QA Part III.docx
DOCX document 25 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Q201--Holly Springs CBOC Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 36C24924R0063
About this file
This document is a Vendor Questions and Answers (Q&A) file for VA Solicitation 36C24924R0063, concerning Community Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC) Services in Holly Springs, Mississippi. The Q&A addresses multiple clarification points regarding proposal submission requirements, particularly around key personnel, licensure, and staffing. Key details include confirmation that clinical staff must have current and active licensure in the state where the clinic is located, though license copies are no longer required with the initial proposal. Vendors are permitted, but not required, to include additional documentation such as candidate resumes, background check clearances, and previous VA experience. The contract is structured as a one-year base period with nine option years, with performance expected to start on the first day of clinic opening. The solicitation does not include price realism evaluation, and salary range submissions are limited to certification of reasonable professional staff compensation in line with market practices.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 35
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Vendor Questions and VA Answers – Part III
| Vendor Questions |
| VA Answers |
| 1 |
| We respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
We respectfully note that this raises a latent ambiguity.
PWS Section 2.8. states as follows:
“2.8 LICENSE AND ACCREDITATION: All contract licensed providers assigned by the Contractor to perform the services covered by this contract shall have a current license to practice in the state where the outpatient clinic is located. If the state where the outpatient clinic is located recognizes multistate licensure through a compact and a contract licensed provider’s home state is a party to such compact, and no other restrictions apply, then the provider’s compact licensure status in the state where the outpatient clinic is located may be acceptable as long as the provider complies with all licensure requirements of the multistate compact for the entirety of the provider’s performance of services under the contract.” (Emphasis added)
We respectfully request that the Government clarify whether Section 2.8, License Accreditation still applies?
Yes, this still applies.
| 2 |
| If Section 2.8, License Accreditation still applies under Solicitation 36C24924R0063, must candidates summarized in the Offeror’s proposal pursuant to Sub-Factor E – Key Personnel possess current and active licensure “to practice in the state where the outpatient clinic is located”? |
| Yes, Offeror shall include a statement that key personnel possess current and active licensure “to practice in the state where the outpatient clinic is located. |
| 3 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Will offers be considered to pose more risk to the Government if providers not possessing licensure to practice in the state where the clinic is located are proposed pursuant to the instructions in Sub-Factor E – Key Personnel?
No.
| 4 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Are offerors permitted to provide proof that their candidates possess licensure to practice in the state where the clinic is located?
Yes, you are permitted to include this, at your discretion.
| 5 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Will an offeror be considered to present less risk to the Government if an offeror demonstrates that its proposed providers are demonstrated to possess licensure to practice in the state where the clinic is located?
No.
| 6 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Are offerors permitted to furnish resumes for candidates?
Yes, you are permitted to include this, at your discretion.
| 7 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Will an offeror be considered to present less risk to the Government if an offeror presents candidate resumes?
No.
| 8 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Are offerors permitted to provide proof that their candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor E possess government background check clearance?
Yes, you are permitted to include this, at your discretion.
| 9 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Will an offeror be considered to present less risk to the Government if an offeror presents proof that their candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor E possess government background check clearance?
No.
| 10 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Are offerors permitted to provide proof that their candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor E possess previous VA experience?
Yes, you are permitted to include this, at your discretion.
| 11 |
| As indicated above, we respectfully note that the original proposal indicated that “A copy of licenses must be provided with offer…” |
The answer to questions three and four in the Question and Answers states as follows:
“RFP will be updated to remove “…must be provided with offer…”. Please see Subfactor E which only requires proposal to include a list of titles, roles, and qualifications of all clinical staff members to be utilized in the performance of this contract.”
Will an offeror be considered to present less risk to the Government if an offeror presents proof that their candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor E possess VA experience?
No.
| 12 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 7, the Government provides the following answer to a question regarding email size: |
“There may be a limit; however, please separate large proposal documents in multiple emails if you feel necessary, and please request confirmation for each email sent, to ensure entire proposal was received.
Will the Government please clarify what the size limit is for proposals so that Offerors can appropriate separate proposal documents?
Specifically, can the Government please confirm if proposals of 20 megabytes can be received by the Government system?
There is no firm limit; it depends on email inbox size, and/or position of Government personnel, and receipt of a 20 megabyte file may vary.
| 13 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 11, the Government provides the following answer: |
“It is the overall company turnover rate for same or similar contracts; you can include this information in Management Plans/Quality Control.”
We would respectfully request that the Government provide a definition of turnover rate as the term turnover rate can be defined in multiple ways, providing significant variance in responses.
Turnover rate refers to the percentage of employees who leave an organization during a given period of time.
| 14 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 14, the Government provides the following answer: |
“The proposed backup staffing plan should be reflected in your response to Subfactor C. The contingency plan is a separate plan, that may reference some similarities from the backup staffing plan. The contingency plan should be located in response to Subfactor E.”
Are offerors permitted to propose backup candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor C possessing licensure in the state services will be performed?
Yes, you are permitted to include this, at your discretion.
| 15 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 14, the Government provides the following answer: |
“The proposed backup staffing plan should be reflected in your response to Subfactor C. The contingency plan is a separate plan, that may reference some similarities from the backup staffing plan. The contingency plan should be located in response to Subfactor E.”
Will an offeror be considered to present less risk to the Government if an offeror presents backup candidates summarized pursuant to the instructions under Sub-Factor C possessing licensure in the state services will be performed?
No.
| 16 |
| In Section E.1.9.3. of the Solicitation, the Government states as follows: |
“The following information is required to be submitted with Offeror’s proposal: Provide certification that salaries and fringe benefits for professional staff are reasonable and in accordance with standard market practices. (PWS Reference: 2.21)”
In Section 2.21. of the PWS, the Government provides the following instruction:
“2.21 CONTRACT PERSONNEL: The Contractor shall be responsible for protecting all Contractor personnel furnishing services. To carry out this responsibility, The Contractor shall provide or certify that the following is provided for all contract staff providing services under the resultant contract:
Workers’ compensation Professional liability insurance Health examinations Income tax withholding, and Social security payments
In order to ensure retention of professional employees/key personnel, Contractor shall be responsible to pay salary and fringe benefits that are reasonable to ensure qualified staff are hired and retained. Salaries and benefits paid shall be similar to those of other similar professionals in the marketplace and relevant community. Fringe benefits shall include receipt of, or compensation for, health insurance premium contribution, vacation time, sick time, holiday time, and any bonuses.”
We would respectfully request that the Government confirm that this requirement applies to both professional staff and labor categories specifically covered by a Wage Determination incorporated into the Solicitation and issued under the Service Contract Act.
This only applies to professional positions that do not fall under a Wage Determination.
| 17 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 23 states as follows: |
“In Sub-Factor E - Key Personnel requests a spreadsheet listing salary ranges and fringe benefit ranges for professional personnel. The instructions mention submitting this worksheet with the pricing information (Volume 1) of the proposal. Should the worksheet be included in both Volume I and Volume II, or only in Volume I? Additionally, where specifically in Volume I should it be included?”
The Government provides the following answer:
“No Please only submit with Volume II under in your response to Subfactor E.”
We would respectfully request that the Government clarify which labor categories to be furnished under the Solicitation are considered “professional personnel”.
Any professional positions that would not be included in a Wage Determination.
| 18 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 20 states as follows: |
“Will the government add price realism language to the current solicitation to prevent contractors from deliberately underbidding this contract?”
The Government provides the following answer:
“No.”
If Offerors are not going to be evaluated for the price realism of their offers, can the Government clarify how the salary ranges and fringe benefit ranges for professional personnel under Sub-Factor E will be evaluated.
We are not evaluating it. All the solicitation asked under Evaluation Factor 3 is to “Provide certification that salaries and fringe benefits for professional staff are reasonable and in accordance with standard market practices.”
| 19 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 25 states as follows: |
“In Sub-Factor E - Key Personnel requests a spreadsheet listing salary ranges and fringe benefit ranges for professional personnel. The instructions mention submitting this worksheet with the pricing information (Volume 1) of the proposal. Should the worksheet be included in both Volume I and Volume II, or only in Volume I? Additionally, where specifically in Volume I should it be included?”
The Government provides the following answer:
“No Please only submit with Volume II under in your response to Subfactor E.”
We would respectfully request that the Government clarify whether the requirement to submit salary ranges and benefit ranges under Sub-Factor E will apply to labor categories specifically covered by the Wage Determination incorporated into the Solicitation under the Service Contract Act.
The solicitation does not require offerors to submit salary ranges. All the solicitation asked under Evaluation Factor 3 is to “Provide certification that salaries and fringe benefits for professional staff are reasonable and in accordance with standard market practices.”
| 20 |
| In Amendment A00002, Question 25 states as follows: |
“What is the estimated length of this contact starting when and ending when?”
The Government provides the following answer:
“This is a one-year base plus 9 option year IDIQ, estimated to start immediately upon award.”
However, we note that Section 19 of the PWS provides as follows:
“…The Contractor shall have 180 days from contract award to commencement of the provision of medical care to local Veterans…”
We would respectfully request that the Government clarify whether the 180 days specified in Section 19 will be included within the one-year base plus nine option years of the Contract or will instead fall outside that duration.
Performance period will start the first day of clinic opening.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .