36C10E19R0003-0001001.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 78 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Veterans Intake, Conversion and Communication Services (VICCS) Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery - Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract. Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C10E19R0003
About this file
This document provides a pre-solicitation notice for the Veterans Intake, Conversion and Communication Services (VICCS) Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery - Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract. The Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Benefits Administration intends to issue a Request for Proposal for services including centralized source material tracking, intake and conversion, inbound mail management, rules-based processing, and centralized outbound services. The solicitation will be competed fully and openly, with an anticipated three to six contract awards. Applicable NAICS code is 518210 with a small business size standard of $32.5 million. The base period of performance will be one year with four one-year options. A minimum of $30,000 will be guaranteed for each awardee. The maximum value of all task orders under the IDIQ is $2 billion. Interested offerors must register in SAM and complete online representations and certifications prior to the August 21, 2019 closing date. Questions may be submitted by email until that time.
36C10E19R0003 0001 Final Question and Answer Tracker V2.6 MLT.xlsx
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 24
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet2
| Row Labels | Count of # |
| ATO and Security Controls | 6 |
| Automated Process Deliverables | 5 |
| Automation Success | 10 |
| Background Investigations | 1 |
| CO Response | 19 |
| Disposition | 1 |
| Draft PWS | 17 |
| Error Handling | 1 |
| Example Business Process | 1 |
| Faxes | 1 |
| Future State | 2 |
| Handwriting | 5 |
| Incumbents | 1 |
| IT Infrastructure | 7 |
| Key personnel | 3 |
| Mail Intake | 5 |
| Mail Packet Index Information | 1 |
| Microforms | 1 |
| Multi-Vendor Award | 1 |
| Outward Facing Intake | 1 |
| Partners | 1 |
| Proposal Structure | 2 |
| Proposal Volume Structure | 3 |
| Resumes | 6 |
| Security | 2 |
| Service Level Requirements | 3 |
| Small Business Credit | 1 |
| Source Material Details | 4 |
| Teaming Agreements | 3 |
| Testing and Deployment | 1 |
| Timeline | 3 |
| VBA Employees | 1 |
| Volume Data | 5 |
| (blank) | |
| Grand Total | 124 |
Tracker
| # | Categorization | RFP Reference | Question | Response |
| 1 | Incumbents | We have a client that is inquiring about solicitation 36C10E19Q0063 and whether there is an incumbent contractor? If so, could you please provide the current or previous contract number? Or is this a new requirement for the government? | This solicitation is a new requirement with a broader scope than the predecessor contracts. In particular, VBA is emphasizing automation, business process services, and outbound communications (especially electronic) with VICCS as VBA anticipates the conversion of paper source materials to be an ever-diminishing pool of work. Instead, VBA views VICCS as a benefits-processing accelerator, reducing the time for VBA to provide benefits by doing more with inputs and outputs beyond simple printing and scanning to make the Veteran/claimant experience dynamic and clear to near-real-time. Previous existing requirements include: paper mail, fax intake, and electronic intake; document conversion; data extraction and entry; outbound customer service calls; paper outbound mail; were covered by the prior task orders: |
Intake, Conversion, and Mail Handling Services (ICMHS), VA118-11-D-1000 VA118-1000-0049, Systems Made Simple (SMS), (Leidos subsidiarity);
Intake, Conversion, and Mail Handling Services (ICMHS), VA118-11-D-1010 VA118-1010-0041, General Dynamics Informational Technology (GDIT) formerly known as CSRA;
Digital Mail Handling Services (DMHS), VA118-11-D-1000 VA118-1000-0042, Systems Made Simple (SMS);
Dependency Claims Processing Assistance, VA119A-15-D-0005 VA119A-17-J-0274, Enterprise Resource Performance Incorporated (ERPI)
| 2 | Award | Does 36C10E19R0003, VICCS RFP allow for an award to be issued should a contractor only respond to specific managed services, i.e., those that relate to conversion services, or does the RFP only allow for an award to be issued whereby a contractor is required to respond to the entire range of managed services? | The Government intends to award between three (3) to six (6) contracts to qualified offerors deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), whose proposals conform to the RFP's requirements and are judged to represent the Best Value to the Government. The Best Value is the most advantageous offer, price and other factors considered. Please refer to the Addendum to 52.212-2 for additional information on proposal evaluation and basis for award. | |
| 3 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.2 Source Material Intake Services |
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Can the Government please provide historical volume data for each of the four intake streams identified? How many different document types are there and with what frequency do underlying forms go through revisions? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
In CY18, VBA received approx. 5.7M mail packets. Of these, approx. 2.3M were received in fax. Approx. 2.7M were received via paper mail. Approx. 700K were received electronically via direct upload. Less than 1% were received via API, but this number is growing linearly. There are approx. 670 unique document types, but typically within mail documents only the top 200 or so show up with any frequency. Form revision frequency varies. Some common forms can go through 1-2 revisions in a year, while others have remained unchanged for nearly 20 years. Generally speaking, forms that are updated receive only 1-2 updates per year and most forms are not revised annually.
This information is provided here because, although the seed task order explicitly does not contemplate intake and conversion, it is useful for offerors to understand the sizing of this IDIQ and the potential volumes involved.
4 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.2.1.1 Receipt of Bulk DCS Materials
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Can the Government please provide historical volumes per PO BOX in the Final RFP? What percentage are from other than Regional Offices? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
The Contractor would not receive any bulk DCS materials via PO box. The Contractor would receive bulk materials either via direct shipment on a truck, or via a common carrier such as UPS which does not deliver to PO boxes. In terms of bulk DCS materials and their origin, at the current time, VBA believes most will be claims files of varying types and lines of business (particularly disability compensation, but not exclusively and increasingly incorporating others) and most will come either via common carrier or via direct shipment.
This information is provided here because, although the seed task order explicitly does not contemplate intake and conversion, it is useful for offerors to understand the scope of VICCS.
5 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.2.4.1 New Fax Line Setup (FFP)
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Other than the government establishing the toll-free fax numbers is the contractor expected to provision and maintain the associated hardware? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
VICCS provides scope for the Contractor to receive faxes as a service for VBA and VBA would expect the Contractor to handle ALL logistics (including hardware, etc.) related to faxes with requirements as elaborated by a task order for these services (which has not been issued).
This information is provided here because, although the seed task order explicitly does not contemplate intake and conversion, it is useful for offerors to understand the sizing of VICCS and the potential volumes involved.
6 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.2.7 Self-Service Document Submission Services (Optional Task)
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Would the Government please provide the number, source, format and the type of metadata expected from the outward facing service? Does this outward facing service exist? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
VBA cannot make reasonable estimates and the outward facing service does not exist. Additional details would be provided when VA issues a task order RFP contemplating self-service submissions.
7 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.3.3.4 Post-Conversion Storage Awaiting Onsite Disposition (Optional Task) (FFP)
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Should this paragraph actually be a subparagraph under 8.3.9 Disposition of Source Materials (Optional Task) and be NSP as it would be priced under 8.3.9? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 8 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.3.7 Redirection of Materials |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Would the Government please confirm that there will be a pricing CLIN for shipping when a shipment, or partial shipment that is redirected to an alternate scanning facility to aid in balancing how is partial LOE and subsequent shipping costs are handled? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 9 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.3.9.2 Dispositioning STRs (Optional Task) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | What are the estimated volumes to be returned on a daily, monthly or annual basis? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 10 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.4.2.4 Hazardous / Delicate / Damaged Materials Conversion |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Can the VA define the potential volume of documents / pages for digital conversion purposes? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 11 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.4.3 On-Site Conversion – National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) (Optional Task) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Can the VA define the anticipated volume of documents / pages for digital conversion purposes on-site at NRPC so the vendor can estimate the associated staffing profile and cost estimate? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 12 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.4.5 Localized Conversion Activities (Optional Task) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | The currently stated 30 mile radius may necessitate higher SCA labor category rates and duplication of equipment. Would the Government consider extending the 30 mile radius? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 13 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.5.2.2 Mail Packet Routing and Upload Services to DMHS (Single Vendor Task) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Please validate that this is planned as a Single Vendor Task as it would suggest with >1 scanning vendors this would need to apply to all of them. Similarly, 8.5.3 and 8.5.3.1 are also identified as Single Vendor tasks. | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 14 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.6.1.11 Upload Failures |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Reference should be 8.7.1.7 | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 15 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.7.1.2 Dependency Claims Processing (FFP per transaction) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Please verify, and update as warranted, that the References in 8.7.1.2 should be 8.7.1.2.1 and 8.7.1.2.2. | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | |
| 16 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.8.1.5 Specialized Print Correspondence (Optional Task) |
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Pease clarify "Accommodations for Sight Impaired"
Large Print generally refers to simply increasing the font size of characters to facilitate readability. However, in some situations text within forms may over write the boundaries of graphical boxes and overwrite other text.
1. Will we have the latitude to minimize margins or adjust paper size and simply resize the entire form?
| 2. Can you provide a breakdown of the projected quantities of Specialized Print as the costs would be different between Braille and large print? | This references a draft PWS in the prior Request for Information released in January, which was structured differently than the current solicitation. | ||
| 17 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.10.1 Inbound Call Service |
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Please clarify the goal of the Inbound Call Service / support call center. Is it's mission to assist with:
Tracked Items for Open Claims, or Confirming receipt of source materials, or Printing status of CBCM requests, or all of the above?
Or is there a more defined purpose? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
Broadly, the inbound call services may be for a variety of purposes and are not explicitly defined in VICCS. Details would be provided in a future Task Order if required.
18 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.11 Consulting (Labor Hours) (Optional Task)
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) The wording and context of 8.11 appears to be general in scope with 8.11.1 - 8.11.4 being specific "Consulting" task orders. Should 8.11.1 - 8.11.4 be viewed as independent and separately priced T&M tasks. This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VA issues a specific task order referencing professional services (which the seed task order does not), VA may provide more details.
The professional services in the seed task are not contemplated as T&M as they have specific deliverables required.
19 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.13.1.5 Transition-in NARA Registry Database of OMPFs (Single Vendor Task)
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Please clarify the purpose and use as it relates to 8.3.1 Source Material Tracking Service (SMTS) (T&M / FFP) (Single Vendor Task). Is this primarily related to ingested OMPF as part of 8.4.3 On-Site Conversion – National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) (Optional Task)? | This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details. | |
| 20 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.15 Service Level Agreement (SLA) |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Should DMHS be replaced with SMTS and VICCS Mail Portal? | This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion or SMTS (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details. | |
| 21 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 9 Key Personnel |
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Is there a particular objective, span of control, government interaction or responsibility in mind associated with identifying a Call Center Program Manager as Key Personnel? | This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details. | |
| 22 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 10.6 Incident Reporting and Management |
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) It is envisioned that this item would necessitate reporting, management and triage be handled within VBA's security perimeter but no GFE (laptops) is identified. Is this a correct interpretation and if so would an appropriate number of VA GFE laptops be added to the GFE list to ensure systems are upgrades and patched in concert with VBA schedules and procedures? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details.
As a general note to offerors, VBA will provide ten (10) or more GFE laptops for the Seed Task to the Contractor for the purposes of interacting with VBA staff/systems, etc. to ensure PII does not become a barrier.
23 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.3.3.4 Post-Conversion Storage Awaiting Onsite Disposition
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Are there any updates on the current status of authority to disposition source materials? And/or if available, can the Government provide anticipated disposition schedules by type and volume? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
VBA has no updates at this time. VBA intends, if possible, to execute disposition within the period of performance of VICCS, pending legislative and regulatory authority to do so, but likely not within the base period or first 1-2 optional periods.
24 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.4.2.2. Microforms Conversion
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | Are the microfiche source materials jacketed 16mm strip cards and COM Cards? Any Aperture Cards? | This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details. | |
| 25 | Draft PWS provided with RFI | 8.6 Inbound Mail Management Support Services |
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Do you envision not only pre-sorting/sorting requirements, but also pre-adjudication services (review of content required for accurate adjudication, accuracy, comprehensiveness, and return letters specific to adjudication processing)? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing conversion (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details.
The seed task reflects such pre-adjudication services within the scope of Rules-Based Processing Service and Business Processing Services.
26 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.7.1.2. Dependency Claims Processing
(reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) Will there be the ability to award two vendors -- One for mail intake and another awardee for adjudication of the claim? This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation.
Multiple awards are planned for the VICCS IDV. The Seed Task Order will be awarded to a single vendor, but does not included mail processing services.
27 Draft PWS provided with RFI 8.7.3 Redaction (Optional Task)
| (reference is to draft PWS provided with RFI) | What # of redactions were used to get to the throughput of 5 minutes per transaction (in terms of # of fields and # of images)? | This references a draft PWS which was structured differently than the current solicitation. If and when VBA issues a specific task order referencing redaction (which the seed task order does not), VBA may provide more details. | ||
| 28 | VBA Employees | How many employees are currently involved in this process ? | VBA has approximately 730 employees processing various transactions related to mail today. | |
| 29 | IT Infrastructure | How fast can the existing infrastructure/Systems respond ? | VBA has not comprehensively evaluated system latency. | |
| 30 | IT Infrastructure | How many concurrent users can the current systems handle at one time ? | The current centralized mail portal used to process claims supports approximately 3,000 users per day and VBMS supports approximately 5,000. | |
| 31 | Example Business Process | Can we have a process design document to better understand the processes ? | There are many processes however the attached diagram describes an example flow for a 21-22 Form used to designate a Power of Attorney. However, VBA expects the vendor to document business processes as part of the seed project task order. | |
| 32 | Handwriting | Is there any level of handwriting considered in all the forms ? | Yes, the offeror should anticipate handwriting on forms received. | |
| 33 | Handwriting | What percent of the form come as hand written form ? | VBA has not captured statistics however, VBA forms are increasingly typed rather then handwritten. | |
| 34 | Testing and Deployment | What is duration of the regression test ? | VBA has no set times for regression testing, however the testing should be performed to a degree that ensures that all automation is functioning correctly. | |
| 35 | ATO and Security Controls | Although we possess these capabilities, CBPS has primarily focused on private sector engagements with very little federal experience. As such, the number of regulations and compliance declarations in the RFP seem daunting, and redundant. Our Business Processing Centers, which we are intending to propose to support this effort, are SSAE-18 SOC 1 & 2 compliant, we meet HIPPA compliance through HITRUST certification, and we are Level 1 PCI DSS Service Provider certified. We feel that the processes that we have in place will meet any data privacy standard. |
Before we commit resources to this effort, is there any way to streamline the minimum acceptable standards to confirm our solution will be compliant in particular to Section 2.0 of the Performance Work Statement document and 36 CFR Part 1234, Subpart B? If the offeror runs a mature and professional information security program, more than likely the offeror already complies with US Government security standards and the primary effort would be documenting and demonstrating compliance. However, VBA can make no assurances that a particular security solution will meet the security requirements without a thorough review. To understand the needed security controls, the offeror can review VA Handbook 6500, Appendix F (at the following link: https://www.va.gov/vapubs/viewPublication.asp?Pub_ID=793&FType=2 ) and review the moderate categorization controls. VBA is also attaching a simplified discussion of the ATO proccess. There is no requirement for NARA compliance for the Seed Task Order since no paper documents would be stored as part of the task.
| 36 | File Format | 9.2 Proposal File Format vs. | |||
| Exhibit A instructions (inside the file) | The Exhibit A template, as provided, is not formatted consistently with the required format for submittal. Example: it is Times New Roman 11 (instead of 12), .5" margins (instead of 1"), etc. But then Exhibit A instructs: "Offerors are strongly cautioned to complete Exhibit A, in its entirety, in the format provided...". Should our final Exhibit A be submitted with the inconsistent formatting as provided? | Contractors should submit the Exhibit A in the format as it was provided (Times New Roman 11 with .5" margins, etc.). The inconsistent formatting on this Exhibit will not be counted against the contractor. | |||
| 37 | File Format | 9.3 Proposal Volume Contents (page limits) vs. Exhibit C directions | The Exhibit C template, as provided, is also not formatted consistently with the required format for submittal. Example: it is Times New Roman 11 (instead of 12), .5" margins (instead of 1"), etc. Exhibit C is limited to 5 pages to include all three sub's referenced and consent forms. Should our final Exhibit C be submitted with the inconsistent formatting as provided? | Contractors should submit the Exhibit C in the format as it was provided (Times New Roman 11 with .5" margins, etc.). The inconsistent formatting on this Exhibit will not be counted against the contractor. | |
| 38 | Proposal Volume Contents | 9.3 Proposal Volume Contents (page limits) vs. Exhibit C directions | Exhibit C, as provided, takes up 1.5 pages with no contractor provided Once even a small paragraph is added, it is difficult to fit three references within the 5-page limit. Would the government consider expanding the page limit to 6 pages? | Yes, the page limit will be increased to 6. Addendum to 52.212-1 has been revised to reflect the changes. | |
| 39 | Proposal Volume Contents | 9.3 Proposal Volume Contents (page limits) vs. Exhibit C directions | Exhibit C, as required by 9.3.2.5. "Each of the major subcontractors and/or Teaming Partner(s) must also complete an Exhibit C, “Subcontractor Information and Consent Form” to be considered. Offerors shall have major subcontractors and/or Teaming Partner(s) identify on the Exhibit C three (3) contracts that they have completed..." whereas the Page Limit table in 9.3 indicates "Exhibit C – Subcontractor Information and Consent Form (3 combined) - 5 pgs. Total". Is the gov't expecting to see one Exhibit C that includes one reference each for our top 3 subs? | No, per the information provided in the addendum to 52.212-1, Section 9.3.2.5, each of the major subcontracotrs and/or Teaming Partners must complete an Exhibit C, where they will identify three (3) contracts that they have completed. Since major subcontractors and/or Teaming Partners are defined as the three (3) subcontractors/teaming partners expected to receive the greatest amount of subcontracted work under the IDIQ, the Government expects to see three (3) Exhibit Cs. | |
| 40 | Evaluation Factors | Solicitation, Section E.12, EVAL-3.3.1.7, p. 53 | The Government requires submission of a “detailed Project Management Plan (PMP), including all sub-components, as outlined in PWS Task 5.” The PWS lists the PMP and 10 sub-component plans, which will far exceed 20 pages. May we provide the PMP in an appendix to Volume I, outside the page count for that volume? | No. The government has revised this requirement in the final evaluation criteria to require that only a WBS, Quality Plan and communications plan are provided, and these documents will be included in the Volume I page count. The evaluation criteria have been revised accordingly. | |
| 41 | Evaluation Factors | Solicitation, Section E.12, EVAL-3.3.1.8, p. 54 | May we provide the GANTT chart in an appendix to Volume I, outside the page count for that volume? | Please see the response to question 40. No GANTT chart is required. The evaluation criteria have been revised accordingly. | |
| 42 | Teaming Arrangements | Solicitation, Section E.12, EVAL-3.3.2.2, p. 54 | The RFP requires Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA) IAW FAR subpart 9.6, between the Prime and each subcontractor. Can the CTAs be provided as an attachment, thereby permitting offerors to thoroughly address 3.3.2.1 through 3.3.2.4 within the 20 pages allotted? | Yes, the CTAs can be provided as an attachment, and will not be included in the page count. | |
| 43 | RTOP | Solicitation, Section B.1, Paragraphs 8.5 and 8.6, page 6 | According to paragraph 8.5, Each task order requirement will have a unique evaluation plan that will be developed by the CO and detailed in the RTOP.” Paragraph 8.6, however indicates: “The CO is not required to prepare formal evaluation plans…” Could the government please clarify? | Paragraph 8.5 in Section B has been reworded to clarify that each task order requirement will have a unique set of evaluation criteria that will be developed by the CO and detailed in the RTOP. | |
| 44 | Proposal Evaluation | 2. Proposal Evaluation and Basis for Award (for the VICCS IDIQ), para 3.3.1.1 and 3.3.1.7, page 52 and 53 | Is it the Government’s intention to require the Offerors to address (and have the Government evaluate) the Seed Project within both the Technical IDIQ Volume I as well as Volume VI (Seed Project)? | Please refer to 52.212-2 and its addendum for detailed information on evaluation criteria and 52.212-1 and its addendum for submission requirements for both the IDIQ and seed project. The IDIQ includes a myriad of potential tasks, and therefore does include some elements of the seed project. | |
| 45 | Subcontracting Goals | Solicitation, para 3.3.2.4, page 54 | Para 3.3.2.4 indicates that Offerors must document the “Offeror’s ability to meet and/or exceed the following Small Business Goals: SDVOSB; 3% of the total contract value…” Because we must not include pricing information in Volume I (9.3.1.1 in Solicitation, page 42), may we express the values in percentages instead of dollars? | Yes, offerors should express the values in percentages instead of dollars. | |
| 46 | Subcontracting Goals | Solicitation, para 3.3.2.4, page 54 | Para 3.3.2.4 also indicates that the subcontracting goals for SBs are 17.5%. Please clarify if this goal is independent and exclusive of the goals for each of the other identified socioeconomic categories. | The SB subcontracting goal of 17.5% includes all of the goals for other specific socioeconomic categories (i.e. SDVOSB, VOSB, 8(a), WOSB, HubZone), and is not independent and exclusive. | |
| 47 | Proposal Evaluation | RFP 3.3.1 | Will Volume VI - Technical approach be evaluated as part of the IDIQ Technical score? | No, only the offerors who are selected for the IDIQ contract awards will be evaluated for award of the seed project; therefore, Volume VI - Technical - Seed Project will be evaluated separately and not as part of the IDIQ Technical evaluation. | |
| 48 | Resumes | Mail Processing Services (MPS) PWS, paragraph 7 (Key Personnel), pages 20-21 | The document states that "Key Personnel" are defined as those persons whose resumes were submitted and marked by the contractor as "Key Personnel." Six Key Personnel positions and minimum qualifications are identified in the table. Are we required to provide a resume for each person we are proposing for each of the six positions? | This requirement was intended post-award. See revised PWS. | |
| 49 | Resumes | Mail Processing Services (MPS) PWS, paragraph 7 (Key Personnel), pages 20-21 | If the answer to the preceding question is in the affirmative, should the resumes be provided as an addendum in Volume VI, not subject to the 25-page limit for the volume? | This requirement was intended post-award. See revised PWS. | |
| 50 | Resumes | Mail Processing Services (MPS) PWS, paragraph 7 (Key Personnel), pages 20-21 | What is the maximum number of pages for each resume? | This requirement was intended post-award. See revised PWS. | |
| 51 | Resumes | 006, PWS TO1: MPS, Paragraph 7. Key Personnel | Re: "The following table includes a list of Key Personnel / Positions identified for this Task Order, with Position Name, Position Description, Minimum Education, and Minimum Experience." Are additional years of relevant experience substitutable for the minimum education for the listing of Key Personnel / Positions in Paragraph 7? | This requirement was intended post-award. See revised PWS. | |
| 52 | Automated Process Deliverables | Price/Cost Schedule, CLINs 1004, 1005, 2004, 2005, 3004, 3005, 4004, 4005 | Can the VA clarify what automated process are to be priced in options years with CLINs 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004 and 1005, 2005, 3005, 4005? | VBA revised the cost/price schedule to address this oversight. Those deliverables were mistakenly included in the optional periods. Please see Seed Project - Final Price and Cost Schedule (v.2). | |
| 53 | Price/Cost Schedule | Price/Cost Schedule | The file (-007) is provided as a pdf file, but we are required to fill it in for proposing cost/price. Could the government provide the file in its native form (Excel or Word) so we can input our values? | A fillable PDF has been attached to this amendment. Please see Seed Project - Final Price and Cost Schedule (v.2). | |
| 54 | Timeline | Solicitation | Please consider a two week extension to the due date. | VBA is unable to entertain a two week extension, however, the due date will be extended until August 20, 2019. | |
| 55 | Automation Success | Task Order 1 PWS | Reference "The Contractor shall invoice VBA only for successful automation of a transaction unless VBA explicitly defines a requirement to fail the transaction from automation in the business rules defined in Task 2 or the Contractor encounters an error in VBA systems." Please clarify how "successful automation" is determined and who/what makes the determination. | "Successful automation" is defined as the Contractor successfully completing an automated transaction without automation fails (even intentional fails). VBA expects the primary reasons transactions would be failed is because of limitations in the Contractor's technology in adapting to VBA's business process and or record conditions. The Contractor is thereby required to minimize potential business process fails and adapt its automation to accommodate paths that might otherwise cause VBA to work items manually. VBA system errors (uncommon) are considered excluded from this consideration with the expectation the Contractor would halt processing for systemic errors (such as system outages). There are no specific barriers or "off-limits" transactions by virtue of the work itself. This is not necessarily true for all areas of VBA business, but it does hold true for VBA mail processing. | |
| 56 | Mail Packet Index Information | Task Order 1 PWS | Reference "The Contractor will receive mail packets to be automated within a queue in the Centralized Mail Portal (current state) or through interfaces with one or more VICCS Vendors (future state)." Will VA please confirm that mail packets have index information that identifies the document contained in the mail packet or is it necessary to examine what a mail packet contains? Will mail packets be sorted according to their content on the mail portal? | Mail packets have index information identifying document types. The Centralized Mail Portal has multiple views. There is the Grid View, which shows a list of packets and the Packet view, which shows additional indexing data, renders the PDF of the packet and also allows downloading. Document types are not shown in the Grid View but are shown in the Packet View. However, the Contractor would not need to download the packet's documents themselves to obtain the document type indexing. VBA anticipates a likely pattern of the Contractor's bots cycling through mail packets in the Grid View, opening each packet individually in Packet View, obtaining the document types from the HTML table in the upper left hand corner, evaluating the document types against rules that determine what packets a bot can process and then either downloading the packet documents for additional processing/extraction and reassigning the packet to the bot's queue or reassigning the packet to a queue staffed by VBA employees because it is not eligible for processing. The bot might then close the Packet View and move on to the next available packet in Grid View. |
| 57 | Proposal Instructions | Solicitation, ADDENDUM to 52.212-2 | Please confirm bidders should comply with the response instructions for each volume and are not required to respond to all "shall" statements in the PWS. | The Performance Work Statement is not a document that requires a response. Offerors will be evaluated using the specific criteria listed in 52.212-2, and should provide a response in accordance with the instructions to offerors (52.212-1 and addendum). The offeror's proposal should include all information specified in the solicitation. | |
| 58 | IT Infrastructure | Solicitation, IDIQ | |||
| Seed Task Order PWS | Is it the government's intent for this to be a vendor hosted environment? | Yes, VBA expects the Contractor to determine an appropriate enviroment that meets security controls. The use of cloud technology is acceptable in order to meet the required timelines and security controls. | |||
| 59 | File Format | RFQ Instructions (36C10E19R0003-001.docx), Section E (pg. 40) | Are tables and figures required to use Times New Roman font or can they be Arial Narrow? | Please reference the addendum to 52.212-1. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape. Times New Roman font is required. | |
| 60 | File Format | Performance Relevancy Questionnaire (Exhibit A) (36C10E19R0003-003.docx) |
Major Subcontractors (Exhibit B) (36C10E19R0003-004.docx)
| Subcontractor Information and Consent Form (Exhibit C) (36C10E19R0003-005.docx) | For Exhibits A, B, and C, can Offerors remove errant spaces in the document for page space considerations? | Contractors should submit the Exhibits (A, B, and C) in the format as it was provided and should not remove errant spaces. Document page limits have been increased to a total of 6 pages for both the Exhibit As and Exhibit Cs. | |
| 61 | File Format | Performance Relevancy Questionnaire (Exhibit A) (36C10E19R0003-003.docx) |
Major Subcontractors (Exhibit B) (36C10E19R0003-004.docx) Subcontractor Information and Consent Form (Exhibit C) (36C10E19R0003-005.docx)
| RFQ Instructions (36C10E19R0003-001.docx), Section E (pg. 40) | In Exhibits A, B, and C, the text is 11pt font. Can Offerors maintain the 11pt when inserting them in our Volume II response or should Offerors increase the font size to adhere to the 12pt font size requirement? | Contractors should submit the Exhibits (A, B, and C) in the format as it was provided (Times New Roman 11 with .5" margins, etc.). The inconsistent formatting on the Exhibits will not be counted against the contractor. | |||
| 62 | File Format | Performance Relevancy Questionnaire (Exhibit A) (36C10E19R0003-003.docx) | In completing Exhibit A, may Offerors use tables with 8pt font size to insert the requested information with sufficient detail while still adhering to the page limit requirement? | Please reference the addendum to 52.212-1. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape. | |
| 63 | File Content | Performance Relevancy Questionnaire (Exhibit A) (36C10E19R0003-003.docx) | The current Exhibit A states, "Provide the following information requested in this format for each of the projects/contracts being described. Projects may be ongoing and cannot have been completed any later than 5 years prior to the solicitation issue date. Provide frank, concise comments regarding YOUR PERFORMANCE on the contracts you identify." |
| Can Offerors include teammate past performance in Exhibit A, or is this only for Prime Contractor past performance? | Exhibit A is to be used to provide information on the prime contractor's past performance (if any is available). Exhibit C should be used to provide information on major subcontractor and/or teaming partner's past performance. | ||||
| 64 | Service Level Requirements | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 1 (pg. 3), Section 3.1 (pg. 5) | Is the requirement to complete transactions by noon the following day based on when it is uploaded to the mail portal? | Yes. This time is measured in calendar days | |
| 65 | Service Level Requirements | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 1 (pg. 3), Section 3.1 (pg. 5) | If the mail portal or a VA system is down for a considerable amount of time, will the contractor still be held to this requirement? | No, the Contractor's system will not count as down. The vendor will be held to an SLR for 99% uptime of their solution. | |
| 66 | Security | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.0 (pgs. 5-16) | If a SaaS product is contemplated for the Seed Task Order, will the VA sponsor a FedRAMP authorization? | VBA does not intend to sponsor; however, a FedRAMP approval is not required to obtain an ATO. | |
| 67 | Security | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pgs. 8) | For the VBA Basic client applications and the Web client applications, the Seed Task Order PWS text states users authenticate using either Active Directory or PIV card. |
Will some of the applications accept ONLY Active Directory OR PIV, or will both options be available to every single application? Most accept PIV or AD credentials, but VA cannot guarantee all. All initial applications for contemplated processes accept both and most of the primary contemplated long-term applications do as well. For instance:
Share – PIV and AD VBMS – PIV and AD Mail Portal PIV and AD OR Username + Password Credentials Long-Term Solution – PIV and AD
| 68 | Volume Data | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pgs. 5-9) | During the peak processing period, could the Government please provide a range (including maximums) of automated transactions that could potentially occur in a single day? This will allow Offerors to ensure proper task scoping. | If the Contractor can successfully automate 99% of VBA’s mail, this would equate to between 16K and 50K transactions per day. This is a wide range owing to variation of documents (which may each have unique transactions) and mail packets, as well as anticipated growth and incorporation of other volume sources. |
| 69 | Mail Intake | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pgs. 5-9) | How many images per document processed through the automation solution should the contractor assume for scoping purposes? | The average images per document is between 6 and 7. |
| 70 | IT Infrastructure | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 5) | What is the anticipated success rate of the contention classification API? | The success rate is 100% to provide a classification (that is to say the API will always provide a classification - some may be inaccurate) with an estimated accuracy of 80% to 90% as it stands today but the Contractor is not responsible for the accuracy of the contention classification API. |
| 71 | Automation Success | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 6) | Does the Evidence Mail transaction (low complexity) require any data to be extracted from the evidence? | VBA does not have a high certainty whether the Contractor will need to extract data. VBA can definitively state no information needs to be input into VBMS regarding the document that requires data extraction (other than reuse of packet metadata). However, the Contractor will need to correlate the evidence mail to a system entry called a tracked item that describes the information requested. VBA believes for most claims that tracked items correlate to document type primarily (which is existing metadata) without the need to understand the content of the document, but VBA has not been able to empirically test this hypothesis. In the event extraction were to be required for Evidence Mail, it would be used to understand the document content for the purposes of matching and as such, likely would not require high degrees of accuracy but more a general sense of the content. |
| 72 | Automation Success | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 7) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that, "Initial deployment of at least two (2) low complexity automated processes with fewer than 49% of transactions off-ramped (measured for two weeks post-deployment) within thirty (30) days of award." |
Will there be an IV&V contractor involved? If so, how much time do you anticipate them needing to validate the automated processes? VBA believes the offeror may be asking three separate questions here:
| 1) | Will an IV&V or VBA review /validate transactions before/during completion of transaction or subsequent? VBA will sample transactions after-the-fact in a quality review. | |||
| 2) | Will VBA require the IV&V to conduct its two-week sampling prior to the deliverable due date of 30 days post-award? No, VBA will perform the sampling for a two-week period after the 30-day delivery date. However, if the Contractor does not meet the off-ramp goals, VBA will not pay the Contractor for the deployment deliverable. | |||
| 3) | Will there be an IV&V involved at all? Yes, an IV&V will eventually perform third-party oversight, but in the near-term post-award, VBA will perform the sampling. | |||
| 73 | Automation Success | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 7) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that, "Initial deployment of at least two (2) low complexity automated processes with fewer than 49% of transactions off-ramped (measured for two weeks post-deployment) within thirty (30) days of award." |
| Since the automated process needs to be tested in 4 VA environments before going into production, will the Government consider revising the 30-day milestone? Or is the 30-day milestone to connect the automation solution into the first testing environment? | No. VBA expects this deployment to be in production and will not revise the milestone. VBA is procuring automation, so a world-class Contractor should have the agility to test quickly in each environment. Since the Contractor is literally automating process, this by extension implies the Contractor should be able to automatically generate its own needed test records and test conditions as well very rapidly and then should be able to automatically evaluate their success/failure. | |||
| 74 | Automation Success | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 7) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that, "Initial deployment of at least two (2) low complexity automated processes with fewer than 49% of transactions off-ramped (measured for two weeks post-deployment) within thirty (30) days of award." |
| If something is off-ramped due to a VA business rule, does that still count against the 51% success rate? | If VBA is requiring a packet to be automation failed due to a business rule associated with VBA’s business practices, the automation fail will not count against the 51% success rate specifically. However, if an automation fail is due to the capability limitation of the Contractor to accomplish a VBA business practice with its approach, that automation fail will be counted against the 51%. VBA and the Contractor will work together to reduce automation fails over time. | |||
| 75 | Automated Process Deliverables | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 7) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that, "Deployment of the 526EZ automated process with fewer than 20% of transactions off-ramped (measured for 2 weeks post-deployment) within sixty (60) days of award." |
| Since the automated process needs to be tested in 4 VA environments before going into production, will the Government consider revising the 60-day milestone? Or is the 60-day milestone to connect the automation solution into the first testing environment? | No. The Contractor shall deploy into production and begin processing transactions within 60 days. | |||
| 76 | Automation Success | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.1 (pg. 7) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that, "Deployment of the 526EZ automated process with fewer than 20% of transactions off-ramped (measured for 2 weeks post-deployment) within sixty (60) days of award." |
| If something is off-ramped due to a VA business rule, does that still count against 80% success rate? | If VBA is requiring a packet to be automation failed due to a business rule associated with VBA’s business practices, the automation fail will not count against the 80% success rate specifically. However, if an automation fail is due to the capability limitation of the Contractor to accomplish a VBA business practice with its approach, that automation fail will be counted against the 80%. VBA and the Contractor will work together to reduce automation fails over time. | ||||
| 77 | ATO and Security Controls | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.3 (pg. 10) | What is the FISMA security classification for the automation platform (low, moderate, high)? | VBA anticipates a moderate system categorization based upon the type of data the system will deal with and the potential impacts. | |
| 78 | ATO and Security Controls | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.3 (pg. 11) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that the ATO for Automation Platform is due within 30 days |
| Does this mean the ATO paperwork needs to be submitted within 30 days or the VA expects to have the team obtain the ATO within 30 days? | VBA expects the Contractor to obtain an ATO within 30 days and will work with the vendor to support meeting that deadline. | |||
| 79 | ATO and Security Controls | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.3 (pg. 11) | The Seed Task Order PWS states that the ATO for Automation Platform is due within 30 days. |
| Of the 66 reference documents provided in the IDIQ volume, which documents define the specific requirements for obtaining the VA ATO? | VA Handbook 6500 provides the specific requirements. Appendix F, Attachment 3 lists the specific security controls the Contractor must implement. Assume a moderate system categorization. | |||
| 80 | Key personnel | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.5 (pgs. 13-15), Section 7 (pgs. 20-21) | In the Seed Task Order PWS, Task 5 requires 2 key personnel to be on-site at VBA. One of the key personnel listed is a "technical lead", but in the Key Personnel requirements section, a technical lead is not included as a key personnel position. |
| Is the technical lead supposed to be included in the Key Personnel section of the PWS or is one of the pre-existing key personnel positions supposed to be the technical lead? | This requirement was intended post-award. See revised PWS. | ||||
| 81 | ATO and Security Controls | Task Order 1: MPS PWS (36C10E19R0003-006.pdf), Section 3.6 (pg. 15) | Will any PII/PHI be included in the Business Intelligence/Reporting system (Task 6), or will the reports be limited to just metadata about the transactions and not the content of the transactions? | Yes, PII will be included in the BI/Reporting System. As a note on PHI, no VBA data (even medical records) are considered to be PHI. Once records become VBA records, even medical records, the provisions of HIPPAA no longer apply and they are only Privacy Act protected. | |
| 82 | Automated Process Deliverables | Price/Cost Schedule (36C10E19R0003-007.pdf), CLIN X0004/X0005 (pgs. 1-2, 5, 8, 11, 14) | The language for each of CLINs 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004 is identical to the language for CLIN 0004. |
The language for each of CLINs 1005, 2005, 3005, 4005 is identical to the language for CLIN 0005.
| The language in the Seed Task Order PWS for the deliverables tied to CLINs 0004 and 0005 indicates these are one-time deliverables to occur in the first 30 days and first 60 days of the contract, respectively. Did the Government intend to repeat these deliverables in the CLINs for the option years? If so, did the Government intend to use the same exact language for the option year deliverables? | VBA will update the deliverables to clarify the intention. The inclusion of the 1004, 1005 deliverables, etc. was not intended. | ||||
| 83 | Automation Success | Task 1: Initial Deployment of Automated Process | Please confirm the government will make all necessary data, visibility of process and system access available day 1 of the contract to allow for initial deployments as stated in Task 1 to be completed on time. | VBA will provide process documents and documentation on day 1, however the Contractor will have to complete various required actions (background investigation initiations for personnel, MOU/ISA for test environments, ATO for production) before access will be granted. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .