36C25623R0008 0002.pdf

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE 7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER 3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO. 1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office. is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30 PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

(Type or print) (Type or print)

(Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code)

(If other than Item 6)

(Specify type of modification and authority)

(such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

1 13

0002 10-11-2023

36C256

Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 16 5075 Westheimer Rd. Suite 750

Houston TX 77056

36C256

Department of Veterans Affairs Network Contracting Office 16 5075 Westheimer Rd. Suite 750

Houston TX 77056

To all Offerors/Bidders

36C25623R0008

09-21-2023

X x x

Due 10/20/2023 at 12:00 PM CST x 1 (one)

The purpose of this amendment is to post questions and answers related to the Specialized Standard.

A. See attached questions and answers starting on page 2.

B. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers remains unchanged.

C. This amendment will need to be signed and returned with proposal submission to be eligible for award.

Stephanie Keo Contracting Officer

VA-VHA-RPOC-2023-0081

Amendment: 0002 Questions and Answers Solicitation: 36C25623R0008 Onsite ER Physician Services

1. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement, FAR 9. 104.2 states that special standards are required when “unusual expertise or specialized facilities are needed for adequate contract performance”. Why does experience with “demonstrating familiarity with VA Emergency Department operations and procedures” require an unusual expertise? How are Military Treatment Facility Emergency Department operations and procedures not similar to VA Emergency Department operations?

Answer: For clarity, the only “required” actions of the special standard are the development of the special standard, the inclusion of the standard in the solicitation, and that the standard applies to all offerors. The answer to the first question is that the Specialized Standard for Prior Experience applies to the contractor’s firm that is submitting an offer, not individual owners or employees. Next, The Department of Defense Military Treatment Facilities has a different mission, staffing, and regulations than the VA. (for example: VHA Directives versus DoD Instructions). Please keep in mind that this is a VA requirement.

2. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement, FAR 9. 104.2 states that special standards are required when “unusual expertise or specialized facilities are needed for adequate contract performance”. Why does the provision of “critical emergency health services to Veterans” require an unusual expertise? How are Military Treatment Facility “critical emergency health services to Veterans” not similar to VA “critical emergency health services to Veterans?”

Answer: For clarity, special standards are not required. The answer to the first question lies in the full sentence that states that the “Special standards may be particularly desirable when experience has demonstrated that unusual expertise or specialized facilities are needed for adequate contract performance.” Emergency room operations are naturally critical services that are not equal to the staffing an urgent care clinic; therefore, it is prudent for the contracting officer to acquire information that clearly indicates and supports a responsibility determination of a prospective contractor where the prescription allows. Based on the nature and scope of the services required it is essential that the prospective contractor must be able to affirmatively demonstrate its responsibility with prior experience relative to the required services. Finally, The Department of Defense Military Treatment Facilities has a different mission, staffing requirements and regulations than the VA. (for example: VHA Directives versus DoD Instructions). Please keep in mind that this is a VA requirement.

3. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement, FAR 9. 104.2 states that special standards are justified when “unusual expertise or specialized facilities are needed for adequate contract performance”. What unusual expertise is required to ensure adequate contract performance for this solicitation and how is it different from the usual expertise required for adequate contract performance obtained in Military Treatment Facilities or otherwise? Please explain.

Answer: A justification is not needed nor required for the use of Special standards. The purpose of the Special standard is not to compare “unusual expertise” with “usual expertise” but rather to determine responsibility of an offeror’s experience in actually providing ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department.

4. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement, why must offerors provide “at least 3 years of prior experience in actually providing ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week”? What aspect of this experience requires a three-year duration that could not be achieved in one or two years, either as an offeror or as a subcontractor providing the services? Must this be a single three-year experience, or can multiple experiences as a prime be combined to produce a three-year duration?

Would the government consider changing the requirement to one year? Would the government consider removing three years as a requirement? Would the government consider changing the requirement to allow it to be satisfied with Military Treatment Facility experience as a prime?

Answer: The answer to the questions concerning experience is to determine if “a prospective contractor that is or recently has been seriously deficient in contract performance shall be presumed to be nonresponsible, unless the contracting officer determines that the circumstances were properly beyond the contractor’s control, or that the contractor has taken appropriate corrective action. Past failure to apply sufficient tenacity and perseverance to perform acceptably is strong evidence of nonresponsibility.” Therefore, it is reasonable to review three years of prior experience and it will not be removed or changed from the special standard. Finally, the special standard will not be changed.

5. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement: Why was this specialized standard not in the original RFP given the Government’s concern that this level of experience is critical?

Answer: First and foremost, a prospective contractor must affirmatively demonstrate its responsibility and “no purchase or award shall be made unless the contracting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. In the absence of information clearly indicating that the prospective contractor is responsible, the contracting officer shall make a determination of nonresponsibility.” (ref: FAR 9.103) Therefore, it is in the best interest of the offeror and the government to try to make an affirmative determination of responsibility for acquiring ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week.

6. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement: how might a contractor acquire the experience of actually providing ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week without having past performance in actually providing ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week? Please provide several examples of how this experience might be acquired without having past performance.

Answer: Please contact your local Procurement Technical Assistance Center (PTAC), SCORE.org counselors, or the Small Business Development Center (SBDC). The counseling is free and the counselors can provide firms with business strategies based on your question. To add, subcontracting with experienced firms is a viable option to gain experience.

7. Question: Regarding the Specialized Standard Prior Experience requirement: is the government more concerned about the administrative or clinical experience in actually providing ER Physician Services for the VA Emergency Department, 24-hours a day, 7-days a week? Please provide a detailed explanation, including why prior experience in a Military Treatment Facility as a prime would not satisfy this requirement.

Answer: The first question is an evaluation factor question that is answered during the evaluation of offers. Next, Military Treatment Facilities have a different mission, staffing requirements and regulations than the VA. This is a VA requirement.

8. Question: Regarding the submission of a document that is titled “Prior Experience”: why must the experience be related to a specific contract? Please provide examples of which types of contracts would apply. For example, if the principal physician that is the owner and primary provider of an offeror has a substantial military experience as a military doctor and emergency room physician, including combat-related medical experience as a veteran, why would this not satisfy the requirement?

Answer: The first answer is that there is no mention of providing a specific contract--the special standard is needed to make a responsibility determination. The second answer is that the Specialized Standard for Prior Experience applies to the firm submitting an offer, not the experience of individuals.

9. Question: Regarding the submission of a document that is titled “Prior Experience”: Why is an estimated annual dollar value of contract required and what dollar value minimum will be considered adequate? For example, if the principal physician that is the owner and primary provider of an offeror has a substantial military experience as a salaried military doctor and emergency room physician, including combat-related experience as a veteran, why would this not satisfy the requirement?

Answer: The first answer is one of the general standards of determining responsibility is that a prospective contractor must have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them; this information would support that determination. The second answer is that the Specialized Standard for Prior Experience applies to the firm submitting an offer, not the experience of individuals.

10. Question: Regarding the submission of a document that is titled “Prior Experience”: why is the offeror’s level of responsibility and authority on the project required and what minimum level of responsibility and authority will be considered adequate? Why is the word “project” used for this required information when “contract” is used for the required contract and annual dollar information? For example, if the principal physician that is the owner and primary provider of an offeror has a substantial military experience as a salaried military doctor and emergency room physician, including combat-related experience as a veteran, why would this not satisfy the requirement?

Answer: The first answer is one of the general standards for determining responsibility is that a prospective contractor must be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental business commitments. Providing this information aides in the determination. The second answer is that the Specialized Standard for Prior Experience applies to the firm submitting an offer, not the individual owner’s experience.

11. Question: Will the government consider cancelling the required submission of “Prior Experience” or modifying it to address the foregoing concerns? See AES UXO, LLC, B-419150 (Comp. Gen.), 2020 CPD P 395 (December 7, 2020).

Answer: No. AES UXO, LLC, B-419150 is a case pertaining to evaluations and not applicable to responsibility determinations. The special standard is used to determine responsibility.

12. Question: Will the government consider extending the due date for submission of "Prior Experience"?

Answer: No. The information requested for the specialized standard does lend itself for an extension of the submission of proposals.

(End of Amendment 0002)