Attachment 1 - MSPV Gen-Z V1 DRAFT RFP 36C10X23R0007_Questions and Answers_20221208.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 39 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 6515--36C10X23R0007 | RFP MSPV Gen-Z V1 - Distribution and Supply Management - Amendment 0002
- Solicitation number
- 36C10X23R0007
About this file
This document is a draft request for proposals for medical/surgical prime vendor services. The Department of Veterans Affairs seeks to award multiple indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts to provide distribution and supply management of medical, surgical, dental, and laboratory supplies to Veterans Affairs medical centers and other government agencies. The base period of performance is five years with an optional five-year period, for a total potential contract length of ten years. An implementation period will be included in the period of performance for each delivery order. Questions regarding this draft RFP are due by November 21, 2022 and should be sent to the points of contact listed utilizing the provided template. The anticipated date for release of the finalized solicitation is December 2022. Interested parties should monitor the Contract Opportunities website to ensure they have the most current information.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
ATTACHMENT D
| ID | Paragraph (please reference RFP, SOW, or Attachments) | Page Number | Section Title | Paragraph Number | Offeror's Questions | Government Response | |
| 1 | SOW | 5 | B. Scope | 1.c. | This language contradicts industry practice for medical surgical distribution. For stocked materials, the PV places purchase orders for their distribution network well ahead of an individual VA Facility order. This PO is placed by the PV to the BPA holder at the acquisition cost (into stock cost) which is established by the BPA holder. | SOW updated to remove language related to order placement by VA. | |
| 2 | SOW | 6 | B. Scope | 1.f. | To avoid potential future protest, the VA should allow prospective bidders to imbed commercial fees in their overall distribution fees (e.g. Bulk and LUM) as they do today under the MSPV Gen Z Transition 2 contract. | SOW Section I.B.1.f. revised as follows: "The PV is prohibited from charging commercial fees to VA authorized suppliers for supplies ordered and distributed within the scope of this contract; however, applicable commercial fees may be charged to VA. Commercial fees are defined as fees that capture the costs of services that a distributor provides to the authorized supplier as part of the process of distributing items from the supplier to the customer." | |
| 3 | SOW | 10 | D. Type of Contract | 1.a. | PV distribution fees include more than just "last mile delivery" costs. PV distribution fees also include all of the variables listed in the Distribution Fees definition on page 71 of the SOW. | VA understands the various costs associated with PV distribution fees, which will now include the associated commercial fees cost as a separate Sub-CLIN. | |
| 4 | SOW | 12 | Section II. MSPV Business Processes | ||||
| B. PVON for New PVs | 1 | This is highly contingent on BPA holders returning the Product Information Request Forms within the specified time period. Will this 7 day requirement also be included in BPA agreements? | Yes. Similar changes will be incorporated into the BPAs for all authorized suppliers that will have specific language related to the MSPV Gen-Z V1 contract. | ||||
| 5 | SOW | 26 | Section IV. Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | ||||
| A. Contract Phase In/Out | 5 | Please provide a specific timeframe of "adequate prior notice" in the event an option period will not be exercised. | Per clause 52.217-9 (RFP Section C.8), "The Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the Contractor within 30 days; provided that the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 60 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension." |
SOW Section IV.A.5. states, "The Government will provide adequate prior notice to the PV in the event that an option period will not be exercised, to ensure the PV can meet these requirements." This was included as a courtesy and show of good faith, as there is no regulation annotating that a Contracting Officer must provide specific notice in the event that an option period will not be exercised.
| 6 | SOW | 52 | Section IV. Work Requirements for PVs | ||||
| V. PV Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 3 | Please provide the actual standard labor cost that will be used for the calculation of penalties? Will there be one standard labor cost, or will it vary by customer location? | The current labor cost is $1.54 based on the average salary of ordering personnel and the average amount of time per line item to process orders. The standard labor cost will be applicable for all facilities and will not vary between VISNs nor will it change during a Delivery Order's (DO) Period of Performance (PoP). | ||||
| 7 | SOW | 52 | Section IV. Work Requirements for PVs | ||||
| V. PV Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 3 | Please specifically outline how VHA will hold VA Facilities accountable in order for the PV to achieve these metrics? For example, when VA Facilities do not return monthly Core Reports? Or when facilities do not provide the approval for materials to be removed from the Core List when they are no longer eligible to remain Core? These customer inactions are outside of the PV's control, and should be excluded from the metrics and penalties calculations. | VHA and MSPO provides guidance and instruction to the field and monitors facility performance. When necessary, MSPO will take action to ensure that facilities complete required actions timely. In no circumstances will adjustments be made to fees that cannot be fully supported by objective data. | ||||
| 8 | SOW | 52 | Section IV. Work Requirements for PVs | ||||
| V. PV Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 4 | The Adjusted Fill Rate language does not reference that only Core lines should be used in the calculation. Please add this to the language to provide further clarification. | SOW revised to clarify Core Items. | ||||
| 9 | SOW | 52 | Section IV. Work Requirements for PVs V. PV Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 4 | The metrics have redundancy in the calculations, and as such, the PV penalties will be duplicative. For example, unadjusted fill rate, adjusted fill rate, and order accuracy are all measuring whether the PV fills an order on time. In this example, one failure will cause a penalty on three different metrics which is unfairly punitive. The VA should redefine the penalty structure so that it drives the right behavior without penalizing the PV repetitively. | The two fill rate metric calculations do not take into account order fulfillment time, they only calculate the completeness of an order. Order Accuracy considers fulfillment time along with other elements as described in the SOW. | |
| 10 | SOW | 52 | Section IV. Work Requirements for PVs | ||||
| V. PV Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 4 | How will the VA accommodate for events outside of the PV's control such as Global Supply shortages (i.e.. Pandemic) and catastrophic weather events (i.e. hurricanes, blizzards, etc.) in their penalty calculations? | Adjustments to fees will only occur when fully supported by objective data and will be limited to PV performance. Performance deficiencies resulting from unforseeable circumstances beyond the control of the PV will be considered on a case-by-case basis and may not incur adjustments to fees. | ||||
| 11 | SOW | 57 | Section VI. Pricing of Distribution Services | ||||
| C. Full Time OSR | f | In order to ensure the success of this value-added OSR resource, the following language should be incorporated into the SOW. "The VA Facility shall provide internet access to ensure the OSR has the necessary connectivity to perform their duties while on-site at the VA Facility." | Concur. Language has been incorporated. VA will provide internet access to OSRs utilizing Government-provided computers. OSRs shall be required to clearly identify themselves as a contractor employee in all communications with the Government. Example: established contractor email address and specified contractor signature block, clearly identifying status as a contractor employee. | ||||
| 12 | SOW | 62 | J. Annual Facility Purchase | 1 | This language continues to be unclear. What is being estimated? What is being reconciled? What is being paid? | SOW revised to provide clarity. | |
| 13 | Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor Generation-Z Version 1 (MSPV Gen-Z V1) - Solicitation 36C10X23R0007 - Attachment A | Attachment A | BASE PERIOD: ESTIMATED DATE - JULY 5, 2023 - JULY 4, 2028 | We definitely want to provide requested information, however we are a US Manufacturer/Supplier (MSPV BPA No. 36C24C20A0136) and these questions seem to be targeted to Prime Vendor response rather than Supplier response. | Draft RFP 36C10X23R0007 is being issued for Prime Vendor (PV) support, which includes comprehensive distribution and supply management functions necessary to assure delivery and availability of certain covered medical/surgical supplies identified in a VA-provided and maintained MSPV Product List, as identified in SOW Section I.B.1. | ||
| 14 | Medical/Surgical Prime Vendor Generation-Z Version 1 (MSPV Gen-Z V1) - Solicitation 36C10X23R0007 - Attachment A | Attachment A | OPTION PERIOD 1: ESTIMATED DATE - JULY 5, 2028 - JULY 4, 2033 | We definitely want to provide requested information, however we are a US Manufacturer/Supplier (MSPV BPA No. 36C24C20A0136) and these questions seem to be targeted to Prime Vendor response rather than Supplier response. | Draft RFP 36C10X23R0007 is being issued for Prime Vendor (PV) support, which includes comprehensive distribution and supply management functions necessary to assure delivery and availability of certain covered medical/surgical supplies identified in a VA-provided and maintained MSPV Product List, as identified in SOW Section I.B.1. | ||
| 15 | SOW | 27 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendor | 5(c) | Given the size and volume of VA orders it is necessary for a distributor to carry more then 15 days worth of inventory to support high velocity and/or low-volume must-have items. Would the VA consider "up to 30 calendar days" vs "limited to 15 calendar days". | Buy-out requests will only be accepted for unique medical/surgical supplies stocked by the PV(s) solely to meet a particular VHA facility’s requirement and will be limited to 15 calendar days’ worth of usage. The SOW does not specify the amount of stock that a PV must carry to fulfill the requirements of the contract. | |
| 16 | SOW | 66 | Appendix A: Definitions | "Into Stock Cost" | "Into Stock Cost" and "Acquisition Cost" is used interchangeably in the statement of work, and the APPENDIX definition of "into stock" is loosely defined such that PVs responding to this RFP could infer "other costs" to be included as part of their "into stock" or acquisition cost. Would the VA consider defining "into stock" as "The product cost at invoiced price from the manufacturer/vendor to the MSPV". Also, given "acquisition cost" is not defined in the appendix, would the VA consider changing the (2) occurrences in section B(1)(e) and (1) occurrence in Appendix "Chargebacks" to reflect the term "into stock" | SOW revised for clarity. | |
| 17 | SOW | 69 | Appendix A: Definitions | "Unadjusted Fill Rate" | For consistency, can the VA provide a calculation example. For instance, If a PV ships 9 out of a total of ten items on a given order is that rated a "0" or "90%" | 90%, which is the actual fill rate. The fill rate calculation looks at the items and quantities ordered. If ten different items are ordered and 9 of those items are filled completely, then the fill rate for that order is 90%. If any single line item is not completely filled, then that line item is considered unfilled. For example ten different items are ordered with a quantity of 5 for each line item. One line item is not shipped at all and one line item only has a quantity of 2 shipped then for that order two line items would be considered unfilled and the fill rate would be 80%. The Fill rate requirements are outlined within the SOW. | |
| 18 | Attachment "C" | NA | NA | NA | Can the VA provide a listing of sites with their current elected # of deliveries (3 day vs 5 day) | VA will not provide this. The default delivery frequency is 5 days per week delivery. | |
| 19 | SOW | 6 | B. Scope | 1(f) | A distributor usually has non-VA business with suppliers where commercial fees are charged by the distributor to the supplier. |
| When the VA states that the “PV is prohibited from charging commercial fees to VA authorized suppliers”, please clarify that this is only applicable to the scope of this Prime Vendor program and sales thereunder. Prohibiting the distributor from charging these fees on non-VA PV transactions would have a significant impact on the PV's commercial business. | The practice of not charging VA Authorized Suppliers, is specific to the VA MSPV Program and is not prohibiting PVs from charging commercial fees to suppliers outside the VA MSPV Program. Please note the VA does allow the commercial fees to be charged to the VA based on a specified percentage, just not to the suppliers. The PV is prohibited from charging commercial fees to VA suppliers for items purchased and distributed within the scope of this contract. Sales and distribution of products outside the scope of this contract are not subject to this restriction. SOW edited for additional clarity. | ||||||
| 20 | SOW | 52 | V. PV Fee Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 3 | Manufacturer backorders should be removed from the unadjusted fill rate performance metric calculations because they arise from situations outside of distributor’s control. Given the structure of the contract performance metrics, manufacturer backorders could negatively impact distributor unadjusted fill rates and Prime Vendor fee adjustments. Inclusion of manufacturer backorders in unadjusted fill rates is not industry standard nor is it standard to penalize a distributor for manufacturer backorders. If the VA finds it necessary to include manufacturer backorders in the unadjusted fill rate, the PV should be allowed to charge this fee back to the manufacturer. The PV proposes the process should be that the PV notifies the VA and the VA collects directly from the manufacture. | Maufacturer backorders are accounted for in the Adjusted Fill Rate metric. | |
| 21 | Section E- Solicitation Provisions | 71 | Technical Factor 2: Technical Approach | Written Submission- 1 | The procurement structure is an IDIQ contract whereby at least two offerors will be awarded as MSPV Gen-Z 1 IDIQ holders. All MSPV Gen-Z 1 IDIQ holders will then be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN. |
Technical Approach factor, however, indicates that offerors will be proposing for specific VISNs when submitting proposals in response to the IDIQ solicitation. See, for example, Phase II evaluation criteria, which indicates that the Technical Approach is limited to 10 pages for Offerors proposing on 1-10 CLINs (VISNs) and no more than 15 pages for Offerors proposing on 11-20 CLINs (VISNs).
Since IDIQ awards will be national in scope and not limited to specific VISNs, can the VA clarify why the Technical Approach is structured in a way that Offerors are proposing on specific VISNs and allow additional page count if bidding on all VISNs? Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 revised as follows: "Written submission of Technical Factor 2 - Technical Approach should total no more than 15 pages in Microsoft Word and/or PowerPoint formats combined. Of the 15 page total, please include an oral presentation outline of no more than two pages."
| 22 | SOW | 6 | Scope | E | Acquisition cost in the medical-surgical industry is proprietary. Therefore, providing breakdowns to the VA of chargeback of commercial acquisition cost would require contract holders to provide proprietary information related to its commercial business. With chargebacks being done between the supplier and the distributor pursuant to industry standards, it is unclear why it is necessary for the VA to obtain this data. Can the VA remove the reservation of right to request breakdowns of the chargebacks or to limit data requested so that proprietary acquisition cost? | The purpose of requesting the PV for a breakdown of Chargebacks would be to ensure the PV is not including any other commercial fees to the suppliers as outlined in the SOW. SOW has been edited to state that an explanation of charges may be requested by VA. |
| 23 | SOW | 52 | V. PV Fee Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 3 | Please clarify in the final RFP the "standard calculation" that will be used, which may result in the final adjustment. | Adjustments are calculated using the standard labor cost times the average line items per order multiplied by the number of deficient orders. |
| 24 | SOW | 52 | V. PV Fee Reconciliation Assessment and Performance Adjustment Review | 3 | Pleae clarify if the Labor Cost per line will always be $1 or if it will be variable. If it will be variable, how is it calculated? | The labor cost will be a set amount based on the average salary of ordering personnel and the average amount of time per line item to process orders. The standard labor cost will be applicable for all facilities and will not vary between VISNs during a DO's PoP. |
| 25 | RFP Section B - B.1(d) | 8 | Continuation of SF 1449 Blocks | G | RFP States: "Although subject to change, the Government anticipates the initial delivery orders to have a Period of Performance (PoP) consisting of one (1) base year and four, one (1) year option periods. " |
Per RFP Sec. C.6 -- FAR 52.216-22(d) - Any order issued during the effective period of this contract and not completed within that period shall be completed by the Contractor within the time specified in the order. The contract shall govern the Contractor's and Government's rights and obligations with respect to that order to the same extent as if the order were completed during the contract's effective period; provided, that the Contractor shall not be required to make any deliveries under this contract after 120 days after the conclusion of the period of performance of any resulting delivery orders.
Can the Government please clarify the following in regard to the above RFP requirements?
A) For Section C.6 -- FAR 52.216-22(d) is this applicable to the Delivery Order (i.e. CLIN) or an individual order from an Authorized Customer (i.e. Purchase Order)?
B) In the scenario where a Delivery Order (i.e. CLIN) is awarded in the middle of the IDIQ Base Period or Option Period (5 year PoP each), can the can the Government confirm whether the PoP for this Delivery Order can be fully performed. Specifically, if Option Periods 3 & 4 for the Delivery Order (hypothetical) would be exercised after the expiration of the IDIQ Option Period, will this result in the DO Option Periods not being exercised? A) Delivery Order
B) FAR 16.505(a)(2) states "Individual orders shall clearly describe all services to be performed or supplies to be delivered so the full cost or price for the performance of the work can be established when the order is placed. Orders shall be within the scope, issued within the period of performance, and be within the maximum value of the contract."
The FAR permits the award of a Delivery Order within the effective period of the of the parent IDIQ, even if the period of performance of that Delivery Order goes beyond the end date of the IDIQ. However, in the hypothetical scenario presented, a Contracting Officer may not exercise an option in the Delivery Order after the expiration of the IDIQ.
26 RFP Section B - B.1(d)(3)(b) 9 Continuation of SF 1449 Blocks B.1(d)(3)(b) RFP States: "Each DOPR will include, at a minimum… Statement of Work (SOW) or specifications, with a description of the requirements, including deliverables, and applicable information"
To what extent will the individual DOPR SOW differ from the SOW that is stated with the RFP? Also, will the proposed pricing for the IDIQ Base/Option contract be imposed as a "Cap" for any DOPR pricing? If so, how will an IDIQ Award Holder be compensated for a DOPR SOW that requires more services/requirements than the IDIQ SOW? RFP Section B.1.1.d.3.b. states, "Statement of Work (SOW) or specifications, with a description of the requirements, including deliverables, and applicable information."
The SOW or specifications provided with each DOPR, should be very similar, if not identical, to that of the current multiple-award IDIQ SOW. However, VA reserves the right to include any minor specifications unique to an individual CLIN (VISN) within each DOPR and should not warrant additional cost/price increases.
27 RFP Section B - B.1(d)(4) 9 Continuation of SF 1449 Blocks B.1(d)(4) RFP States: "The CO will, however, maintain an internal record of the award decision and supporting information. COs may evaluate by directly comparing competitive proposals and make an award decision based upon this comparison"
Will the Government please clarify what basis it will use for the CLIN Awards resulting from the individual DOPR's, such as a Best Value or some other determination. RFP Section B.1.1.d.4. states, "The delivery order proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the unique evaluation criteria as set forth in each DOPR."
Per RFP Section B.1.1.d.5., "In accordance with FAR 16.5, the CO has broad discretion in determining which contractor should receive a delivery order. The CO will issue a delivery order to the contractor whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government considering the evaluation factors specified in the DOPR."
| 28 | RFP Section E - E.7(B) - Submission Requirements | 50 | Solicitation Provisions | E.7(B) | Per the RFP, part of the Phase II submission includes: | |
| a. | Completed Reps & Certs | |||||
| b. | Executed Offer, to include SF1449 and Amendments | |||||
| c. | Points of Contact | |||||
| d. | OCI Information |
Can the Government please confirm that each of the above are required Proposal Deliverables and that there are no page limits applicable to these items. In addition, can the Government please clarify which portion of the proposal (i.e, Technical, Price, etc.) that the above deliverable items are supposed to be included for purposes of the submission. Completed Reps & Certs, Executed Offer (to include SF1449 and Amendments), Points of Contact, and OCI Information are all Phase II deliverables.
| a. | Completed Reps & Certs (no page limitation) |
| b. | Executed Offer, to include SF1449 and Amendments (no page limitation) |
| c. | Points of Contact (no page limitation) |
| d. | OCI Information (no page limitation) |
The above four deliverables shall be submitted with each Offeror's Phase II submission, which consists of the following (as identified in Addendum to FAR 52.212-1):
| a. | Completed Reps & Certs |
| b. | Executed Offer, to include SF1449 and Amendments |
| c. | Points of Contact |
| d. | OCI Information |
| e. | Technical Factor 2 – Technical Approach |
| f. | Factor 3 – Veterans’ Involvement (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) |
| g. | Factor 4 – Price |
| 29 | RFP Section E | N/A | Solicitation Provisions | N/A | Can the Government clarify whether there are any electronic file size limitations for Proposal Deliverables being submitted electronically? (i.e. file size for attachments may not exceed 10MB) If so, can the Government please specify the applicable restrictions ? | Please see RFP Section B.5 Acceptable Formats, which states: "Offerors are cautioned that Veterans Affairs cannot receive email attachments that exceed 10MB. Therefore, if your proposal or parts of your proposal exceed 10MB, then you must break them up into separate emails and attachments, so that each communication does not exceed 10MB. Additionally, offerors may not submit offers or parts of offers in Compressed or Zips files – only .PDF, .DOC, .DOCX, or .XLS files should be attached to emailed proposals. Offerors are advised that, should they resubmit a proposal, the most recent proposal received by VA is the one that shall be considered for evaluation." |
| 30 | RFP Section E - E.7(C) - Submission Requirements | 52 | Solicitation Provisions | E.7(C) | RFP States: "Offerors shall submit signed originals of all documents which require the Offeror’s signature. Use of reproductions of the signed original is authorized in the copies." |
Can the Government please clarify whether hardcopy proposals are required to be submitted? If so, can the Government please clarify the specific number of hardcopies (i.e., original and copies) that must be submitted.
Finally, If no hard copies are required, can the Government clarify what is meant by "signed originals?"
Hardcopy proposals are not required.
Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 revised as follows: "Offerors shall submit all documents which require the Offeror’s signature. Use of reproductions of the signed original is authorized. Offerors shall affirmatively state, in writing, whether they commit to fulfilling all requirements, terms and conditions of the contract, taking no exceptions to the RFP."
31 RFP Section E - E.7(C) - Submission Requirements - Factor 4: Price 58 Solicitation Provisions E.7(C) RFP Section B.1(d)(2) states: "All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN. Only one IDIQ holder will receive DO award per VISN."
RFP Section E.7(C)(Factor 4: Price) states: Offerors shall only provide pricing for VISNs in which they are submitting an offer for....All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN."
If a IDIQ Contractor did not propose on a VISN or CLIN for the base IDIQ, can the Government confirm that any (emphasis added) IDIQ Contractor can submit a proposal in response to all of the DOPRs issued by the Government, regardless of whether the IDIQ Contractor submitted a proposal for the CLIN as part of its original IDIQ proposal. Can the Government also confirm that no preference in the award decision for the DOPRs will be given to IDIQ Contractors that originally proposed for the respective CLIN. Section B.1.1.d.1. of the RFP states: "MSPV Gen-Z V1 will follow ordering procedures as outlined in FAR 16.505. In accordance with FAR 16.505(b)(2), the CO will provide all MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders a fair opportunity to be considered for all awards under MSPV Gen-Z V1 which exceed the applicable value threshold (currently $6 million), unless one of the following exceptions applies:"
RFP Section B.1.1.d.2. has been revised as follows: "As requirements for MSPV Gen-Z V1 are defined, Contractors will be given the fair opportunity to compete for the award, assuming the threshold is met and one of the exceptions noted above does not exist. The CO will issue a DOPR for each VISN, in accordance with FAR 16.505 and the procedures as outlined below. All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN. Only one IDIQ holder will receive DO award per VISN. It should be noted that while MSPV Gen-Z V1 contractors are not required to submit a proposal for all DOPRs for which they are afforded the opportunity, in an effort to obtain maximum competition, they are expected to do so for all VISNs where they expressed interest in providing distribution services in their proposal to the base IDIQ solicitation. Repeated failure to provide a response for those VISNs identified in an Offeror’s IDIQ proposal may be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to exercise the option. Contractors unable to perform the requirements as stated in a DOPR must submit a “no-bid” to the CO with a brief, yet specific, explanation."
Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 has been revised as follows: "Contractor shall reference and utilize Attachment A – SAMPLE CLIN (VISN) PRICING for submissions in response to this Request for Proposals (RFP). Failure to utilize the prescribed files/formats may render a submission ineligible for consideration. Offerors are required to identify which VISNs they have interest in providing distribution services at the delivery order level within Attachment A (this is solely for informational purposes to ensure adequate PV coverage is achieved in accordance with P.L. 115-407, Sec. 703, and will not be used for evaluation purposes; this does not count against page count). Offerors may provide an explanatory narrative as to any assumptions made in the development of their proposed price but are not required to. The Offeror’s completed pricing template (Attachment A) constitutes its offer to the Government. The electronic price proposal narrative, if submitted, shall be in Microsoft Word, and the price proposal calculations shall be in Microsoft Excel (utilizing Currency format; Accounting format is prohibited). Submitted files shall contain all formulas, calculations, and worksheet/workbook links used to compute the proposed amounts. The formulas, calculations, and links shall not be hidden for the Government to verify the accuracy of the data. Print image files or those files/worksheets containing only values are not acceptable. The narrative description of the Price Volume shall be limited to 5 pages (Attachment A does not count against page count). The pricing template (Attachment A) contains a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA’s MSPV program across all VISNs, including Other Government Agencies (OGAs), and the territory of Puerto Rico. Offerors shall provide pricing for the base period and all option periods. Pricing provided within Attachment A will be used for evaluation purposes only, to determine fair and reasonableness. Subsequent pricing will be requested from those contractors receiving IDIQ award via the issuance of individual Delivery Order Proposal Requests (DOPRs) for each VISN. All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN."
32 RFP Section E - E.7(C) - Submission Requirements - Factor 4: Price 58 Solicitation Provisions E.7(C) RFP States: "Pricing provided within Attachment A will be used for evaluation purposes only, to determine fair and reasonableness. Subsequent pricing will be requested from those contractors receiving IDIQ award via the issuance of individual Delivery Order Proposal Requests (DOPRs) for each VISN"
Can the Government please clarify if any of the pricing proposed by each Offeror for its Base IDIQ proposal will result in these prices being set as a "cap" or " ceiling" for purposes of each DOPR.
A. If so, how does the Government intend for any adjustment to the Base IDIQ Proposed Prices for any new DOPR SOW requirements that are required for the respective DOPR?
B. Can the Government also clarify that if the original proposed pricing is used to establsh a price "cap" or "ceiling", for proposals being submitted, how will a IDIQ Contractor that did not originally propose pricing for the CLIN will have a similar restriction? Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 has been revised as follows: "Contractor shall reference and utilize Attachment A – SAMPLE CLIN (VISN) PRICING for submissions in response to this Request for Proposals (RFP). Failure to utilize the prescribed files/formats may render a submission ineligible for consideration. Offerors are required to identify which VISNs they have interest in providing distribution services at the delivery order level within Attachment A (this is solely for informational purposes to ensure adequate PV coverage is achieved in accordance with P.L. 115-407, Sec. 703, and will not be used for evaluation purposes; this does not count against page count). Offerors may provide an explanatory narrative as to any assumptions made in the development of their proposed price but are not required to. The Offeror’s completed pricing template (Attachment A) constitutes its offer to the Government. The electronic price proposal narrative, if submitted, shall be in Microsoft Word, and the price proposal calculations shall be in Microsoft Excel (utilizing Currency format; Accounting format is prohibited). Submitted files shall contain all formulas, calculations, and worksheet/workbook links used to compute the proposed amounts. The formulas, calculations, and links shall not be hidden for the Government to verify the accuracy of the data. Print image files or those files/worksheets containing only values are not acceptable. The narrative description of the Price Volume shall be limited to 5 pages (Attachment A does not count against page count). The pricing template (Attachment A) contains a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA’s MSPV program across all VISNs, including Other Government Agencies (OGAs), and the territory of Puerto Rico. Offerors shall provide pricing for the base period and all option periods. Pricing provided within Attachment A will be used for evaluation purposes only, to determine fair and reasonableness. Subsequent pricing will be requested from those contractors receiving IDIQ award via the issuance of individual Delivery Order Proposal Requests (DOPRs) for each VISN. All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN."
Under the MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ soliciation, Offerors will submit pricing in accordance with the RFP, via submission of Attachment A - SAMPLE CLIN (VISN) PRICING. Attachment A contains a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA's MSPV program across all VISNs, including OGAs, and Puerto Rico. Offerors are also required to identify which VISNs they have interest in providing distribution services at the delivery order level within Attachment A to ensure adequate PV coverage.
The proposed IDIQ pricing for each Offeror receiving IDIQ award will be used as a cap/ceiling for each DOPR.
The SOW or specifications provided with each DOPR, should be very similar, if not identical, to that of the current multiple-award IDIQ SOW. However, VA reserves the right to include any minor specifications unique to an individual CLIN (VISN) within each DOPR and should not warrant additional cost/price increases.
33 RFP Section E - E.9(A) 59 Solicitation Provisions E.9(A) RFP States: "For this effort, the Highest Rated Offerors with a Fair and Reasonable Price will determine the best value basis for the award of contracts under the solicitation."
Can the Government clarify whether this language only applies to this specific RFP or whether there will also be similar requirement for each of the DOPR's to be issued under the IDIQ for the award basis. This language is specific to the overarching IDIQ.
RFP Section B.1.1.d.4. states, "The delivery order proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the unique evaluation criteria as set forth in each DOPR."
Per RFP Section B.1.1.d.5., "In accordance with FAR 16.5, the CO has broad discretion in determining which contractor should receive a delivery order. The CO will issue a delivery order to the contractor whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government considering the evaluation factors specified in the DOPR."
34 Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section II.D(1) 14 MSPV Business Process II.D(1) SOW States: "PVs shall propose for VISNs to which they wish to provide distribution services "
Can the Government please clarify whether the above direction is related to the Base IDIQ Proposal or for the individual Delivery Order Proposal Requests? If Base IDIQ, this contradicts the RFP.
For consistency purposes, shouldn't each Offeror responding to each of the DOPRs be limited to only the VISNs/Delivery Orders/CLINs that it proposed on for the IDIQ Proposal. Presumably the award decision for the IDIQ Base Contacts are specfiic to the individual CLINs that were proposed by each respective offeror. Therefore, allowing an IDIQ Contrctor to propose for a DOPR opportunity that they did not propose on originally would be allowing that Contractor to compete for an opportunity that they did not satisfy the base award criteria to allow them to compete for the respective CLIN.
Can the Government please clarify why it is acceptable to allow all IDIQ Contractors to compete for for all of the resulting DOPR's regardless of whether the Offeror did not propose on the specific CLIN. SOW Section II.D.I. revised as follows: "PV(s) shall propose distribution fees in accordance with RFP Attachment A for a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA’s MSPV program across all VISNs, including OGAs, and the territory of Puerto Rico. Individual CLIN pricing for each VISN will be requested via Delivery Order Proposal Request (DOPR) issuance after IDIQ award, in accordance with FAR 16.505 and the procedures identified in the RFP. Upon DOPR issuance, PVs receiving IDIQ award will be permitted to propose on VISNs to which they wish to provide distribution services. Upon delivery order award, VISNs may be organized into regions that are served by a particular PV."
Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 has been revised as follows: "Contractor shall reference and utilize Attachment A – SAMPLE CLIN (VISN) PRICING for submissions in response to this Request for Proposals (RFP). Failure to utilize the prescribed files/formats may render a submission ineligible for consideration. Offerors are required to identify which VISNs they have interest in providing distribution services at the delivery order level within Attachment A (this is solely for informational purposes to ensure adequate PV coverage is achieved in accordance with P.L. 115-407, Sec. 703, and will not be used for evaluation purposes; this does not count against page count). Offerors may provide an explanatory narrative as to any assumptions made in the development of their proposed price but are not required to. The Offeror’s completed pricing template (Attachment A) constitutes its offer to the Government. The electronic price proposal narrative, if submitted, shall be in Microsoft Word, and the price proposal calculations shall be in Microsoft Excel (utilizing Currency format; Accounting format is prohibited). Submitted files shall contain all formulas, calculations, and worksheet/workbook links used to compute the proposed amounts. The formulas, calculations, and links shall not be hidden for the Government to verify the accuracy of the data. Print image files or those files/worksheets containing only values are not acceptable. The narrative description of the Price Volume shall be limited to 5 pages (Attachment A does not count against page count). The pricing template (Attachment A) contains a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA’s MSPV program across all VISNs, including Other Government Agencies (OGAs), and the territory of Puerto Rico. Offerors shall provide pricing for the base period and all option periods. Pricing provided within Attachment A will be used for evaluation purposes only, to determine fair and reasonableness. Subsequent pricing will be requested from those contractors receiving IDIQ award via the issuance of individual Delivery Order Proposal Requests (DOPRs) for each VISN. All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN."
Under the MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ soliciation, Offerors will submit pricing in accordance with the RFP, via submission of Attachment A - SAMPLE CLIN (VISN) PRICING. Attachment A contains a predetermined sample VISN, which estimates the average costs and performance requirements under VA's MSPV program across all VISNs, including OGAs, and Puerto Rico. Offerors are also required to identify which VISNs they have interest in providing distribution services at the delivery order level within Attachment A to ensure adequate PV coverage.
RFP Section B.1.1.d.2. has been revised as follows: "As requirements for MSPV Gen-Z V1 are defined, Contractors will be given the fair opportunity to compete for the award, assuming the threshold is met and one of the exceptions noted above does not exist. The CO will issue a DOPR for each VISN, in accordance with FAR 16.505 and the procedures as outlined below. All MSPV Gen-Z V1 IDIQ contract holders will be permitted to respond to DOPRs issued for each VISN. Only one IDIQ holder will receive DO award per VISN. It should be noted that while MSPV Gen-Z V1 contractors are not required to submit a proposal for all DOPRs for which they are afforded the opportunity, in an effort to obtain maximum competition, they are expected to do so for all VISNs where they expressed interest in providing distribution services in their proposal to the base IDIQ solicitation. Repeated failure to provide a response for those VISNs identified in an Offeror’s IDIQ proposal may be taken into consideration when deciding whether or not to exercise the option. Contractors unable to perform the requirements as stated in a DOPR must submit a “no-bid” to the CO with a brief, yet specific, explanation."
35 Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section III.A(1) 16 VA Ordering Procedures III.A(1) SOW States: "If the VA implements a new electronic inventory and ordering system, the PV shall have the technical capability to work with the VA to adapt to any new system specifications required to accept electronic orders from the VA."
| Can the Government confirm that any work that is required to be performed by a PV to adapt and implement the necessary changes to its systems and IT infrastructure to interface with the VA's anticiated new electrronic inventory and ordering system will be reimbursed to the PV via a separate change order modificaiton. | Significant changes may be subject to negotiation at the discretion of the CO. | |||||
| 36 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section III.B(3) | 23 | VA Ordering Procedures | III.B(3) | SOW States: "Acceptable performance is defined as greater than or equal to 99% of all CO negotiated MSPV required services continuously available as required throughout the contingency/disaster response period." |
We believe that there potentially is a typo in the above noted portion of the SOW. Can the Government please confirm whether any revision to the above language is necessary?
| Also as demonstrated by the recent Covid pandemic, which we would consider to be a Force Majuere/Act of God situation, Can the Government confirm that in these specific situations, that Contractors will not be held to the the performance KPI's stated in this contract when not considered to be "normal" operating conditions. | As indicated, this is CO negotiated, so the acceptable peformance is 99%. | |||||
| 37 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section IV.B(3)(b)(ii) | 29 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | IV.B(3)(b)(ii) | In regard to the requirements for removing items from the Authorized Customer's Core List the SOW States: "Buy-out requests will only be accepted for unique medical/surgical supplies stocked by the PV(s) solely to meet a particular VHA facility’s requirement and will be limited to 15 calendar days’ worth of inventory. " |
If the current requirement is to maintain 30 days worth of Core item stock. Will the Government consider increasing the buy back limit to 30-days, especially as most of the items required to be supplied under this contract are special VA specified products that a PV contractor cannot sell under its other commercial business?
| The SOW does not require a specific number of days stock to be carried by the PV. Management of stock is at the discretion of the PV. | |||||
| 38 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section IV.V(3) | 52 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | IV.V(3) | SOW States: Contract Performance Metrics Eligible for Adjustment: |
a. Core List Order Accuracy
b. Special Order and Non-Core List Order Accuracy
c. Unadjusted Fill Rate (Core Items)
d. Adjusted Fill Rate
e. Order Lead/Delivery Times
i. Bulk Deliveries
ii. LUM
f. Non-Core List Unadjusted Fill Rate
| Will all of the potential adjustments for these KPI's be calculated in the same fashion as described in Paragraph IV.V(4)? if so, this does not result in a fair or equitiable penalty. Additionally, can the Govt please define exactly how all "penalties" are going to be calculated for purposes of the contract. | Please refer to SOW Section IV.V.4. Example of PV Fee Adjustment Methodology is the same for each performance metric. | |||||
| 39 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section IV.V(4) | 52 - 53 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | IV.V(4) | SOW States: "The value of the shortage is calculated as a percent of the actual metric (90%) divided by the minimum required threshold (95%). This calculation is then used to determine the number of deficient orders within the month being reported on. The standard labor cost is applied to the deficient orders using the monthly average number of line items to determine the total adjustment. For a monthly invoiced amount of $1,000, with an actual fill rate of 90%, the calculation indicates an offset of $1.20 against the reported month’s invoice. |
Unadjusted Fill Rate Order Value ------------------- $1,000 PV Fees %--------------------- 1% PV Fees Invoice--------------- $10 Fill Rate Requirement-------- 95% Actual Fill Rate ---------------- 90% Percent Value of Shortage-- 5.3% Labor Cost per line------------ $1 Total Orders-------------------- 5 Average Lines per Order----- 4 Deficient Orders--------------- 0.3 Fee Adjustment---------------- $1.20
Could the Government clarify how the above calculations are mechanically operating? We are unable to determine how a couple of the above factors were determined including the "Fee Adjustment" amount.
Based on the example provided, It would seem that this fee adjustment can result in completely inequitable and unreasonable penalty. Specifically in the event that fill rate issues are the result of low dollar value items, then these orders will carry the same importance/weighting for purposes of the penalty calculation as high dollar value items. The resulting penalty will be imposed across all orders regrardless of dollar value and/or orders that delivered in full. Would the Government consider limiting any potential penalties to be limited to the orders that actually contributed to the deficient performance.
| Adjustments are calculated using the standard labor cost times the average line items per order multiplied by the number of deficient orders. | ||||||
| 40 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section IV.V(4) | 52 - 53 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | IV.V(4) | Can the Government please provide the PV Fee Adjustment Methodology for each of the six (6) Performance Metrics? | SOW Section IV.V.4. Example of PV Fee Adjustment Methodology is the same for each performance metric. |
| 41 | Attachment B - Statement of Work - Section IV.V(4) | 52 - 53 | Work Requirements for Prime Vendors | IV.V(4) | Is the "Standard Labor Cost" the same across all Performance Metrics? How is this "Standard Labor Cost" determined? Is it flat for the entire contract period or subject to fluctuations? If subject to fluctuations, how will this be adjusted? Will the "Standard Labor Cost" be consistent across all VISNs? | The labor cost will be a set amount based on the average salary of ordering personnel and the average amount of time per line item to process orders. The standard labor cost will be applicable for all facilities and will not vary between VISNs during a DO's PoP. |
| 42 | SOW: Paragraph G. Drop Ship | 34-35 | IV. Work Requirements | G. | General Recommendation/Question: a. 1 hour order confirmation to supplier is unrealistic, unachievable, and outside normal business processes. With regard to the rational that this standard is achievable because DS vendor’s must but EDI, an EDI is not necessarily automatic and is not processed in “real time”. EDI transactions are still performed in patch processing and in most cases require purchasing process intervention. |
b. This requirement also assumes suppliers/vendors are in the same time zone, accept orders throughout the day, and can provide confirmation within an hour, etc. In order for this to be a valid requirement, VA must specify the same order confirmation requirements within the Supplier BPA’s and allow PV’s the ability to access non-performance penalties as appropriate.
c. Finally, this requirement conflicts with the guidance/requirement to consolidate DS orders from the same vendor on one purchase order.
d. A realistic requirement is to provide order confirmation from the DS vendors within 2 business day and the performance requirements must be outlined in the VA Supplier BPAs.
| The order confirmation required from the PV related to drop ship supplies is a confirmation from the PV that the order has been placed with the supplier within the specified timeframe. The SOW has been revised to reflect that the PV has 2 hours from receipt of an order to provide a confirmation to the facility that the orders for items that are drop ship only have been placed with the supplier(s). | |||||
| 43 | SOW: Paragraph V. PV Fee Reconciliation | 51-52 | IV. Work Requirements | V. | General Recommendation/Question: a. While the use of penalty fees is not necessarily outside normal business practices, VA accessing disincentive fees (penalties) without allowing the PV to control fees/penalties within the supplier agreement, place undue risk and burden on the PV. While we can support the process of measuring performance, and accessing penalties for non-performance, it is incumbent upon VA to require BPA supplies to perform at or above the same standards and allow PVs to pass on penalties associated with non-performance of fill-rates, order lead times, accuracy, etc. |
b. Relative the performance standards outlined in Paragraph S. Metrics as the basis for fee reconciliation, VA must accurately clarify the adjudication processes for non-performance. Furthermore, both non-adjusted and adjusted fill-rate calculations must account for supplier behavior and performance relative to product allocation, constrained items, and other supply-chain disruptions outside the control of the PV. Please clarify the Fee Reconciliation adjudication process? Who is the decision authority to access penalties? What is the process to appeal non-performance fee assessments? What is the process to hold BPA suppliers accountable for non-performance and to access non-performance fees to BPA Suppliers.
| Adjustments are calculated using the standard labor cost times the average line items per order multiplied by the number of deficient orders. No adjustments to fees will be made unless fully supported by objective data. The CO will make a final determination in situations where a PV disputes an adjustment. |
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 .