve existing cancer registries; to plan and implement registries where none existed; to develop model legislation and regulations for states to enhance the viability of registry operations; to set standards for data completeness, timeliness, and quality; to provide training for registry personnel; and to help establish a computerized reporting and data-processing system.

The Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC), Cancer Surveillance Branch (CSB) in the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP) is responsible for administering and monitoring the NPCR. As of 1999, Page Task Order #3 Page 20

B. Technical Approach

The Contractor will provide a discussion of their technical approach for the services required for these tasks. The Contractor will also provide a detailed time line for the accomplishment of tasks. The discussion should be specific to the proposed accomplishment of the tasks outlined in this RFTP. Those proposals which offer only a general discussion of the nature of execution of task requirements will not be considered.

This criterion will be evaluated according to the soundness, practicality, and feasibility of the contractor’s technical approach for providing the services required for this task order.

C. Similar or Previous Experience:

This activity to process, evaluate and aggregate data for the NPCR comes at a critical point in the maturity and success of this national program. The NPCR-CSS must be in place and fully functional within the first within 4-6 months of the contract performance period. (NPCR grantees routinely report their incidence data to CDC the end of January each year and their NPCR Program Evaluation data the end of May each year). A scientifically and technically experienced Contractor will be required in order for CDC to meet its ongoing responsibility to evaluate and aggregate data that are reported to CDC annually. The Contractor should provide information reflecting experience that is similar in complexity and size to the anticipated project. The Contractor should provide relevant experience in working with cancer surveillance and Web-based program evaluation data.

This criterion will be evaluated according to the Contractor’s experience working with similar projects.

Cost Evaluation: A cost analysis of the business cost proposal shall be conducted to determine the reasonableness of the proposal.

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions apply to this request for task order proposal, and are hereby incorporated by reference:

Number Date Title 52.215-1 JAN 2004 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition

Page Task Order #3 Page 21

52.227-17 DEC 2007 Rights in Data--Special Works

Your response must be submitted in two parts: a Technical, and a Business proposal.

Each part shall be separate and complete in itself so evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of the other.

Required Statements: Your proposal should indicate that the proposal is predicated on the terms and conditions of the TAMS 2008 Request for Proposal.

Offerors are required to submit a proposal in response to this request for task proposal.

The Government shall not pay any cost for the preparation and submission of proposals submitted in response to this RFTP. All communications concerning this project prior to the award of a task order under this RFTP shall be with the Contracting Officer or the Project Officer. Communications with unauthorized individuals concerning a specific RFTP prior to award may jeopardize your eligibility for award.

Page Task Order #3 Page 22

TECHNICAL MONITOR:

Component 1 To Be Determined

PROJECT OFFICER: Christine Dauer Public Health Advisor Division of Cancer Prevention and Control

(DCPC)

National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

4770 Buford Highway NE, MS K-52 Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3724 Telephone: 770 488-3056

Task Order #3 page 20.doc