36C10X19R0001-0005002.pdf

Questions/Answers- Solicitation #36C10X19R0001

Appraisal Management Services/Other Related Services

Amendment #05

1. PWS § 3.0, RFP page 11 states that “A Commercial-Off-the-Shelf (COTS) product with proven past performance in the appraisal industry is required which must be capable of integration with WebLGY.” The VA has clearly determined that some integration services will be necessary, taking the requirements beyond the FAR definition of a COTS item, which requires no modifications. Also, federal law requires that agencies allow bidders to propose commercial items wherever they can meet government requirements. Thus, we believe the intent here (and any other place where COTS products are referenced) is to require a “commercial item” – is this correct? If not, please explain why a commercial item would not be acceptable.

Answer: Yes. The intent is to have a commercial off the shelf product that is commercially available to the mortgage lending industry.

2. Does VA expect the COTS product to be hosted in VA data centers or can it be hosted in the contractor’s data center or preferred cloud services provider?

Answer: No, VA does not intend to host any of the proposed services by the vendor.

3. PWS § 1.2, RFP page 8 - Can VA please clarify the requirement “AMS will provide a desktop appraisal process using data from VA and other sources to develop a desktop valuation product”?

Is VA requesting 1) a desktop valuation technology solution that will enable VA appraisers to use data from VA and other sources to complete desktop valuations? 2) an Appraisal

Management Company (AMC) solution, whereby the AMC would manage the fulfillment of desktop valuation orders outside of the VA appraisal panel, OR 3) A different solution? If a different solution, please explain.

Answer: The desktop appraisal solution would be used by VA staff. A desktop appraisal would incorporate the latest technology to offer an estimated market value for a property without an appraiser visiting the property. VA could potentially use desktop appraisals in the reviews of requests for reconsideration of value, questions or concerns arising from appraisals of complex properties, or in making decisions on loans.

4. PWS § 1.2, RFP page 8 - If VA is requesting an AMC solution, given that the US Territories have not adopted AMC legislation, would VA view those regions as being out of scope for the desktop valuation requirement?

Answer: VA is not requesting an AMC solution.

5. PWS § 4.4, RFP page 20 says, “The scoring will be largely based on the AMS COTS risk-based scoring model and associated business rules. VA currently uses Business Rules or Scoring

Criteria.” Can VA provide a copy of the Business Rules and Scoring Criteria it has in mind?

Answer: 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. After award, VA anticipates collaborating with the contractor however the final decision on business rules will be VA’s.

6. PWS § 1.2, RFP page 8 says “Based on the score of the appraisal, authorized VA employees may elect to order ORS. The ORS will provide VA staff with additional information regarding the property in an effort to evaluate the accuracy and credibility of the appraisal. ORS is comprised of desktop appraisal, AMS, Multiple Listing Data, Property Conditions Reports, Cost

Data and Improved/Unimproved Land Data.” Is there a prescribed report format that must be used for the ORS? If so, can VA please provide?

Answer: No, there is not a prescribed report format. The contractor should propose the format which would likely reflect the industry standard.

7. With respect to PWS § 4.3 Operational Data Reporting requirements (RFP pages 17 et seq.), the RFP references “Monthly updates on the average conventional appraisal fee for single family homes… searchable by county and state.” Does VA have a preferred data source for the conventional appraisal fee information?

Answer: No, VA does not currently receive this information.

8. With respect to PWS § 4.4 AMS Services requirement, RFP pages 19 et seq., the RFP references “Select potential high-risk cases for field review…” Can VA please clarify the expectations (i.e. scope, intended appraiser resources, etc.) for “plan trips geographically to most benefit the government from a staffing, resource, and funding perspective?”

Answer: All field reviews are performed by VA staff. VA seeks proposals for the latest innovations in the appraisal field review process. VA envisions a process that would select appraisals for field review based on risk and then map the subject property location and the location of the sales to improve the efficiency of conducting field reviews.

9. With respect to PWS § 4.5 C. Fee Panel Recruitment and Retention requirement (RFP page

22), the RFP requires the contractor to “Send an alert to the RLC when an appraiser is not assigned with the names and contact information…” Does VA have a preferred data source for the appraiser information?

Answer: No, VA does not currently receive this information.

10. PWS § 4.5B says that the contractor must provide a “Desktop Appraisal Solution, similar to those used by major lenders…” It appears this RFP is strictly for a software solution to manage project assignment and monitor workflow for the VA’s pool of appraisal vendors. It does not appear to include Contractor screening potential appraisers to become part of VA’s appraisal panel. Is this accurate?

Answer: Yes, VA will still manage its fee panel including recruitment. The contractor will not screen candidates for VA’s fee appraiser panel.

11. PWS § 4.1B, RFP page 15 says that the contractor must “Utilize quality control measures and/or post-delivery audit tools for validating AMS and ORS data stored or provided to VA. The

Amendment #05 quality control test and audit results should be reported quarterly.” Can the VA please explain the measure of quality control and audit services required? For example, is the VA requiring “spot checks” of statistically significant samples, validation of all data, updates to valuation reports, or other service levels? Please explain the VA’s expectations.

Answer: The contractor is responsible for establishing and performing quality control measures to ensure the validity of the AMS/ORS data. The contractor’s quality control plan must meet government standards and should be consistent with the measures that are standard in the industry for large-scale AMS/ORS applications.

12. PWS 4.8, RFP page 25, It does not appear that the VA requires a dedicated server, only compliant segmentation and security protocols on existing servers with a secondary development server. Is this accurate?

Answer: The VA data shall be protected and segmented from other parties, specifically as it relates to Privacy Act protected data such as PII.

13. Does the VA place any restrictions on where data may be stored?

Answer: Yes, the data must reside within the continental US and may not be hosted overseas.

14. PWS § 4.3, RFP page 18 refers to corrections made by appraisers to completed appraisals, including timeliness, number of corrections, and items corrected from previous uploaded appraisal report. Does the correction request generate from the AMS to the appraiser or does that come from the VA directly?

Answer: Requests for corrections will continue to be made by VA staff and lenders’ Staff

Appraisal Reviewers (SARs).

15. It is assumed that no one other than Appraisers will have direct access to the system. All other access with be through single sign on through WebLGY. Is this correct?

Answer: VA staff and Lender’s SARs will need access through a single sign-on from

WebLGY. Appraisers will need access to the requested appointment scheduling tool.

16. PWS § 4.3, PWS page 18 refers to dashboards and reports. Please describe the access control requirements for the various dashboards and reports.

Answer: Dashboards and reports will only be available to VA staff.

17. PWS § 4.3, PWS page 18 refers to dashboards and reports. How will contractors be required to roll the data up? By RLC? By market?

Answer: Data will be needed by appraiser, by county, by state and by RLC. RLC boundaries do not cross state lines.

18. PWS § 4.3, PWS page 18 refers to dashboards and reports. One of the dashboard requirements is “Appraisal assignments with no appraiser assigned/Overdue and pending appraisal assignments.” If AMS process starts after Appraiser Assignment, under what conditions will we have unassigned orders?

Answer: Assignment data will be provided to the contractor in real time. The contractor will alert the RLC about unassigned appraisals. The RLC will assign these appraisals and the contractor will receive the updated assignment information in real time.

19. PWS § 4.5, RFP page 21 says the contractor will provide a tool so that a Veteran or lender may schedule the inspection online based on the appraiser’s availability. Will the VA mandate that all appraisers provide their availability into AMS?

Answer: Yes, VA would mandate VA fee panel appraisers to use the COTS scheduling tool.

20. PWS § 4.5, RFP page 21 says the contractor will provide a tool so that a Veteran or lender may schedule the inspection online based on the appraiser’s availability. How is veteran access currently handled? Are there any other systems outside of WebLGY to which the scheduling tool will be integrated?

Answer: Appraisers are currently scheduling appointments and entering notes in

WebLGY about any delays. The scheduling tool will only be integrated with WebLGY, and in the future, with the system that is anticipated to replace WebLGY.

21. PWS § 4.3, RFP page 18 refers to dashboards and reports and requires the contractor to send an alert to the RLC when a state license is nearing expiration (at a timeframe set by VA) and another alert if the license expires. Will VA provide all appraisal license expiry details in their panel export or elsewhere?

Answer: VA will export fee roster information to the contractor daily.

22. Why has VA included the service contract act clause (FAR 52.222-41)? If VA believes it applies, can you please explain why and to what anticipated labor categories it would apply?

Answer: The clause was erroneously included in the original solicitation. The government has removed this clause on the final solicitation.

23. PWS Section 4.4- How will the AMS plan trips geographically?

Answer: All field reviews are performed by VA staff. VA seeks proposals for the latest innovations in the appraisal field review process. VA envisions a process that would select appraisals for field review based on risk and then map the subject property location and the location of the sales to improve the efficiency of conducting field reviews.

24. PWS Section 4.4-Does the integration currently exist and is the current AMS providing these features?

Answer: These features are not provided in the current AMS.

25. PWS Section 4.5A-Are the Appraiser Panel management features currently implemented by the AMS or WLGY and were they provided by the AMS with the 6-month implementation?

Answer: VA staff will continue to manage the fee appraiser panel. The current AMS does not include any tools to facilitate recruitment of fee appraisers. VA is seeking data to facilitate recruitment of appraisers where needed (please see page 21).

26. PWS Section 4.5B- Is the Desktop Appraisal currently implemented in the AMS, when is the desktop appraisal utilized, how are the 10,000 properties selected, how does this correspond to the automated scoring process, what is the result of the Desktop Appraisal, is it pre-or post-NOV issuance?

Answer: The current AMS does not include desktop appraisal capability. VA staff would determine when a desktop appraisal is needed. A desktop appraisal would incorporate the latest technology to offer an estimated market value for a property without an appraiser visiting the property. VA could potentially use desktop appraisals in the reviews of requests for reconsideration of value, questions or concerns arising from appraisals of complex properties, or in making decisions on loans. Desktop appraisals would be separate from the initial AMS scoring of appraisals that takes place immediately when uploaded by the appraiser. VA staff could elect to order a desktop appraisal before issuing an NOV when questions arise during the appraisal review process.

27. PWS Section 4.5C- Is this a capability of the current AMS and was this feature implemented within the first 6 months of the incumbent contract?

Answer: Fee panel recruitment and retention features are not included in the current

AMS.

28. PWS Section 4.8- How many concurrent users is the AMS supporting?

Answer: About 300 VA staff members and 6,600 SARs are currently using AMS. Please note that volume varies greatly among lenders and SARs so some SARs use the system infrequently.

29. PWS Section 4.8- Please explain what is meant by "the phased evolution of the LGY environment" and provide the timeframes for what is envisioned.

Answer: While VA anticipates replacing WebLGY in the future, the timeframe is uncertain. 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.

30. PWS Section 1.1- When and how is this decision made to accept an appraisal and what system is used to record the review results and what actions are permissible?

Answer: The SAR or VA staff member who reviews the appraisal makes the decision to accept an appraisal as evidenced by issuing a Notice of Value (NOV). The appraisal reviewer may contact the fee appraiser for any clarifications or corrections that may be needed which must be completed before a NOV is issued. Review results are recorded in

WebLGY.

31. PWS Section 1.1- Does WLGY or the AMS provide the Appraisal to the borrower and how is it provided?

Answer: On origination appraisals, the lender obtains a copy of the appraisal in WebLGY and provides a copy to the borrower outside of WebLGY.

32. PWS Section 1.1- Can you please provide a flow chart that explains the process, and identify what steps the AMS must perform from receipt of request to the NOV being issued?

The process includes the following steps (a flow chart is not considered necessary to illustrates this process).

Step 1: Lender or servicer orders appraisal online in WebLGY.

Step 2: Appraisal is assigned automatically on a rotational basis to a fee appraiser.

Appraisal request and assignment data is provided in real-time to AMS contractor.

Step 3: AMS contractor tracks when the appointment is scheduled, when the site visit is completed and when the appraisal is uploaded. Any delays are noted in WebLGY.

Step 4: Appraiser uploads completed appraisal into WebLGY.

Step 5: Appraisal is immediately provided to AMS Contractor and is automatically read and scored.

Step 6: Appraisal reviewer (SAR or VA staff) logs into WebLGY and through this single sign on reaches AMS contractor’s system where they will use feedback from AMS scoring and a checklist to issue the NOV. The NOV will be available in WebLGY.

33. PWS Section 1.1- Is 100% of all appraisals either Desk Reviewed or Field Reviewed, is the

AMS review used as an automated determining factor and the AMS creates the NOV?

Answer: All appraisals are desk reviewed either by VA staff or a lenders’ or servicer’s

SAR. Please see pages 6-7. Field reviews are performed on appraisals selected for field review at a later date. As noted on page 20, VA is seeking proposals to improve the consistency and to enhance its oversight of the appraisal review process.

34. PWS Section 1.1- Do the RLC's complete the sampling and reviews in WLGY or AMS and what happens to the findings, are they factored into the AMS scoring?

Answer: The initial AMS scoring of the appraisal is completed upon upload of the completed appraisal. As noted on page 21, VA is seeking proposals for a system that will automatically select appraisals for review based on risk. Findings will be a key component of the appraiser’s performance which will be tracked within the AMS.

35. PWS Section 1.2- Please provide a description of improvements to current operations envisioned by VA.

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. While minimum requirements are specified, VA is seeking proposals that will offer an opportunity to enhance service to Veterans and their mortgage lenders and servicers.

36. PWS Section 1.2- Please explain what other sources are used to support the review process and are AVM's required for each appraisal and utilized in the scoring process.

Answer: An AVM is not required for each appraisal. VA staff may request an AVM if needed. Market data like that typically incorporated within an AVM, is anticipated to be used within the AMS to indicate a valuation risk score for each appraisal.

37. PWS Section 1.2- Please provide a step-by-step description of this process and describe what happens if there are validation errors and low scores on an appraisal

Answer:

Step 1: Lender or servicer orders appraisal online in WebLGY.

Step 2: Appraisal is assigned automatically on a rotational basis to a fee appraiser.

Appraisal request and assignment data is provided in real-time to AMS contractor.

Step 3: AMS contractor tracks when the appointment is scheduled, when the site visit is completed and when the appraisal is uploaded. Any delays are noted in WebLGY.

Step 4: Appraiser uploads completed appraisal into WebLGY.

Step 5: Appraisal is immediately provided to AMS Contractor and is automatically read and scored.

Step 6: Appraisal reviewer (SAR or VA staff) logs into WebLGY and through this single sign on reaches AMS contractor’s system where they will use feedback from AMS scoring and a checklist to issue the NOV. The NOV will be available in WebLGY.

The appraisal reviewer will use the feedback from the AMS scoring of the appraisal during their review of the appraisal, resolving any questions or concerns regarding low scores or validation errors with the appraiser before issuing the NOV.

38. PWS Section 1.2- Please provide a list of VA rules and scoring criteria

Answer: The VA rule set is proprietary data of current contractor. VA does have custom rules in addition to the contractor’s proprietary rules that are high risk specific to the VA

Amendment #05 home loan program focusing on property eligibility and Minimum Property Requirements

(MPRs). Scoring criteria is based on typical USPAP and GSE standards for a COTS program for appraisal credibility and report integrity.

39. PWS Section 1.2- Please explain and describe VA's definition of a desktop appraisal process.

Answer: A desktop appraisal would incorporate the latest technology to offer an estimated market value for a property without an appraiser visiting the property. VA could potentially use desktop appraisals in the reviews of requests for reconsideration of value, questions or concerns arising from appraisals of complex properties, or in making decisions on loans.

40. PWS Section 1.2- Is the post-closing quality reviews the RLC process and how does VA anticipate the new sampling process to work? Does this take place after the NOV is issued?

Answer: Appraisals would be selected after the NOV has been issued for desk or field review by VA staff based on risk and integrity of the report.

41. PWS Section 1.2- Does the integrated and standardized appraisal review tool and process currently exist and is it completed by AMS Pre- or Post NOV?

Answer: VA currently has an appraisal review tool which is an industry COTS program and VA is seeking proposals to maintain this capability and provide oversight of appraisals. The AMS scoring is completed immediately upon the appraiser uploading the completed appraisal and the appraisal reviewer preparing the NOV uses the feedback from the AMS scoring.

42. PWS Section 1.2- Is the ORS process completed Pre or Post NOV issuance in the sample review and how is it used or is every appraisal reviewed by VA prior to NOV issuance?

Answer: All appraisals are desk reviewed by VA staff or a lenders’ or servicers’ SAR before an NOV is issued. Other Related Services (ORS) may be needed based on the results of an initial desk and/ or field review. For example, Multiple Listing Data might be needed by a VA staff member researching market data in order to make a decision on a request for reconsideration of value.

43. PWS Section 1.2- When and how is the Multiple Listing Data, Property Conditions Reports and Cost Data provided and please describe how this process is completed.

Answer: VA staff would have access to this data after providing the case number or a property address (in unique situations if no case number is available) and the requested data would then be provided by the contractor. For example, if a Veteran is purchasing a home in an isolated area and no appraiser is available, VA staff could use this data to prepare a Memorandum of Value.

44. PWS Section 1.2- What is the volume of ORS reports that we should use in pricing the

AMS?

Answer: The estimated volume for ORS is 10,000. Please see pages 22 and 70.

45. PWS Section 1.2- Are the results of the ORS review factored into the AMS review and scoring process?

Answer: No, the AMS review will be performed immediately after the appraisal is uploaded by the appraiser. ORS information would be requested on demand by VA staff later, during the desk and/or field review process.

46. PWS Section 1.2- Please provide a description of improvements to current operations VA wants to add?

timeliness, oversight of appraiser performance and efficiencies in the appraisal review process. While minimum requirements are specified, VA is seeking proposals that will offer an opportunity to enhance service to Veterans and their mortgage lenders and servicers.

47. One of the documents referenced is the FISMA/NIST, however there is no mention of a compliance requirement through an independent assessment and testing, please clarify.

Answer: The compliance requirement, if necessary, will be conducted after contract award.

48. Has the current AMS system been FISMA/NIST evaluated and certified, how long will the new contractor have before completing the evaluation and when will an ATO be issued?

Answer: The current AMS system has not been FISMA/NIST evaluated and certified. The discussion regarding the evaluation and the issuance of the ATO will be discussed after award.

49. Does this contract intend to license COTS software, if so why does the NAICS reference

Hosting Services only? Should both NAICS be utilized and why isn't VA requiring a FedRamp

Cloud provider?

Answer: VA is acquiring the use, not ownership, of a COTS product. Therefore, the second and third parts of the question do not apply.

50. PWS Section 3.1- What objective criteria is used to gauge the quality of service and what is the current results and rating?

Answer: The contractor is responsible for establishing and performing quality control measures to ensure the validity of the AMS/ORS data. The contractor’s quality control plan must meet government standards and should be consistent with the measures that are standard in the industry for large-scale AMS/ORS applications. The current contractor’s quality control plan is proprietary information.

51. PWS Section 3.1- Please provide the benchmarks and ratings of the current system compared to industry.

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.

52. PWS Section 3.1- Please provide a description of VA's specific requirements and sample reports and analytic outputs 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. VA’s current capability to create both fixed and ad hoc reporting capability based on MISMO XML defined data categories with the use of end user licenses with different levels of access and report building capabilities for VA staff and management.

53. PWS Section 4.2.A.-Please explain the AMS's interaction with fee appraisers and what training will be provided given the fact they interface with WLGY and the VA, where is the interaction with the AMS?

Answer: The appraisers will need access to the tool provided by the contractor to facilitate appointment scheduling and timeliness tracking. Currently, the appraiser interacts with

WebLGY by uploading an XML appraisal report, plans and specs, contracts, repair inspection reports (1004D). Once the XML appraisal is uploaded, the embedded PDF is loaded into WebLGY for access by VA staff, Lender SARs and underwriters. The XML

(less the embedded PDF) is forwarded to contractor for scoring and then returned to

WebLGY for VA staff and Lender SAR review.

54. PWS Section 4.2.A-Does the current AMS provide appraiser and lender online training services today?

Answer: No training is currently provided for appraisers; however, VA is seeking to improve customer service through improvements in appointment scheduling and timeliness tracking so appraisers will need training on these new features. Training is provided to VA staff and lenders’ SARs with help desk for technical/access issues and a COTS prerecorded

Amendment #05 webinar and quick reference guides that are created, updated to VA appraisal review requirements and maintained annually by contractor. Initial training was provided to VA staff and lenders when the AMS information initially became available.

55. PWS Section 4.2.A- Please explain when and how the Lenders will be interacting with the AMS?

Answer: Lenders will use the AMS feedback from reading and scoring the appraisal during their appraisal review before issuing the NOV. Lenders will not have access to reporting capability as this is for VA staff only for program oversight and management purposes. VA is requesting proposals for improving the appraisal review process with a checklist (please see page 20).

56. PWS Section 4.3- Please provide samples of the VA's current report requirements 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. VA’s current capability to create both fixed and ad hoc reporting capability is based on MISMO XML defined data categories with the use of end user licenses with different levels of access and report building capabilities for VA staff and management.

57. PWS Section 4.3-Given this dashboard requirement didn't exist in the original RFP does this capability exist in the current AMS? This will require custom coding to integrate with the

WLGY how long did the incumbent take to complete this coding, testing, documentation and training and will the new AMS be afforded the same timeframe and considerations

Answer: The current AMS does not include dashboard reporting. A six-month implementation period is expected. VA is seeking a COTS solution to take advantage of technological advances and innovative approaches to appraisal oversight.

58. PWS Section 4.3- Can the VA provide specifications for the ad hoc analytics capability.

innovative approaches to appraisal oversight. VA’s current capability to create both fixed and ad hoc reporting capability is based on MISMO XML defined data categories with the use of end user licenses with different levels of access and report building capabilities for

VA staff and management.

59. PWS Section 4.3- Please clarify the requirement to provide an equity analysis of the current

VA portfolio and is this a current AMS capability?

Answer: The equity analysis would be derived from comparing Loan Amount to

Reasonable Value. On a purchase it is on the Sales Contract, and on a refinance, it should

Amendment #05 be provided by the requester when requesting the appraisal in WebLGY. This is not a current capability.

60. PWS Section 4.4-Can you please provide the VA's current Business Rules and Scoring

Criteria and will the new AMS be required to utilize the same?

Answer: After award, VA anticipates collaborating with the contractor however the final decision on business rules will be VA’s. 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.

61. PWS Section 4.4- Can you provide a sample of VA's current SAR checklist and rules.

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. VA does not currently have a SAR checklist.

62. PWS Section 4.4- Does the SAR review capability exist in the current AMS, the requirement says, "it could be accomplished" this suggests that the AMS must also provide a comprehensive field review support capability, which wasn't part of the original requirement

Answer: SAR review capability is not part of the current AMS. VA envisions acquiring this feature to enhance the accuracy of the appraisal review process. VA envisions improvements to appraisal oversight by selecting appraisals for desk and/or field review based on valuation and report integrity risk. VA staff will continue to conduct all field reviews.

63. Solicitation Section- Volume IV, Pricing: On what volumes should we base our FFP cost estimates for the pricing proposal?

Answer: Per the answer to question #42, this is a fixed priced contract for AMS COTS services 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.

Other volumes are as follows: 4.5- Help Desk- 300 VA Staff Members

10,000 External SARs

6,500 VA-Approved Fee Appraisers