Q and As for 36C25726R0014 NTX Wheelchair Transportation Services.pdf

Technical Questions – 36C25726R0014 – NTX Wheelchair Transportation Services

Q1. Given the vastness of the coverage area, we noted that the seven (7) SCA Wage Determination documents provided with solicitation documents do not cover all the counties as outlined in section 2.0 of the PWS. Counties without SCA Wage Determination as of this moment are:

• Collin, TX

• Cooke, TX

• Cottle, TX

• Dallas, TX

• Delta, TX

• Denton, TX

• Ellis, TX

• Erath, TX

• Fannin, TX

• Foard, TX

• Grayson, TX

• Gregg, TX

• Hardeman, TX

• Henderson, TX

• Hill, TX

• Hood, TX

• Hopkins, TX

• Hunt, TX

• Jack, TX

• Johnson, TX

• Kaufman, TX

• Lamar, TX

• Montague, TX

• Palo Pinto, TX

• Pittsburg, OK

• Rains, TX

• Rockwall, TX

• Rusk, TX

• Smith, TX

• Somervell, TX

• Stephens, TX

• Tarrant, TX

• Upshur, TX

• Van Zandt, TX

• Wise, TX

• Young, TX

Is it the government’s intent to provide more SCA Wage Determination documentation to cover these missing counties?

A1: There are 20 SCA Wage Determinations included in the RFP, not 7, and all the counties you listed were included within the 20 listed SCA Determinations. I would recommend reviewing section D of the RFP located on page 56.

If not, which Wage Determination should contractors use for planning purposes in these counties?

A1: The location(s) from where the awardee’s vehicles will be dispatched will determine the SCA Wage determination(s) that will be used for the contract.

Q2. Could the Government please provide historical data on the total number of trips per year?

A2:

Q3. Of this historical data, could the Government please provide a figure as to how many of these trips occurred on Saturdays and Sundays on average per week?

A3:

Q4. Within the historical trip data, could the government please provide how many trips occurred before 5:59 AM and after 6:00 pm CST on average per day?

A4:

Q5. PWS 4.5.1.1 states that “No more than one patient will be transported per order unless approved by an authorized VA staff.” On average, how often can contractors expect transports with more than one beneficiary being approved per year?

A5: This occurs often and must be approved by an authorized VA staff.

Q6. Section 2 of the PWS outlines 54 counties in the coverage area, spanning Texas and Oklahoma counties. Of these, we noted that the counties of Wilbarger, Clay, and Wood were not included in the service area even though they are surrounded by counties within the response area. Should contractors disregard these counties in preparation for the response?

A6: See updated PWS with all service counties.

Q7. Wage Determination number 2015-5145, pertaining to the county Bowie was attached by the Government as part of the solicitation packet. Is it the intent of the Government to include Bowie in the service area?

A7: Please refer to the counties listed on the PWS.

Q8. Given the solicitation’s requirement for 24/7 services across multiple states and extensive geographic coverage, please explain how a single-award structure ensures full and open competition and does not unduly favor an incumbent or uniquely positioned vendor.

A8: A SDVOSB is allowed to partner with other SDVOSBs or Small Businesses IAW VAAR 852.219-75 VA Notice of Limitations on Subcontracting to accomplish coverage for the extensive geographic area.

Q9. Please clarify how offerors are expected to price services where the Government explicitly excludes compensation for required positioning (deadhead mileage), while simultaneously imposing strict response-time requirements.

A9: All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the rate pricing.

Q10. Given that quantities are stated as ‘estimates’ while services are ordered on an ‘as-needed’ basis, please confirm whether these estimates are reliable for pricing purposes or whether they should be considered non-binding.

A10: Since exact trip quantities are unknown, an Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity contract will be used, allowing a quick response to changing requirements.

Q11. How were the minimum ($5K) and maximum ($100M) values derived, and what historical utilization supports these figures?

A11: The only guarantee is the minimum. The quantities on the RFP are based on historical data.

Q12. Are the estimated quantities in Section B.2 based on historical usage data, and can that data be provided?

A12: The estimated quantities are based on historical data.

Q13. Will actual ordering be reasonably consistent with these estimates?

A13: The estimated quantities are based on historical data.

Q14. Do these estimates include ANY OTHER type of beneficiary transports that are not considered single-person wheelchair transport, such as BLS Ambulance or multiple beneficiary transports by a multi-passenger Van?

A14: The only transports that will be covered by the contract are Non-Emergent Wheelchair transports.

Q15. Are quantities evenly distributed across ordering periods, or is ramp-up expected?

A15: We can’t foresee how many transports will be needed per ordering period;

this is why we are awarding an Indefinite Delivery Contract. The estimated quantities are evenly distributed across ordering periods (based on historical information).

Q16. Given that reimbursement applies only when a Veteran is onboard, how should contractors account for deadhead mileage required to meet response times?

A16: All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the rate pricing.

17. Will the Government consider zonal pricing or geographic differentials due to the wide service area?

A17: No, the Government will not consider zonal pricing or geographic differentials at this time.

Q18. Please clarify how the Government will apply AQL performance metrics where delays are attributable to factors beyond contractor control, to ensure evaluations are consistent with FAR 15.305 and do not impose disproportionate risk.

A18: See PWS, paragraph 4.5.1.7.3. * The contractor shall not be held liable for nonperformance caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of the contractor and without its fault or negligence, such as acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the Government in its sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, and unusually severe weather.

The contractor MUST notify the VA with as much advance notice as possible should any of these occur.

Q19. What dispute resolution process exists if Bing Maps mileage differs from actual route mileage due to safety, traffic, mandatory detours, or road conditions” Particularly given the vast differences between Apple, Google, and Bing Mapping API’s.

A19: The Government uses Bing Maps to determine route mileage.

Q20. In the event of VetRide system failure, will the Government (a) toll or waive the 30-day submission deadline, and/or; (b) accept alternative documentation without penalty?

A20:

Q21. Is there any documented system uptime data or Service-Level Standards defined for VetRide?

A21: No. there is no publicly documented uptime data or service level standards published for VetRide.

Q22. The solicitation requires 30-minute dispatch times and 97% on-time performance within 15 minutes. How will the Government evaluate performance where delays are caused by (a) rural distance variance that is uncommon against the bulk of urban-setting transports; (b) access delays due to unforeseen traffic patterns, construction, and detours; (c) access delays for unforeseen weather conditions that impact access/egress and/or beneficiary safety (i.e., force majeure)?

A22:

Q23. Will exceptions to the 97% AQL standard be formally documented?

A23: Yes.

Q24. What is the required process for obtaining VA approval for extended wait time billing?

A24:

. This information will be communicated to the awardee during the post-award meeting.

Q25. What documentation is required to validate no-show reimbursement claims?

A25:

Q26. Does the Government require pre-approval of subcontractors, and if so, what criteria apply?

A26: The Government does not require pre-approval of subcontractors, but subcontracting must comply with VAAR 852.219-75 VA Notice of Limitations on Subcontracting.

Q27. Can subcontractor rates exceed prime contract rates, or must all billing align strictly with contract pricing?

A27: All billing will align strictly with contract pricing.

Q28. The PWS states drivers must be capable of administering oxygen and providing first aid. Please clarify whether these requirements fall within non-emergent transport scope and whether EMS-level licensure is required. If not required, please outline the specific first aid training criteria for drivers.

A28:

Q29. Please clarify if the oxygen administration requirement comes with a requirement for the awardee to specifically source and carry oxygen? If so, is the contractor expected to also carry delivery supplies such as non-rebreathers and nasal cannulas?

A29:

Q30. Is the oxygen administration requirement merely an assist feature requirement for drivers to be able to assist patients in the administration and placement of oxygen who have already been prescribed continuous oxygen?

A30: Yes.

Q31. The solicitation states that a fuel adjustment clause is being considered. When will the Government finalize whether VAAR 852.216-75 (Fuel Surcharge) will be included?

A31: Clause is being added during this amendment.

Will offerors have an opportunity to revise pricing?

A31: Yes, if proposals were submitted prior to this amendment up until the proposal due date on block 8.

Q32. The solicitation states that a 30-day phase-in begins after the protest period. What level of incumbent transition support will be provided during the 30-day phase-in?

A32: The incumbent will be providing support during the phase-in period for the awardee.

Q33. During the awarded period, will trip volume be ramped or immediately full-scale at start?

A33: The expectation is that the awardee will be able to perform at full scale after the 30-day phase-in period.

Q34. Please provide the complete general liability insurance requirements (limits, endorsements, additional insureds).

A34: Please refer to VAAR Clause 852.237-7 indemnification and medical liability insurance and 852.228-71 indemnification and insurance.

Q35. Does the Government require professional liability or only auto/general liability? If required, please provide the complete professional liability insurance requirements (limits, endorsements, additional insureds).

A35: Please refer to VAAR Clause 852.237-7 Indemnification and Medical Liability Insurance and VAAR 852.228-71 Indemnification and Insurance.

Q36. Could you provide the last 2 historical awards on this contract?

A36: There has only been 1 historical award for this requirement. The incumbent is Bradsher, James E and the contract numbers are 36C25722D0047, 36C25722D0048, 36C25722D0049, and 36C25722D0050 (four contracts prior to the consolidation).

Q37. Will the Government provide a detailed listing of historical trip volume including origin, destination, pickup time, and dropoff time for the past 24 months? VA facility names or street addresses would be great, but zip codes for patient residences are sufficient. Knowing the days, times, and locations for peak demand will allow for quotes that provide maximum value and efficiency.

A37:

Q38. What is the average daily number of "Add-on" trips (not scheduled in advance) currently requested?

A38: Estimated an average of 7 per day.

Q39. What is the historical "No-Show" rate for veterans in the North Texas catchment area?

A39: Data was not tracked previously, but will be tracked in the future using VetRide.

Q40. In the event of VetRide system downtime, what is the expected turnaround time for the "reconciliation" process mentioned in PWS 4.5.1.1.2 (pg 13)?

A40: No later than the next business day by the close of business.

Q41. Does the VA provide a dedicated IT point of contact for VetRide vendor portal issues in the North Texas region?

A41: The NTX COR will be the POC for all VetRide vendor portal issues.

Q42. Does the VA anticipate a need for bariatric stretchers or specialized "extra-wide" wheelchairs for the bariatric transport line items (e.g., 1002, 2002)?

A42:

If so, are these provided by the VA or must they be part of the contractor’s standard equipment?

A42: Veterans will have their own wheelchair; however, there may be a need for the contractor to provide one occasionally (in this scenario, which is not often, the contractor will know ahead of time before dispatching a driver).

Q43. Can VA provide identified historical trip-level data for the last 12–24 months including pickup ZIP/city, destination facility, pickup datetime, trip type (wheelchair/ambulatory/bariatric), mobility device type, loaded miles, wait time, cancellations, no-shows, and after-hours flags?

A43:

Q44. What is the average number of trips per day and per week, broken out by weekdays, Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays?

A44:

Q45. Can VA provide hour-by-hour pickup demand by day of week (e.g., 1-hour bins)?

A45:

Q46. Can VA provide hour-by-hour return-trip demand following appointments?

A46:

Q47. Are there seasonal or monthly fluctuations in trip demand, and what factors typically drive them?

A47:

Q48. What is the average and median loaded trip distance, and can VA provide a distance distribution (e.g., 0–5, 6–10, 11–25, 26–50, 51+ miles)?

A48:

Q49. What percentage of trips exceed 25 loaded miles, by facility or region?

A49:

Q50. What is the percentage breakdown of trips by type: standard wheelchair, bariatric wheelchair, ambulatory, and other?

A50:

Q51. What is the breakdown of trips by mobility device type (manual wheelchair, power wheelchair, scooter, walker, none)?

A51:

Q52. For bariatric trips, what is the average daily volume and typical time-of-day demand?

A52:

Q53. What are the top origin ZIP codes and destination VA facilities by trip volume?

A53:

Q54. Can VA provide common origin-destination corridors or aggregated heat-map style summaries?

A54:

Q55. What are the peak pickup hours and peak return hours on weekdays versus weekends?

A55:

Q56. What is the historical volume of same-day or add-on trip requests by hour and day?

A56:

Q57. What is the historical no-show rate and late-cancellation rate, and how are they defined?

A57: Data was not tracked.

Q58. What percentage of trips include authorized escorts or attendants?

A58:

Q59. Are shared rides ever permitted under this contract, and if so, under what constraints?

A59: The contractor’s van should not transport more than 2 patients at a time.

Q60. What performance metrics does VA track most closely (on-time pickup, missed trips, complaints), and what are historical averages?

A60:

Q61. Can VA confirm the authoritative mileage calculation methodology used for payment determination?

A61: Bing Maps.

Q62. Is reimbursement based solely on loaded miles with the Veteran onboard, with no deadhead reimbursement?

A62: Reimbursement will be based solely on loaded miles with the Veteran onboard. All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the pricing.

Q63. How is wait time authorized, documented, and billed beyond any included allowance?

A63:

Q64. Are multi-stop trips (e.g., lab, pharmacy, imaging) common, and how should they be billed?

A64: There will be a transport entered in Vetride for each stop.

Q65. What documentation is required to bill for late cancellations or no-shows after dispatch?

A65:

Q66. What is the expected invoice review and payment cycle (Net 30/45/60)?

A66:

Q67. Does VA conduct ride audits or documentation audits during performance?

A67: Yes, ride audits will be conducted during performance of the contract.

Q68. What driver training and certification requirements apply beyond state minimums?

A68: See PWS, paragraph 4.3 Contractor Personnel.

Q69. What is the expected award-to-go-live timeline, and is phased rollout allowed?

A69: A 30-day phase-in period will start once the protest period ends, and no phased rollout period is planned.

Q70. Does VA anticipate significant volume or policy changes during the contract term?

A70: VA does not anticipate significant volume or policy changes during the contract term.

Q71. Will the VA accept a Proprietary Dispatch system that can receive and submit completed trip data to VetRides?

A71: The VA is only utilizing VetRide for scheduling and invoicing.

Q72. We would like to know if this contract has been previously awarded?

A72: Yes.

If so, who is the incumbent and what is the contract number?

A72: The incumbent is Bradsher, James E, and the contract numbers are 36C25722D0047, 36C25722D0048, 36C25722D0049, and 36C25722D0050. There were four contracts prior to the consolidation being approved into one contract.

Q73. Please confirm whether a Transportation for Hire license and applicable permits for each vehicle are required at the time of initial proposal submission. As discussed in the pre-solicitation conference, this license/permit is necessary to legally perform the services contemplated under the solicitation and requires the permit for every vehicle being operated and every driver operating under the contract.

A73: The Transportation for Hire license will not be required at the time of initial proposal submission, but will be required during the 30-day phase-in period.

Q74. Reference: Volume III – Past Performance, Page 63, and Factor 2, Page 65.

The RFP requires past performance "commensurate with the scope of services required by the PWS," and the PWS reflects approximately 95,585 trips per year at steady state.

Will the Government establish a minimum annual trip volume, vehicles operated, etc (e.g., as a percentage of the PWS magnitude) below which a reference will be considered not relevant?

A74: The Government will not establish a minimum and relevance of successful performance in providing Wheelchair Transportation Services commensurate with similar scope of the services required by PWS.

If so, what is that threshold?

A74: The Government will not establish a minimum and relevance of successful performance in providing Wheelchair Transportation Services commensurate with similar scope of the services required by PWS.

Q75. Reference: Volume III – Past Performance, Page 63.

The IDIQ ceiling is $100,000,000 with a $19M NAICS 485991 size standard. Will the Government establish a minimum total contract value for a reference to be deemed relevant, and will references materially below that threshold be rated lower on Relevancy?

A75: No, the Government will not establish a minimum total contract value for a reference to be deemed relevant.

Q76. Reference: Factor 2, Page 65.

The RFP states that an offeror without relevant past performance "may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably." Please clarify: if an offeror's submitted references are determined to be not relevant (e.g., insufficient scope or volume), will the offeror receive a neutral rating, or may the Government determine the offeror has failed to demonstrate the experience necessary for successful performance and remove them from the competitive range?

A76: Once an offeror is determined to be technically capable of performing tasks listed in PWS, the offeror will be considered for the next step of the evaluation process. IAW RFO 15.202(c)(1), an offeror without a record of relevant past performance may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably; thus, they will receive a Neutral rating.

Q77. Reference: Volume III – Past Performance, Page 63, and Factor 2 – Past Performance, Page 65.

The RFP states that "a joint venture will be assessed on the combined performance of each or as a team of the joint venture offerors." Please clarify and confirm the following, consistent with SBA regulations governing joint venture offerors:

For a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) Mentor-Protégé joint venture formed pursuant to 13 CFR § 128.402 and an approved SBA Mentor- Protégé Agreement, the Government will consider the past performance of (i) the managing venturer (protégé), (ii) the mentor partner (including where the mentor is an other-than-small business), and (iii) the joint venture entity itself, consistent with 13 CFR § 128.402(e). No partner's past performance will be discounted or disregarded solely because that partner is the mentor, the protégé, or because the joint venture entity is newly formed for the purposes of this acquisition.

A77: Yes, the Government will consider the past performance of all parties involved in a joint venture.

Q78. Reference: PWS Para 4.3.1.2 (p. 9), Para 4.4.1 (p. 10), Para 13.1 (p. 23);

Attachment B Technical Factor (a) – Phase-In Transition Plan.

The PWS requires the contractor to comply with applicable federal, state, and local licensing (including Driver and Transportation-for-Hire), vehicle registration, commercial auto and medical liability insurance, and driver background/fingerprinting requirements prior to the August 3, 2026 start of performance. Please confirm that:

(a) Offerors will be deemed eligible and technically capable provided that all required licenses, permits, registrations, and insurance coverages are obtained and in full effect prior to the start of the Period of Performance (August 3, 2026), rather than requiring that all such credentials be in place at the time of proposal submission.

A78: Yes, offerors will be deemed eligible and technically capable provided that all required licenses, permits, registrations, and insurance coverages are obtained and in full effect prior to the August 3, 2026, start of performance. IAW RFP Instructions, the contractor will provide a phase-in transition plan detailing the actions to be taken to prepare to start services on time.

(b) Offerors relying on the 30-day phase-in period to finalize any licensure, permitting, insurance, or registration element will be required to submit, as part of their Attachment B Technical Factor (a) Phase-In Transition Plan, a structured and detailed acquisition plan demonstrating feasibility within the 30-day phase-in window, including at a minimum:

(i) An itemized list of all required licenses, permits, registrations, and insurance policies, with the issuing authority for each;

(ii) The current status of each item (already held, pending, or to be obtained);

(iii) The specific application pathway and processing timeline for each pending item, supported by publicly available processing times from the issuing authority;

(iv) The internal responsible party and milestone dates within the 30-day phase-in period for each item;

(v) Contingency plans if a license, permit, or insurance policy is delayed beyond the planned milestone.

A78: Yes, this is correct.

(c) Offerors who propose to obtain required licensure or insurance during the phase-in period but who fail to provide a structured, detailed, and verifiable acquisition plan as described above will be treated as not demonstrating the technical capability to begin performance on August 3, 2026, and may receive a No-Go determination under Factor 1.

A78: Yes, this is correct. IAW RFP Instructions, the contractor will provide a phase-in transition plan detailing the actions to be taken to prepare to start services on time.

Q79. Reference: PWS Para 13.1 – Medical Liabilities Insurance (p. 23); PWS Para

4.9.4 – Invoicing The Government's clarification on this topic is requested because municipal Transportation-for-Hire permitting is the principal local-law licensure regime applicable to VA-paid wheelchair transport under this solicitation. Other state-level NEMT licensure regimes (such as Texas DSHS or Oklahoma OSDH NEMT provider registration, and Texas or Oklahoma Medicaid NEMT broker enrollment) are understood by the offeror community to apply to Medicaid- or Medicare-billed transport, which PWS Para 4.9.4 (p.

17) expressly prohibits under this contract. Thus, we believe that this is an unnecessary requirement.

A79: IAW PWS paragraph 13.1 Medical Liabilities Insurance, the contractor shall carry required insurance (See VAAR Clause 852.237-7 Indemnification and Medical Liability Insurance) and vehicle insurance IAW the Texas Department of State Health Services and Oklahoma Department of State Health Services.

Q80. Reference: PWS Para 4.4 Contractor Equipment, Vehicles, and Inspection (pp.

10–11); PWS Para 4.5.1.5 (p. 14); Attachment B Technical Factor (b) – Proposed Fleet Breakdown; Price Schedule Line Items 1001–5002 (pp. 5–7); and PWS Section 2 Background (p. 8).

The PWS requires the contractor to provide all vehicles necessary to perform approximately 95,585 wheelchair transport trips per year at steady state, including both standard (≤300 lb) and bariatric (>300 lb) capacity, across 44 Texas counties and 6 Oklahoma counties on a 24/7/365 basis. Given the magnitude of the requirement and the 30-day phase-in window, please clarify and confirm:

(a) To protect the Government from aspirational or unsupported fleet claims, will the Government require each offeror to provide, as part of the Attachment B Technical Factor (b) Fleet Breakdown, documentary evidence substantiating the proposed fleet, such as the following for each vehicle in the proposed fleet:

A80: Each offeror will have to provide a phase-in transition plan describing the actions that will be taken to get ready to start services on time and a Proposed Fleet Breakdown, including Staffing Plan and Dispatch Procedures IAW PWS paragraphs 4.4 & 4.5.

(b) Will the Government treat as non-responsive or No-Go under Factor 1 any offeror who (i) proposes a fleet size or composition without documentary support as described in subpart (d) above, (ii) relies on unsourced "to be procured" vehicles without binding commitments, or (iii) proposes fleet capacity demonstrably inconsistent with the number of vehicles the offeror can document at proposal submission?

A80: Each offeror will have to provide a phase-in transition plan describing the actions that will be taken to get ready to start services on time and a Proposed Fleet Breakdown, including Staffing Plan and Dispatch Procedures IAW PWS paragraphs 4.4 & 4.5.

(c) Given the significant capital cost of acquiring a wheelchair-accessible vehicle fleet sized for ~95,585 annual trips within a 30-day phase-in window, will the Government require offerors who propose to expand their fleet during phase-in to provide evidence of financial capacity to complete that procurement, such as:

(i) An audited or reviewed financial statement demonstrating working capital sufficient to fund the phase-in procurement;

(ii) A letter of credit, line of credit, or financing commitment from a FDIC financial institution for the amount of the planned fleet expansion;

(iii) Evidence of existing manufacturer/dealer relationships and allocation of vehicle slots supporting the procurement timeline;

(iv) A performance bond or fleet procurement bond protecting the Government in the event of phase-in failure?

A80: Each offeror will have to provide a phase-in transition plan describing the actions that will be taken to get ready to start services on time and a Proposed Fleet Breakdown, including Staffing Plan and Dispatch Procedures IAW PWS paragraphs 4.4 & 4.5.

(d) Will the Government consider any company who is operating less than 100 owned vehicles, non-responsive?

A80: Each offeror will have to provide a phase-in transition plan describing the actions that will be taken to get ready to start services on time and a Proposed Fleet Breakdown, including Staffing Plan and Dispatch Procedures IAW PWS paragraphs 4.4 & 4.5.

Q81. Reference: PWS Para 4.5.1.1 (p. 12) and Attachment B Technical Factor (b).

The PWS requires "dedicated staff available to monitor this portal 24/7." Will offerors be required to identify in the Staffing Plan the specific number of dispatch personnel, their schedules, and their credentials/experience with medical transportation dispatch platforms (VetRide), and will the absence of experienced dispatch staff be factored into the Go/No-Go determination?

A81: Each offeror will have to provide a phase-in transition plan describing the actions that will be taken to get ready to start services on time and a Proposed Fleet Breakdown, including Staffing Plan and Dispatch Procedures IAW PWS paragraphs 4.4 & 4.5.

(a) Will the Government treat demonstrated prior experience operating the VetRide Vendor Portal (including receiving electronic trip requests and resolving invoice disputes) as a mandatory threshold requirement for Factor 1 Technical Capability, on the basis that the 30-day phase-in window and the >90,000 annual trip volume do not permit a learning curve on VetRide proficiency without significant risk to veteran access to care and Government financial integrity?

A81: The Government is not requiring the vendors to already have VetRide experience, as this training will be part of the 30-day phase-in period.

(b) Will offerors who cannot document prior operational VetRide experience by named dispatch and invoicing personnel assigned to this contract be rated No-Go under Factor 1, on the basis that post-award VetRide training (as contemplated by PWS Para 4.9.4) is insufficient to mitigate the operational and financial risk of VetRide-naive dispatch and invoicing at this contract's scale and phase-in window?

A81: The Government is not requiring the vendors to already have VetRide experience, as this training will be part of the 30-day phase-in period.

(c) Due to the large scale of this contract, we believe that the VA should make VetRide experience mandatory. Specifically in contractual invoicing, because of The VA Office of Inspector General’s finding that the predecessor wheelchair transportation contractor at the VA North Texas Health Care System resulted in approximately $3.7 million in improper payments. Will the VA consider this a mandatory requirement? The size and scope of this contract, matched with the phase-in timeline will not allow for the contractor to become acquainted with the VetRide system, potentially resulting in future invoice issues.

A81: The Government is not requiring the vendors to already have VetRide experience, as this training will be part of the 30-day phase-in period.

Q82. Reference: VAAR 852.219-75 (pages 52–53), PWS Para 4.5.1.5 (p. 14), Factor 1

– Technical Capability (p. 64), and 13 CFR § 125.6.

The RFP incorporates the Limitations on Subcontracting certification requiring the SDVOSB prime to perform at least 50% of the services with its own workforce or with similarly situated SDVOSB/VOSB subcontractors. Please clarify:

(a) Will offerors be required to submit a formal subcontracting plan or utilization plan with their proposal identifying (i) the specific scope of work proposed to be subcontracted, (ii) the identity of each proposed subcontractor, (iii) the percentage of total contract value to be paid to each subcontractor, and (iv) whether each subcontractor is a certified SDVOSB or VOSB listed in the SBA certification database as "similarly situated" under 13 CFR § 125.6?

A82: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements. This is also part of the instructions to offerors.

(b) Will an offeror be determined non-responsive, non-compliant, or ineligible for the competitive range under any of the following circumstances:

(i) Ostensible subcontractor affiliation: The offeror's proposed operations demonstrate unusual reliance on a subcontractor — or that a subcontractor will perform the primary and vital requirements of the contract (including but not limited to wheelchair van transportation operations, fleet provision, driver employment, 24/7 dispatch, and VetRide portal monitoring) — such that the offeror and the subcontractor would be deemed affiliated under 13 CFR § 121.103(h)(3) (as applied to SDVOSB set-asides under 13 CFR § 128.401(g)), regardless of whether the subcontracted percentage is under 50%?

A82: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating that the offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements. This is also part of the instructions to offerors.

(ii) For purposes of this acquisition, please identify which PWS functions the Government considers the "primary and vital" requirements that must be self-performed by the SDVOSB prime (or by a similarly situated SDVOSB subcontractor under 13 CFR

§ 125.6). Specifically, please confirm whether the following are considered primary and vital: (i) wheelchair van transportation operations (the actual transport of veterans); (ii) fleet ownership, leasing, and maintenance; (iii) driver employment, training, and supervision; (iv) 24/7 dispatch and VetRide portal monitoring; (v) contract management, COR interface, and invoicing; (vi) Quality Control Plan execution and oversight.

(iii) Substantive dependence on non-similarly-situated firm: The offeror's proposal demonstrates substantive operational and financial dependence on a non-similarly-situated firm for performance of the PWS — for example, where the offeror does not independently possess (whether through direct ownership, direct employment, or similarly situated SDVOSB/VOSB subcontractor arrangements) the fleet, drivers, dispatch, management, or financial capacity necessary to perform the contract — such that the offeror cannot demonstrate the independent capability to perform the contract as the prime contractor under FAR 9.104-3(d)?

A82: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating that the offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements. This is also part of the instructions to offerors.

Q83. Reference: Volume III – Past Performance, Page 63, and Factor 2 – Past Performance, Page 65.

In the non-emergent medical transportation industry, some prime contractors historically perform their contracts primarily by subcontracting transportation services to other operators (commonly referred to as a "broker" or "pass-through" model), rather than performing the work with their own fleet, drivers, and dispatch. Please clarify:

(a) For each submitted past performance reference, will offerors be required to disclose the percentage of contract work that was self-performed (i.e., performed by the offeror's own employees and owned/leased fleet) versus subcontracted to third-party transportation providers?

A83: Yes, the Government will consider the past performance of all parties involved in a joint venture. In addition to the certification required by VAAR Clause 852.219-75.

(b) Will the Government evaluate as less relevant past performance references in which the offeror acted primarily as a broker or pass-through entity — for example, where 50% or more of the trips under the reference contract were performed by subcontractors rather than by the offeror's own drivers and vehicles?

A83: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements.

(c) Given that the PWS and VAAR 852.219-75 require the awardee to self-perform at least 50% of the contract (or through similarly situated SDVOSB subcontractors), will the Government treat past performance references in which the offeror did not self-perform at least 50% of the referenced contract as not demonstrating the offeror's own capability to meet the self-performance requirements of this solicitation?

A83: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements.

(d) Will offerors be required to identify, for each past performance reference, the specific number of vehicles directly owned or leased by the offeror and the number of drivers directly employed by the offeror during the reference period, to support the Relevancy determination?

A83: The VAAR Clause 852.219-75 must be certified by all offerors, stating that the offeror will comply with the limitations of subcontracting requirements.

Q84. Reference: Factor 1 – Technical Capability (p. 64); Factor 2 – Past Performance

(p. 65); and Evaluation Approach (p. 66).

The RFP states that Technical Capability will be evaluated as a "Go or No-Go" and that the best-value tradeoff will be conducted between Past Performance and Price only.

Please clarify:

(a) Given that Technical Capability is evaluated on a Go/No-Go basis, will proposals that materially exceed the PWS minimum technical requirements (for example, larger fleet capacity, enhanced driver qualifications beyond First Aid/CPR, faster response times than PWS Para 4.5.1.7, additional redundant dispatch capability, or other technical enhancements) receive any evaluation credit in the best-value tradeoff decision?

A84: Technical Capability will be evaluated as a "Go or No-Go," and the best-value tradeoff will be conducted between Past Performance and Price only.

(b) If technical excellence beyond the PWS minimum does not factor into the best-value tradeoff, please confirm that the tradeoff decision will be based solely on Past Performance (more important) and Price, and that offerors should not invest proposal effort in technical enhancements beyond the PWS minimum.

A84: Technical Capability will be evaluated as a "Go or No-Go," and the best-value tradeoff will be conducted between Past Performance and Price only.

(c) If technical excellence does factor into the best-value tradeoff, please identify the specific technical areas or discriminators the Government considers high-value, so that offerors may address them directly in Volume II.

A84: Technical Capability will be evaluated as a "Go or No-Go," and the best-value tradeoff will be conducted between Past Performance and Price only.

(d) Will the Government evaluate as less relevant or non-relevant any past performance reference in which the offeror cannot document that it directly performed the majority of the transportation, dispatch, and invoicing functions through directly-owned fleet and directly-employed personnel, on the basis that such references do not demonstrate the offeror's independent capability to self-perform the PWS requirements under this solicitation?

A84: The Government will consider the past performance of all parties involved in a joint venture. In addition to the certification required by VAAR Clause 852.219- 75.

Q85. The PWS requires 24/7 availability, continuous VetRide monitoring, and defined response times. Please clarify whether contractor personnel assigned to meet these requirements are considered “engaged to wait” under Service Contract Labor Standards, and therefore must be compensated at SCA wage rates during periods of required availability, regardless of whether a transport is actively being performed.

A85: All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the rate pricing.

Q86. If not, provide the specific legal or regulatory basis supporting that determination.

A86: All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the rate pricing.

Q87. How will the Government ensure a fair and equal evaluation of offerors where some may include SCA-compliant labor costs for required availability and readiness, while others may not?

A87: This contract is subject to SCA compliance labor.

Q88. Will SCA compliance be evaluated as part of responsibility determination or contract administration, and what specific mechanisms will be used to enforce compliance across all contractors?

A88: This contract is subject to SCA compliance labor.

Q89. The price schedule states that payment will only be made when a Veteran is being transported. Please confirm that no reimbursement will be made for driver repositioning, staging, or deadhead mileage, and that all such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the base rate pricing.

A89: All such costs are expected to be fully absorbed within the rate pricing.

Q90. Given that the base rate includes the first 25 miles, please provide the historical average trip distance and the percentage of trips that exceed 25 miles, based on the most recent 12 months of actual data.

A90:

Q91. Please confirm whether the Year 1 reduced estimated quantities reflect actual anticipated demand or a phased ramp-up assumption. If phased, provide the expected monthly trip volume for the first 6 months of performance.

A91:

Q92. The PWS places responsibility on the contractor to manage pick-up timing and ensure timely arrival for appointments. Please clarify how delays caused by VA facilities, clinical staff, or appointment overruns will be accounted for in performance metrics and whether such delays will be excluded from Acceptable Quality Level calculations.

A92: See PWS, paragraph 4.5.1.7.3. * The contractor shall not be held liable for nonperformance caused by an occurrence beyond the reasonable control of the contractor and without its fault or negligence such as, acts of God or the public enemy, acts of the Government in its sovereign or contractual capacity, fires, floods, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, and unusually severe weather.

The contractor MUST notify the VA with as much advance notice as possible should any of these occur.

Q93. Please confirm whether the requirement that Veterans should not wait more than one hour after appointments for return transport is a performance standard subject to AQL measurement, and if so, how this metric will be tracked and enforced.

A93

Q94. Under Section 4.5.1.5, the Government reserves the right to re-procure services and charge excess costs. Please define the specific performance thresholds or conditions that will trigger re-procurement and how excess costs will be calculated and validated.

A94: This question refers to a post-award action referencing non-compliance of the contract. Such are considered contract administrative actions and the procedures in the RFO will be followed for such scenarios.

Q95. Please confirm whether VetRide will technically restrict transportation requests to authorized ordering personnel only, or whether the contractor is responsible for validating authorization prior to accepting and performing each order.

A95: Only authorized personnel have access to enter trips in Vetride.

Q96. In cases where transportation requests are placed outside of VetRide due to system downtime, please clarify how authorization, documentation, and payment reconciliation will be verified to ensure timely payment.

A96:

Q97. Please clarify whether waiting time beyond the initial 30 minutes requires prior VA approval before it can be invoiced, and how such approval will be documented within VetRide or other systems.

A97:

Q98. For no-show transports, please confirm whether waiting time incurred after arrival but prior to cancellation is compensable, or if reimbursement is strictly limited to base rate plus mileage to the pickup point.

A98:

Q99. Given the limitations on subcontracting requirements, please clarify how compliance will be measured for this IDIQ, specifically whether it will be evaluated on a per-order basis, cumulative basis, or another defined period.

A99: The limitations on subcontracting is required for the whole duration of the contract and will be evaluated annually.

(END OF Q&As)