36C10X19R0001-0003002.pdf

1. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.1.A, p. 13 36C10X19R0001-001, Section E.1 B.2 3)

Content Requirements p. 56 This section says “The contractor shall provide a draft of the PMP for the tasks defined in this PWS in the proposal submission and shall update the PMP based upon feedback from VA post-award” Q: The content requirements on page 56 do not except the Draft PMP from the 40 page technical volume limit, nor do they provide for the Draft PMP to be submitted as a separate volume. If the VA is requesting contractors to submit the detailed information outlined on page 13 with the proposal response, we would request that the PMP be assigned a 15-page limit and to be submitted separately from the Technical Volume.

Further, if the VA would like to see a detailed schedule using MS Project, we would further request that the project schedule be excepted from the 15-page limit for the

PMP.

Answer: The key components of the Project Management Plan (PMP) are the technical specifications of the proposal. Using the format of a draft PMP will help ensure that all technical requirements are addressed in the proposal.

Consequently, 40 pages should be sufficient for the technical approach. Changes to final solicitation 4.1.A task description are now found on pg. 12. Content requirement found in pg. 67.

2. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.1.A, p. 13 Q: We assume that all the items in the third paragraph of this section beginning, “The final plan shall describe…” are required only in the final plan to be delivered post-award. Is this assumption correct?

Answer: This assumption is correct. Changes to final solicitation 4.1.A task description are now found on pg. 12.

3. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.1, p. 55 Q: We assume that the prohibition against hyperlinks includes links to websites, email addresses that include a hyperlink, and hyperlinks to other parts of the proposal. Is this assumption correct?

Answer: This assumption is correct.

4. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.2.1.b, p. 55 Q: May illustrations use a font other than Times

New Roman or Arial? May illustrations use a font size smaller than 12-point?

Answer: Illustrations must use either the Arial or Times New Roman font. Per the solicitation (pg.67), the font size on illustrations can be 8-point or greater.

5. 36C10X19R0001-001, Volume I, Item 5, p. 57 This section says “Offerors shall at a minimum address the following:”. Item 5 states, “Evidence of specific methods and techniques for completing each discrete task, including implementation, transition plan, Quality Control Plan (QCP), customer service, and training plan.” Q: We assume we should describe our methods and techniques, but that we are not required to submit a transition plan, Quality Control Plan, or training plan as part of the proposal. Is this assumption correct?

Answer: Yes, that is correct. These are minimum requirements as VA is seeking proposals for the latest appraisal review tools and innovative technology. This is an opportunity for proposals to offer information about features that will help

VA best serve Veterans. Reference to this question is now on pg. 69.

6. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, pp. 19 Q: We assume that Deliverable 4.8.5 should be numbered 4.3.5. Will the Government correct this in an amendment?

Answer: This has been corrected and updated in the amendment/ final solicitation. Reference to this question is now on pg. 18.

7. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.5, pp. 21 Q: The deliverables in Section 4.4 are numbered

4.5.1 through 4.5.4. We assume this should be 4.4.1 through 4.4.4. Will the

Government correct this in an amendment?

solicitation. Reference to this question is now on pg. 20.

8. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.2.1.b, pp. 55 “Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.” Q: We assume that “paragraph” does not include headers and that headers do not need to be separated by at least one blank line. Is this assumption correct?

Answer: This assumption is correct. Reference to this question is now on pg. 67.

9. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.2.1.b, pp. 55 “Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.” Q: We assume that “paragraph” does not include bulleted text and that bulleted text does not need to be separated by at least one blank line. Is this assumption correct?

10. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.2.1.b, pp. 55 “Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line.” Q: We assume that text in tables does not need to be separated by at least one blank line. Is this assumption correct?

11. 36C10X19R0001-001, B.2.3, pp. 56 Q: Since resumes are excluded from the 40-page limit for Volume I, may we include them as an appendix to Volume I with a separate set of page numbers (i.e., 1-10)?

Answer: Sure, as long as it stays within the page limitation of 2 pages per résumé.

Reference to this question is now on pg. 67.

12. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 & pp. 60 Q: Does the Cover Letter to be included in

Volume V have a page limit?

Answer: Contents in Volume IV have no page limits. Reference to this question is now on pg. 71.

13. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 60 “All administrative information submitted shall conform to the formatting outlined above. Q: To which formatting is the Government referring?

Answer: Proposal submission found n E.1. B.2. Reference to this question is now on

pg. 72.

14. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, pp.18 “Provide Dashboards with real-time data, refreshed every 60 seconds, for all key workload and performance data including, but not limited to: … -Appraiser scorecards by state, county and appraiser with accuracy, timeliness and workload data” Q: Will LGY provide regular updates of all fee panel appraisers so that the contractor can check license expiration and other requirements?

Answer: Yes. Reference to this question is now on pg. 17.

15. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.8, p.25 “Web Services Server. The Contractor shall provide a web service (over a FIPS 140-2 compliant TLS encrypted HTTPS, using the HTTP authorization header) to allow the VA to push and pull information using industry standard web protocols.” “SFTP Server. The Contractor shall provide a FIPS 140-2 compliant SFTP (using port 22) server to allow for the VA to push and pull files.” Q:

Which data/reports will be pushed and pulled via Web Services or Direct Connection and which data/reports will be pushed and pulled via the SFTP?

Answer: It is essential that the contractor fully understand the requirements for interconnecting systems with the government. It is recommended that all documents within VA Directive 6500 be thoroughly reviewed by the contractor.

These documents are available at https://www.va.gov/vapubs/Search_action.cfm

Concerning the data/reports, this will be determined on a case by case basis during the design of each data exchange/report, based on your proposal.

Reference to this question is now on pg. 24.

16. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, pp.18 “Provide Dashboards with real-time data, refreshed limited to: … Appraiser scorecards by state, county and appraiser with accuracy, timeliness and workload data” Q: Will appraisal request and assignment data be delivered by WebLGY to contractor in “real-time” or on scheduled frequency?

https://www.va.gov/vapubs/Search_action.cfm

Answer: Appraisal request and assignment data will be provided in real-time as the contractor will need this information in order to monitor appraisal timeliness. Please see Section 4.5, A. Reference to this question is now on pg. 17.

17. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, p.19 “Contractor shall provide data concerning loan level equity position for the active portfolio” Q: Can the Government please clarify what is meant by “Loan Level Equity Position”, and specifically which data elements the government is requesting? Q: What data points will be provided to the contractor by the VA to determine Loan Level Equity Position?

Answer: Loan Amount to Reasonable Value. On a purchase it is on the Sales

Contract, and on a refinance, it should be located on VA Form 1805.

Q: Does the VA anticipate the loan level equity position data on a transactional basis or in batch?

Answer: Both are preferred. Reference to this question is now on pg. 18.

18. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.8, p.26 “Provide secure online access to the web-based application, for 15,000 or more concurrent users, 24 hours a day/seven (7) days a week not including scheduled maintenance” Q: Will the Government confirm which of the following users will be actively accessing the contractor’s systems? -VA Staff -

External SARs -Approved Fee Appraisers Q: Will the external SARs be accessing the appraisals via contractor’s AMS or via WebLGY? Q: Can the Government please clarify the total number of users who will have authorization to contact the Help Desk with customer service requests?

Answer: VA Staff, SARs and appraisers will be authorized to contact the Help

Desk for customer service. The number of SARs actively reviewing appraisals is dictated by market activity. Currently, about 6,600 SARs are actively reviewing appraisal reports. Reference to this question is now on pg. 24.

19. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 6 & pp. 23 Page 6 “The current C&V environment consists of approximately 300 VA staff members, over 6,600 external SARs and over

6,500 VA-approved independent appraisers.” Page 23 “The help desk will serve some estimated 300 VA staff members, 10,000 external SARs and 6,500 VA-approved fee appraisers.” Q: Please reconcile these figures.

Answer: Currently, about 6,600 SARs are actively reviewing appraisal reports.

Appraisal report volume is primarily dictated by the market. SAR approvals issued by VA do not expire. While approximately 10,000 individuals have been approved by VA to review appraisals, only about 6,600 have reviewed an appraisal recently. Reference to this question is now on pgs. 5 and 22.

20. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 The page limitations for Volume II state “3 pages for

Narrative plus maximum of 3 past performance questionnaires.” Q: Since Past

Performance Questionnaires are to be submitted to the Government by the offeror’s customers, we assume that no part of the Past Performance Questionnaires should be included in Volume II. Is this assumption correct?

Answer: That assumption is correct. Reference to this question is now on pg. 67.

21. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The Past Performance Matrix, Attachment 3, is a spreadsheet and does not provide a place for all of the information the Government is requesting offerors to provide in Volume II. Q: Will the

Government permit offerors to provide Volume II in Microsoft Word format, to include the information required in sections (1) and (2) on pp. 57-58 of the RFP and the information requested in Attachment 3? This would provide a much clearer response format and make it easy for the Government to validate that offerors have met the page limitations.

Answer: Please see updated Section E.1. B.2 Volume II Proposal Submission.

Reference to this question is now on pg. 70. The Past Performance Matrix and the past performance narrative are complimentary in nature. The past performance narrative provides essential contract information, such as the contract number, period of performance, and contract description. The Past

Performance Matrix gives offerors the opportunity to provide additional essential details, such as an expanded description of performance, a breakout of task-specific experience, labor categories, and services performed. Offerors may use Microsoft Word for the three (3) page narrative, for the Past Performance

Matrix use the newly formatted excel spreadsheet, this has no page limitations.

However, the chart formatting and language content must stay the same.

Reference to this question is now on pgs. 69-70.

22. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The Past Performance Matrix, Attachment 3, is a spreadsheet and does not provide a place for all of the information the Government is requesting offerors to provide in Volume II. Q: If the Government permits offerors to provide Volume II in Microsoft Word format, to include the information required in sections (1) and (2) on pp. 57-58 of the RFP and the information requested in Attachment 3, will the Government extend the page limit to two pages per reference? This will provide offerors with the minimum sufficient space to provide the information the Government has required.

Answer: Please see response above. Reference to this question is now on pgs. 69-70.

23. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 The instructions require offerors to use the Past

Performance Matrix (Attachment 3) to provide their past performances, which are limited to a total of 3 pages. Attachment 3 is a spreadsheet. The tasks in Column A of

Attachment 3 match the RFP’s PWS, except that Attachment 3 omits 4.3 Operational

Data Reporting. Q: Should Attachment 3 include 4.3 Operational Data Reporting as a task for which spreadsheet columns B, C, and must be completed?

Answer: Please see newly formatted Past Performance Matrix. Reference to this question is now on pgs. 69-70.

24. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions require offerors to use the Past Performance Matrix (Attachment 3) to provide their past performances, which are limited to a total of 3 pages. Attachment 3 is a spreadsheet.

The font in the blocks to be filled out is Calibri 11 point. The RFP states that font size shall be no smaller than 12 point, except for tables an illustrations, where it can be 8 point or larger. Q: Should offerors update the spreadsheet to use 12 point font? Or, can we consider it a table and reduce the font size to 8 point?

Answer: The spreadsheet has been updated to Times New Roman. 8 points.

Please adhere to the Proposal Submission Section E.1 B.2, pg. 67.

25. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions require offerors performances, which are limited to a total of 3 pages. Attachment 3 as provided is not formatted to print at 100% and the margins are not set at 1” as required by the solicitation. Q: How will the Government determine if the Volume II submission meets the page limitations?

Answer: The Past Performance Matrix has no page limit. This has been updated to Times New Roman. Please see pgs. 68 and 70.

26. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions require offerors performances, which are limited to a total of 3 pages. Q: May offerors adjust the column widths of the spreadsheet to permit the maximum amount of information to be provided within the permitted page limit?

Answer: The Past Performance Matrix has no page limit. This has been updated to Times New Roman. Please see pgs. 68 and 70.

27. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 56 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions require offerors performances, which are limited to a total of 3 pages. Q: Since we must provide three past performances, should we copy the spreadsheet tab two more times and provide each past performance on a separate tab?

Answer: Yes, that is an allowable option

28. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 57-58 36C10X19R0001-003 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions for Volume II require offerors to provide the information detailed in sections (1)(a) on p. 57 through (1)(g) on p. 58. However, neither the Past

Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 2) or the Past Performance Matrix

(Attachment 3) include spaces for all of this information. Q: Where and in what format should offerors provide this information?

Answer: For the three (3) narrative follow instruction on pg. 66. The Past

Performance Matrix is Excel and has been updated to allow space for all information.

29. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 58 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions for Volume II require offerors to provide a contract description per section (2) on p. 58. However, the Past Performance Matrix (Attachment 3) does not provide space for this information. Q: Where and in what format should offerors provide the contract description?

Answer: Contract description shall be provided in the three (3) narrative. Please follow the submission instruction on pg.69.

30. 36C10X19R0001-001, pp. 57-58 36C10X19R0001-003 36C10X19R0001-004 The instructions for Volume II require offerors to provide the information detailed in sections (1)(a) on p. 57 through (1)(g) on p. 58. However, neither the Past

Performance Questionnaire The instructions for Volume II require offerors to provide the information detailed in sections (1)(a) on p. 57 through (1)(g) on p. 58. However, neither the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 2) or the Past Performance

Matrix (Attachment 3) include spaces for all of this information. Q: Will the

Government permit offerors to submit this required information outside of the page limit so as to permit sufficient space to provide the information required in

Attachment 3?

Answer: The three (3) page narrative is limited to three (3) pages. The Past

Performance Matrix does not have a page limit.

31. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, pp. 19 “Errors made by appraisers found during electronic reading and scoring of appraisals through AMS.” Q: Is the VA referring to clerical/administrative errors or any triggering of an automated rule through the

AMS?

Answer: As this is a request for proposals for COTS products, VA is seeking the same appraisal quality information that is currently in use in the industry.

Typically, errors would be an omission, discrepancy or inconsistency, rather than an automated business rule that may have been triggered even though the appraiser provided a comment explaining the concern that triggered the business rule. Reference to this question is now on pg. 18.

32. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.4, pp. 20 “VA will export the SAR ID number, SAR name, Staff Appraiser name and Senior SAR indicator information to the contractor for use in appraisal review oversight reporting.” Q: When & how will the data elements be sent to the Contractor?

Answer: Likely via a SFTP server file transfer. This reference is still on pg. 20.

33. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.3, pp. 18 “Provide Dashboards with real-time data, refreshed limited to: … -Appraisal assignments with no appraiser assigned;” Q: How will the

Contractor know when an appraisal is not assigned? Will new orders be sent to the contractor only when an appraiser has agreed to complete the assignment?

Answer: Appraisal request and assignment data will be provided in real-time.

Consequently, the contractor will be notified immediately if no appraiser is available in a geographic area resulting in no appraiser being assigned. VA staff will use this key workload data from the contractor to manage the fee appraiser panel to include finding an appraiser to complete the assignment and adding appraisers to the panel where needed.

Appraisers on VA’s fee panel are expected to accept all assignments unless there is a conflict of interest as appraisers notify VA in advance when they are not available for assignments (for example, vacation or illness). Appraisers are required to promptly contact VA if an assignment must be reassigned due to a conflict of interest or short notice unavailability. This reference is now on pg.

17.

34. 36C10X19R0001-001, 4.4 p19 “Receive appraisal reports in MISMO standard XML format with embedded PDF” Q: Will the appraiser upload the completed appraisal into WebLGY or directly to the Contractor’s System?

Answer: The completed appraisal will be uploaded by the appraiser into

WebLGY. This reference is still on pg. 19.

35. The Solicitation is marked as a “Draft.” Is it the intention of the Department to issue a revised/final version of the Solicitation before proceeding to collect proposals? If so, will additional time be provided to respond to any changes in the revised/final

Solicitation?

Answer: Yes, 36C10X19R0001 A00003 released on 01/23/2019 amends the draft solicitation, and is now the final solicitation.

36. If the Department does not intend to issue another version of the Solicitation, we are concerned that the Solicitation does not contain sufficient information to allow bidders to understand WebLGY and its potential phase-out. For example, while the proposal requires the Contractor to “Deliver an AMS COTS product at the time of award,” to perform an implementation of AMS which “shall encompass the design and integration of these services into the WebLGY environment,” and to “Create interfaces with WebLGY for the exchange of assignment and results (p.19),” it goes on to state that “Efforts are underway to redesign VA’s systems and it is anticipated that another systems environment will likely replace WebLGY over the next few years. (p.19).” The Solicitation provides very little information about the current

WebLGY systems environment or its contemplated replacement, making it difficult for bidders to make an accurate assessment of either the precise scope of work or the effort necessary to create an interface with WebLGY. Please provide a more detailed description of the current WebLGY system architecture and any plans to phase out

WebLGY. Will bidders be provided an opportunity to review/analyze/test the

WebLGY architecture prior to bid submission to better understand how much work will be involved to integrate commercially available technologies?

Answer: While VA anticipates replacing WebLGY, VA does not anticipate changing the scope of the AMS/ORS. The contractor would be integrating with the new system in the same manner as WebLGY. This reference is now on pg.

18.

37. Is the scope of the Solicitation limited to provision of technology, along with associated training and support, or does it also extend to provision of appraisal management and related services?

Answer: VA staff will continue to manage the fee appraiser panel. VA is seeking

AMS technology, training and the Other Related Services (ORS) described in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

38. Can the Agency please provide additional detail about the role the Contractor will be expected to fulfill with respect to AMS and ORS management? The Solicitation states that “C&V’s vision is to provide a phased approach to accomplish a fully integrated, seamless, and user-friendly solution encompassing the appraisal process from the initial request and assignment through the issuance of a VA guaranty. The

Contractor shall provide the C&V staff, lenders, and servicers in the United States

(U.S.) with services that will improve standardization, risk management, timeliness and performance, as well as the credibility and quality of valuation functions.” (p.8)

The Solicitation requires the Contractor to “to provide and manage AMS and ORS for

VA.” (p. 11) The AMS “services” described in the Solicitation include appraisal order, assignment and review tracking, electronic review and scoring, data collection, and “a desktop appraisal process using data from VA and other sources to develop a desktop valuation product” (p.8); however, the ORS “services” are not defined.

Answer: VA will continue to manage its fee appraiser panel. The ORS services include appraisal assignment timeliness tracking, desktop appraisals and fee appraiser recruitment and retention. Please see Section 4.5, pages 20-21.

39. Because the requirements of the Solicitation are so broadly stated, and the Solicitation does not specify which VA personnel/resources will be available to provide input for integration, training, and other services, it will be difficult for bidders to provide an accurate price. The Pricing Spreadsheet that accompanies the Solicitation (Section

D.1, Attachment 01) provides only the names of the 8 categories listed in the Tasks and Deliverables section of the Solicitation, without a description of the expected detail or calculation method, and without information on whether pricing may reflect different quantities of services to be requested by the Agency. The descriptions of the

Tasks and Deliverables do not appear to correlate with the categories in the Price

Schedule in the Solicitation (Section B.6), creating further ambiguity. Can the

Agency provide additional detail about the Department’s expectations concerning the method to be used and detail to be provided in connection with this Pricing

Spreadsheet?

Answer: Please see updated Attachment 01 Pricing Spreadsheet. See updated pricing language for Volume IV pg. 71.

40. Two quick administrative questions:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=b81befdc7fe2490db354e

173eecfcbeb&tab=core&_cview=0 Uses the word “draft” as an RFP. Will there be another “final” RFP published and if so, when?

Answer: 36C10X19R0001 A00003 released on 01/23/2019 amends the draft solicitation, and is now the final solicitation.

41. Also, the portal for questions does not work: This is the specific reference (pg. 9): VA

Information and Information System Security/Privacy Requirements for Information

Technology (IT) Contracts, which is available at: http://www.iprm.oit.va.gov. Is there a different way that questions should be submitted?

Answer: This bullet point has been deleted, since the reference titled “VA

Information and Information System Security/Privacy Requirements for

Information Technology Contracts” no longer exists in that form. NOTE: If an updated document comes into use by VA, it will be made public to all offerors.

42. Page 10: Define a "fixed priced contract". Is this fixed by transaction or is this fixed for the entire of the yearly volume assuming 1,000,000 orders per year?

Answer: This is a fixed priced contract for AMS COTS service based on the maximum of 1,000,000 appraisals per year. However, the contractor will only invoice for actual number of units ordered which is based on appraisal volume. While we estimate that we will have 750,000 appraisals per year, market conditions dictate actual and future volume. When preparing proposals, offerors should propose at the maximum 1,000,000 appraisals per year.

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=b81befdc7fe2490db354e173eecfcbeb&tab=core&_cview=0%20 https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=b81befdc7fe2490db354e173eecfcbeb&tab=core&_cview=0%20 http://www.iprm.oit.va.gov/

43. Page 13: Transition process: Is defined as no more than six months to do a transition. Do we need to do any data transfer from incumbent's AMS? are we going to have incumbent's support during the transition process? is the transition process starting after implementation?

Answer: We do not expect a need for transferring data with the incumbents

AMS. Any data transfers would take place between the incumbent AMS and

LGY.

44. Page 19: Deliver a AMS COTS at time of award, what do they mean by deliver and what is the functionality that they are expecting at this delivery?

Answer: The AMS services should be via an established COTS product that is already available, not a new product being built solely for this acquisition.

45. Page 20: VA's selection of preexisting or VA specific compliance and risk identification rules. Where we can get a copy of these? when are these going to be delivered? Please review possible contradiction on page 20: "NOTE: The scoring will be largely based on the AMS COTS risk-based scoring model and associated business rules". Please clarify if these rule sets are complementary and if not complementary which one will take priority?

Answer: VA anticipates collaborating to establish business rules however VA will have final approval of all business rules. The VA rule set is proprietary data of current contractor. VA does have custom rules in addition contractor’s proprietary rules that are high risk specific to the VA home loan program focusing on property eligibility and MPRs. Scoring criteria is based on typical

USPAP and GSE standards for a COTS program for appraisal credibility and report integrity.

46. Page 20: Subsequent AMS request for the same loan type. Do we need to consider the possibility of pulling new data?

Answer: AMS feedback will be provided by the contractor immediately after the completed appraisal has been uploaded by the fee appraiser. In the event that an appraiser uploads a corrected or revised appraisal, the revision would then be electronically read and scored again. Current contract allows for unlimited revisions to be scored and graded for 45 days before charging for an additional unit.

47. Page 20: Select high-risk cases for field review and plan trips accordingly. Please clarify if the criteria to determine a high-risk case is different to "VA's selection of preexisting or VA specific compliance and risk identification rules".

Answer: Criteria for determining if an appraisal presents a high-risk would be consistent throughout the AMS/ORS.

48. Page 21: Volume. How is the volume of 10,000 uses a year is being estimated?

Answer: VA estimated 10,000 uses a year based on the volume of work products where ORS might be beneficial, for example, requests from Veterans for reconsideration of value after an appraisal has been completed. The volume for

ORS will be primarily market derived.

49. Page 22: Processing appraiser’s applications. ok, but it seems that is VA who manages the panel, is VA going to manage the panel using AMS?

Answer: VA will continue to manage its fee appraiser panel. VA envisions using

AMS data to facilitate recruitment of candidates for the fee appraiser panel, particularly in areas where there may be shortages of appraisers.

50. Page 54: Take note on phases, what are the dates on phases?

Answer: It is anticipated that the first phase will be 2-3 weeks after receipt of proposals, the second phase will be another 2 weeks after the first phase, then the third phase will be another 2 weeks thereafter.

51. General question: Can we get a list of all current VA's APIs to connect to all required end points that they are expecting to migrate into the new AMS, including a detailed description?

Answer: LGY currently calls services hosted by the AMS provider. There are currently no LGY created/offered API’s for these services.

52. Section B.2 - Does the PMP and Master Schedule count in the PWS total of 40 pages?

Answer: Yes.

53. General question - Are we to use the VA templates:

https://www.va.gov/process/artifacts.asp for our responses, or can we use templates that were used for other projects?

Answer: For the pre-award/proposal submission process, we do not anticipate the need for the VA templates. However, in the post-award IT system process, offerors are to use the pertinent VA templates from the website in the above question.

54. Section 4.5 - VA is requesting an appraisal tool to help facilitate the timely completion of an appraisal. Not much detail is provided regarding the functions expected within the appraisal tool. Can you please elaborate on VA’s expectations?

https://www.va.gov/process/artifacts.asp

Answer: VA is seeking proposals for an innovative COTS product that will promote appraisal timeliness resulting in enhanced customer service to Veterans and their mortgage lenders (please see page 19). The tool will improve communication related to scheduling appointments by sending system-generated reminders to appraisers and reporting any scheduling delays in WebLGY. The tool will track when the appointment is set, when the site inspection has been completed and when the appraisal report is uploaded.

55. Section 4.1 A. - the RFP indicates that the PMP shall include cost requirements. Are the cost requirements to be included in the draft PMP Master plan or only in the final plan after award?

Answer: Cost requirements are not required for the draft PMP. Kindly re-read the description of what is expected on pg. 12.

56. Section 4.8 - Will all Veterans and Lender users who wish to use the inspection scheduling tool already have an AccessVA login to utilize Single Sign On, or will they require temporary/unauthenticated access to the tool to schedule the inspection?

Answer: AccessVA registration would likely be needed for many users.

57. Section 4.8 - Will all user accounts utilize an identity from one of the three AccessVA identity services (DS Logon, DoD CAC, or ID.me)?

Answer: AccessVA also allows for VA PIV cards for internal users (application dependent). AccessVA registration would likely be needed for many users.

58. Section 4.3 - Will appraisal orders without an appraiser assignment be sent from

WebLGY to AMS? This would be needed for the AMS dashboards to be able to report on appraisal assignments with no appraiser assigned.

Answer: Yes, all appraisal request data will be provided to the contractor in real-time.

59. Sections 4.2.A.3 and 4.2.A.4 - How many VA employees, external SARs and VA-approved independent appraisers who need to be trained on the AMS/ORS both ILT and via online training within 0 to 6 months of the system going live? How many people will be trained per ILT session?

Answer: Only one Instructor Led classroom session is required for VA staff which must be held in Washington, DC. External SARs and appraisers will be provided self-paced online training. It is estimated that 6,600 SARs and 6,500 appraisers would complete the training shortly after implementation.

60. Section 4.2 - Will all, some, or none of the online training be managed from a VA-owned and supported LMS or LCMS or is the contactor expected to provide and manage a delivery platform for the fee appraisers/SARs that are not direct VA employees?

Answer: The contractor is expected to provide and manage a COTS delivery platform for all users who take the training.

61. Section 4.2 - Does the VA want individual assessment reports on participants and/or aggregate reports for each of the training groups?

Answer: VA must be able to validate that an individual user completed the training. Aggregate reports provided by user groups, such as SARs or VA staff will be sufficient.

62. Section 4.2 - Does the VA wish to include Virtual Instructor-led training, (e.g. Adobe

Connect, WebEx, GoToMeeting, etc.) for the following audiences/purposes:

• VA employees who were not able to attend classroom training

• As a refresher and/or for change management for VA Employees and/or external

SARs and Fee Appraisers.

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS program that is self-paced, online training and one classroom session in Washington, DC must be provided (please see page 16).

Proposals offering additional training in addition to these minimum requirements may be submitted.

63. Section 4.6 - Please provide current statistics for the help desk, including the number of supported users and appraisals, the number of calls per month, the average time per call, the number of emails per month, etc.

Answer: Currently, approximately 6700 users are supported (SAR’s and VA staff).

The help desk typically receives less than 10 calls, each call averaging less than 5 minutes. Approximately 50 emails are received each month.

64. Section 4.6 - Will all email responses be individualized or will we have the ability to use existing standardized responses to frequently asked questions for the majority of the email requests?

Answer: Standardized responses may be provided as long as the response completely addresses the question and is in keeping with VA’s commitment to providing the highest level of customer service to the lenders and appraisers who partner with VA to serve Veterans.

65. Section 4.4 – As an FYI, the deliverables for section 4.4 are numbered 4.5.X.

solicitation.

66. As this is a draft request for proposal, will the VA issue an amended or final request for proposal before 1/18/2019 or at a later date, and should offerrors still be submitting a final proposal before 1/18/2019 or would a draft be appropriate knowing a revised request for proposal will be issued?

solicitation, and is now the final solicitation. At this point, no extensions to the due date are anticipated. Proposal due date is no later than 12:00pm EST

02/04/2019.

67. What is the expected date for the VA to publish responses to questions submitted by interested parties, and could a delayed response date result in an extension of the deadline to respond to the draft request for proposal?

solicitation, and is now the final solicitation and answers questions received.

68. Page #7 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 1.1 The Appraisal Process - The solicitation states, All users have a predetermined level of authorization within the system, based upon their responsibility and need for access, to specific information.” Please provide additional information on current authorization level restrictions, including, but not limited to, whether the VA expects authorization to be restricted or otherwise managed at a user, file, or field level.

Answer: VA controls system access through role based permissions. The role of a user controls what the user can access (at the application, file, and field level).

For example, only appraisers have access to the appraiser portlet, can only view assignments that belong to their appraiser ID, and can only see uploaded documentation relevant to their role. This controls are currently, and will continue to be managed by LGY. This reference is now on pg. 6.

69. Page #7 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 1.1 The Appraisal Process - The solicitation states, “Currently, WebLGY is the permanent system of record for all C&V information. WebLGY maintains a count of appraisal requests, appraisals pending review, and NOVs issued. It also maintains a record of the quality reviews performed by VA staff, with deficiencies noted during the review, and whether they were substantive or non-substantive. Since November 2013, WebLGY is also the permanent record for AMS data captured from the reading and scoring of each appraisal uploaded into WebLGY.” Please provide any available current integration information between WebLGY and the current AMS system.

Answer: WebLGY calls standard web services provided by current AMS system provider. This reference is now on pg. 6.

70. Page #8 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 1.1 The Appraisal Process - The solicitation states, “The AMS provides the data and results of the scoring and electronic screening review, and collects the data from the appraisal reports for use by VA.

Lastly, AMS will provide a desktop appraisal process using data from VA and other sources to develop a desktop valuation product. “Please define "other sources" that are expected to be used in regards to the desktop valuation product.

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS product which is already widely used in the industry. Typically, such a product would include data from contractor’s proprietary information, public records and local MLS data. This reference is now on pg. 7.

71. Page #9 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 1.3 Applicable Documents - The solicitation identifies the following as guidance for offerors in performance of the solicitation:

“VA Information and Information System Security/Privacy Requirements for

Information Technology (IT) Contracts, which is available at:

http://www.iprm.oit.va.gov .” The above link does not appear to work, when accessed in Chrome or Safari browsers (we believe it may no longer be available). We respectfully request the VA provide an alternate web address or a copy of the above requirements, to permit us to properly evaluate these expectations.

Answer: Please see the answer to question #41.

72. Page #12 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - Section 3.1 - The solicitation includes the following performance objective: “Deliver a high-quality experience for all stakeholders, including Veterans, lenders, and servicers who are partnering with VA to serve them, through timely appraisal reports. Provide tools for conducting strong oversight to ensure accuracy of appraisal reports as VA appraisals are performed to protect the interests of the program and all program participants. (Deliverables 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6) . ” Please specify the metrics under which the VA will evaluate whether a contractor successfully meets the above high-quality experience objective.

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS solution with the latest technology that incorporates industry standards for determining contractor’s accuracy and platform stability. This reference is now on pg. 11.

73. Page #12 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - Section 3.1 - The solicitation includes the following performance objective: “Ensure that VA’s appraisal review staff and lenders’ and servicers’ Staff Appraisal Reviewers (SARs) have the latest appraisal review tools and resources available in the industry in order to best serve Veterans.”

Please specify the metrics under which the VA will evaluate whether a contractor successfully meets the above objective that SARs have the “latest appraisal review tools and resources available in the industry in order to best serve Veterans.”

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS solution that incorporates industry standards for determining contractor’s accuracy and platform stability. This reference is now on pg. 11.

74. Page #12 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - Section 3.1 - The solicitation includes the following performance objective: “Provide innovative technology to ensure that VA is exceeding appraisal industry benchmarks. Quality appraisal services are essential in supporting VA’s commitment that VA guaranteed home loans are the product of choice for Veterans. (Deliverables 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.7, 4.8).” Please specify the appraisal industry benchmarks the VA will utilize when evaluating whether a contractor successfully meets the above objective.

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS solution to take advantage of technological advances and innovative approaches to appraisal oversight. VA envisions improvements in appraisal timeliness, oversight of appraiser performance and efficiencies in the appraisal review process by comparing appraiser and appraisal valuation and credibility against the same metrics as contractor’s other clients. For example, comparing an appraiser’s valuation and integrity for a given area or date range against their local pier group, VA at large, and the contractor’s non-VA clients. VA currently has this capability and is used to determine how VA compares to the appraiser’s pier group for disciplinary actions and the industry for valuation and report credibility. This reference is now on pg. 11.

75. Page #13 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 4.1 Program Management/Oversight - A.

Program Management - The solicitation states, “The contractor shall perform program management services to plan, monitor and control the tasks outlined in the

PWS and specifically the implementation of AMS/ORS. At a minimum, the following services are required: Development and delivery of final, detailed Project

Management Plan (PMP).” Is there an outlined template and/or format for the Project

Management Plan (PMP) (if so, please provide), or can it be customized?

Answer: Please follow the instruction on pg. 12. “The contractor shall provide a draft of the PMP for the tasks defined in this PWS in the proposal submission and shall update the PMP based upon feedback from VA post-award. The PMP, and all other written deliverables, shall follow the Project Management Body of

Knowledge (PMBOK).”

76. Page #13 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 4.1 Program Management/Oversight - A.

Program Management - The solicitation states, “The contractor shall provide a draft of the PMP for the tasks defined in this PWS in the proposal submission and shall update the PMP based upon feedback from VA post-award.” Please confirm which volume of an offeror’s proposal the PMP should be included in, and if the PMP counts against any page limitations for such volume.

Answer: The draft PMP will be included within the Technical Approach for which there is a 40-page limit. The key components of the Project Management

Plan (PMP) are the technical specifications of the proposal. Using the format of a draft PMP will help ensure that all technical requirements are addressed in the proposal. This reference is now on pg. 12.

77. Page #19 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 4.4 AMS Services - The solicitation states, “Efforts are underway to redesign VA’s systems and it is anticipated that another systems environment will likely replace WebLGY over the next few years.” Should offerors include in their proposal any product capabilities to transition from WebLGY to another system? Should offer proposals include the company’s ability to manage the VA’s fee panel from an order management perspective?

Answer: While VA anticipates replacing WebLGY, VA does not anticipate changing the scope of the AMS/ORS. The contractor would be integrating with the new system in the same manner as WebLGY. VA will continue to manage the fee appraiser panel including the addition of appraisers to the panel and the rotational assignment of appraisals. This reference is now on pg. 18.

78. Page #20 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 4.4 AMS Services - The solicitation states, “Provide a checklist with consistent review criteria to ensure that lenders Staff

Appraisal Reviewers (SARs) are incorporating the results of the AMS reading and scoring of the appraisal (alerts and other feedback) in their review.” Please provide a summary or listing of review criteria currently used by lender SARs.

Answer: SARs must follow the guidance in Chapters 10-13 of the VA Lenders

Handbook and all currently valid VA-issued Circulars when reviewing appraisals. This reference is now on pg. 19.

79. Page #25 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - 4.8 IT and Online Accessibility of Information

Various Tasks - Security - The solicitation states, “All Contractors and Contractor personnel, shall be subject to the same Federal security and privacy laws, regulations, standards and VA policies as VA, including the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C.

§552a, and VA personnel, regarding information and information system security.

Contractors must follow policies and procedures outlined in VA Directive 6500, Information Security Program; and VA Handbook 6500.6, Contract Security which are available at http://www1.va.gov/vapubs and its handbooks to ensure appropriate security controls are in place.” As referenced in 6500.6, please provide the expected timeline for an offeror to receive an Authority to Operate (ATO).

Answer: Security checks happen after contract award. The length of time to

ATO on those tasks, that require an ATO, depends on the security office.

80. Page #55 of 36C10X19R0001-001 - B. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION - 2. PROPOSAL

FILES - The solicitation states, “Font size shall be no smaller than 12-point. Arial or

Times New Roman fonts are required. Characters shall be set at no less than normal spacing and 100% scale….b) Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no smaller than eight (8)-point and may be landscape.” Please confirm if we must only use Arial or Times New Roman for any graphics and tables.

Answer: Confirmed- please only use Arial or Times New Roman for graphics and tables. Please follow instructions on pgs. 66-67.

81. General Solicitation Question - An executive summary addressing key elements of our proposal isn't explicitly required in the Draft Request For Proposal (DRFP). May we submit one anyway?

Answer: It is up to the offeror what they want to include in their Technical

Approach, but it must be part of the 40-page limit.

82. General Solicitation Question - The solicitation includes a Draft Request for Proposal, and the solicitation requires proposals to be due by 1/18/2019, 12:00 PM Eastern

Standard Time. Because this is a draft request for proposal, will the VA issue an amended or final request for proposal before 1/18/2019 or at a later date, and should offerrors still be submitting a final proposal before 1/18/2019 or would a draft be appropriate knowing a revised request for proposal will be issued?

Answer: 36C10X19R0001 A00001 released on01/23/2019 amends the draft due date is anticipated.

83. General Solicitation Question - The solicitation requests that questions to the solicitation to be submitted on or before 12/21/2018, and proposals are due by

1/18/2019. Understanding the questions are to be submitted prior to upcoming federal holidays, and given the highly technical nature of the solicitation, it is critical to receive the VA’s responses to offeror questions well in advance of the 1/18/2019 proposal submission deadline. What is the expected date for the VA to publish responses to questions submitted by interested parties, and could a delayed response date result in an extension of the deadline to respond to the draft request for proposal?

due date is anticipated the due date 02/04/2019.

84. General Solicitation Question - Notwithstanding that the solicitation includes a Draft

Request for Proposal, because of the significant technical specifications, data reporting, system integration and related requests in the solicitation, we strongly encourage the VA to extend the solicitation proposal submittal due date of 1/18/2019 by at least two weeks to account for the upcoming federal holidays (Christmas, New

Years), and allow parties the opportunity to respond effectively to the proposal based on answers provided by the VA to the questions submitted on or before 12/21/2018 in responses to the solicitation.

due date is anticipated the due date 02/04/2019.

85. Solution Process 1.1 The Appraisal Process Citing: WebLGY maintains a count of appraisal requests, appraisals pending review, and NOVs issued. It also maintains a record of the quality reviews performed by VA staff, with deficiencies noted during the review, and whether they were substantive or non-substantive. Can the VA comment on what substantive and non-substantive deficiencies are within the program? Can the VA provide historical metrics on the volume of those deficiencies?

Answer: VA is seeking a COTS program that utilizes industry recognized risk factors that impact the creditability and integrity of the report. VA does have additional substantive (high risk) factors that are rules based that impact VA property eligibility and MPR requirements. Substantive errors typically concern a material error which effects the estimated value by over 5% or involves the condition of the property, for example, a positive/negative error on a market grid adjustment or omitting a readily apparent repair on an appraisal report. Examples of non-substantive errors include overlooking a fireplace on a comparable sale, or reversing the photographs of two of the comparable sales on an appraisal report. This reference is now on pg. 6.

86. Solution Process 1.2 Purpose & Vision; 4.4 AMS Services Citing: …VA will begin to target reviews…