Vendor Questions and Answers.pdf

Vendor Questions and Answers

1. Quantities: Section B.2 lists quantities of 15 pre-employment, 40 periodic / annual, and 5 directed / special fitness-for-duty evaluations for each period of performance.

Please confirm whether these are estimated quantities or guaranteed minimums, and whether the Government intends to order on a requirements or indefinite-quantity basis.

A: The quantities are estimates, not guarantees. The final contract will be an Indefinite-quantity / Indefinite-delivery type contract in which actual quantities will change throughout the life of the contract.

2. Historical volume: Please provide the number of evaluations completed by type (pre-employment, periodic / annual, directed / special FFD) for each of the most recent three years, and the contract number of the current or most recent contract for these services.

A: Services are currently provided under contract number 36C26321P0967. The following are the number evaluations for the previous 3 years:

Year Pre-employment Annual Special FFD 9/1/2023 – 8/31/2024 6 34 N/A* 9/1/2024 – 8/31/2025 9 27 N/A* 9/1/2025 – 8/31/2026 3 34 N/A*

*Directed/special FFD evaluations were not a separately priced category under the current contract; any such evaluations performed were billed as initial screenings.

Figures are provided for planning purposes only and do not guarantee future workload.

3. Records Retention and Disposition: SOW Section 6 requires the Contractor to maintain psychological evaluations, testing, handwritten notes, and related mental-health evaluation records for seven (7) years in accordance with the VHA Directive 0730 records-management memorandum and applicable records schedules.

Business Associate Agreement paragraph 3.M requires return or destruction of all PHI and other VA data upon completion or termination of the contract. Records Management Obligations paragraph C.4 (Section D attachment) states that records may not be destroyed except in accordance with agency records schedules and with the written concurrence of the Head of the Contracting Activity. Please clarify which provision governs retention and disposition of these records following contract completion, and provide a copy of the referenced VHA Directive 0730 records-management memorandum.

A: After contract completion, the BAA return /destruction requirements would apply when the contract is terminated. Any records under 7 years would be returned to the VA/Government, unless it’s not possible and then the company must retain the records following the BAA until they meet the retention schedule. See attached for a copy of VHA Directive 0730(1) for information regarding records management.

4. Governing directive: SOW Section 1 references VHA Directive 0730(1), Psychological Evaluations of VA Police Officers, as amended February 5, 2021 (or latest version available). Please confirm the version that will govern performance and whether a revision is anticipated during the period of performance.

A: VHA Directive 0730(1) as amended February 5, 2021 is the latest version of this directive and will govern performance in conjunction with any resulting contract from this solicitation. It is unknown if this directive will be revised during the period of performance.

5. Report transmission: SOW Section 5.2 permits transmission of the Police Officer Recommendation Report by secure email or fax using Government-approved procedures. Please identify the approved procedures or standards for transmitting reports to the designated MVAHCS Employee Occupational Health provider.

A: Approved methods to send reports to the would be encrypted email to the designated email address or by fax number.

6. Invoicing: Section B.1 provides for invoices submitted monthly in arrears, and SOW Section 8.2 provides for invoices upon completion and acceptance of evaluation services. Please confirm that a single monthly invoice covering all evaluations completed and accepted during that month satisfies both provisions.

A: Yes, one monthly invoice will satisfy both provisions.

7. Evaluator Licensure for Telehealth: SOW Section 4.1 states that licenses may be held in any state the evaluator is located, and that a Minnesota license is required for services performed on-site at MVAHCS. For evaluations performed remotely, please confirm whether an evaluator authorized to practice telepsychology under the Psychology Interjurisdictional Compact (PSYPACT, Minn. Stat. § 148.9051) satisfies the licensure requirement of Section 4.1. Please also confirm whether the Contractor remains responsible for compliance with the licensure requirements of the jurisdiction in which the evaluated individual is located at the time of the evaluation.

A: Evaluators must hold a current, valid professional license and be legally authorized to perform the psychological evaluation services required by the contract. For remote evaluations involving individuals physically located in Minnesota, psychologists may satisfy applicable interstate-practice authorization requirements through a Minnesota psychology license or valid authorization to practice interjurisdictional telepsychology under PSYPACT, provided all applicable conditions are met.

The Contractor is responsible for ensuring that each evaluator complies with the professional licensure and practice requirements applicable to the services performed, including the requirements of the jurisdiction in which the evaluated individual is physically located throughout the life of the contract. PSYPACT authorization applies to eligible psychologists and does not independently authorize psychiatric medical practice.

The SOW has been adjusted to reflect this requirement. Additionally, the Addendum to Far 52.212-1: Instructions To Offerors—Commercial Items has been adjusted to require offerors to provide copies of the evaluator(s) active license as a psychologist or psychiatrist within the state of Minnesota and/or valid authorization to practice interjurisdictional telepsychology under PSYPACT.

Supporting authority: Minnesota Statutes § 148.9051, which recognizes interjurisdictional telepsychology under PSYPACT.

8. Incumbent and prior contract context: Is there a current or recent incumbent providing this level of effort (LOE)? If so, can you please provide the incumbent name, contract award number and contract award value?

A: Services are currently being provided by Modern Psychologist Network LLC under contract number 36C26321P0967 with a total contract award value of $126,250.00.

• If there's an Incumbent, what scope changes have been made from the old contract to the new contract?

A: The requirement has been updated from the predecessor contract to align with VHA Directive 0730(1). Refer to the SOW for the complete requirements.

Changes include:

(1) directed/special Fitness-for-Duty evaluations are now a separately identified evaluation type;

(2) evaluator qualifications follow VHA Directive 0730(1) rather than the predecessor contract's doctoral and five-year experience language;

(3) required psychological testing follows the Directive rather than named instruments;

(4) telehealth is expressly permitted and the 30-mile off-site restriction has been removed; and

(5) estimated quantities have been updated.

9. IGCE Range: Does the government have an IGCE range it can share, or provide historical pricing from prior similar work at this location?

A: IGCE information is For Official Use Only and cannot be shared.

10. In the Solicitation, Section E.1, Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, paragraph d on page 57 requests references for same or similar services provided by the offeror's company within the past three years. Section E.2 on page 58 also identifies past performance as an evaluation factor. May a prime offeror satisfy this requirement using relevant past performance of its proposed evaluation subcontractor, or the relevant experience and references of named key personnel who would perform the evaluations? Or must the qualifying past performance belong to the prime offeror itself?

A: Offerors should provide past performance data for their own company which demonstrates their ability to perform/manage a contract with the same or similar requirements found in this solicitation. A prime contractor may also provide past performance data for any subcontractor that will be used, but this information does not replace the requirement for past performance data from the prime contractor.

• If subcontractor or key-personnel experience is acceptable, please clarify what supporting documentation is required.

A: Subcontractor past performance information should follow the same instructions required from the prime contractor in order to demonstrate their ability to perform the same or similar services as required under the solicitation.

11. Remote licensing: What license or interstate-practice authorization must a remote evaluator show when the person being evaluated is physically in Minnesota? The SOW distinguishes remote licensure from Minnesota licensure for on-site work.

(SOW §§3–4.1, pp. 6–7)

A: A psychologist performing remote evaluations of individuals physically located in Minnesota must hold a valid professional license and possess the authorization necessary to practice telepsychology in Minnesota. A current Minnesota psychology license or valid PSYPACT authorization may satisfy this requirement, as applicable.

Licensure solely in the state where the evaluator is physically located does not, by itself, establish authorization to provide telepsychology services to individuals located in Minnesota. The Contractor is responsible for verifying and maintaining the necessary professional licensure and interstate-practice authorization for each evaluator. The SOW has been adjusted to reflect this change.

12. On-site requirements: Can we price all evaluations as remote, or must we provide on-site capability? If VA directs on-site work, must travel be included in the per-evaluation price? (SOW §3; pricing schedule)

A: Remote versus on-site evaluations are at the discretion of the evaluator and offerors should price evaluations accordingly to how they will occur. Information regarding on-site evaluations found within the SOW is provided to demonstrate the option for on-site evaluations and the requirements surrounding these evaluations.

There is no requirement to provide on-site evaluations. In the event an on-site evaluation is necessary, a separate payment method may be developed or a supplemental modification agreement to the resulting contract may occur after dialog with the awarded contractor.

13. Police-evaluation qualifications: Beyond the required training documentation, is there a minimum amount of police/public-safety evaluation experience? May qualified testing personnel administer and score tests under the evaluator’s supervision, with the psychologist or psychiatrist conducting the interview, interpreting results and signing the report? (SOW §§4.1, 4.3–4.4; p. 56)

A: The Government has not established a minimum number of years or a minimum number of completed police/public-safety psychological evaluations beyond the qualifications identified in the SOW. Evaluators must possess the required professional licensure, training, and expertise in psychological assessment relevant to law-enforcement personnel.

Qualified testing personnel may assist with the administration and scoring of psychological instruments under appropriate professional supervision, provided such activities comply with applicable licensing requirements, professional standards, and test-publisher instructions.

The licensed psychologist or psychiatrist conducting the evaluation remains responsible for the required individual interview, interpretation of assessment findings, professional recommendation, and completed Police Officer Recommendation Report.

14. Required tests: Are particular instruments, versions or remote-proctoring procedures required? Must VA approve the proposed test battery before performance? (SOW §§3, 4.3, 4.5–4.7)

A: Psychological testing shall comply with VHA Directive 0730(1), the SOW, applicable professional standards, and test-publisher requirements. The Government does not specify particular commercial testing instruments or versions beyond the requirements established in these documents.

Pre-employment evaluations must include a written psychological test battery consisting of at least two tests: one broadband measure of normal-range personality traits and one broadband measure of psychopathology and personality problems, including appropriate validity measures.

For periodic/annual and directed/special Fitness-for-Duty evaluations, additional psychological testing shall be performed when indicated by the assessment findings or otherwise required under the SOW.

Remote administration must comply with applicable professional standards and test-publisher instructions, including audio-visual monitoring when required by VHA Directive 0730(1). The SOW does not establish a separate Government preapproval requirement for the proposed test battery. The Contractor remains responsible for ensuring that all testing methods satisfy the contract requirements.

15. Volume: Are the annual 15 pre-employment, 40 annual and 5 directed evaluations committed purchases or estimates payable only when completed and accepted? Is there a minimum quantity, and what referral peaks should we anticipate? (Pricing schedule; SOW §8)

A: The quantities identified in the solicitation are estimates for planning and pricing purposes and do not represent guaranteed purchases of each evaluation type.

Actual quantities will depend on Government requirements, including hiring activity, periodic evaluation schedules, and directed/special Fitness-for-Duty referrals.

The resulting indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract will establish an overall minimum guarantee and maximum contract value. Payment will be made for authorized evaluations completed and accepted in accordance with the contract.

Historical invoice records indicate that periodic/annual psychological evaluations are generally concentrated during the January–March timeframe. For example, historical invoices document 12 annual evaluations billed in February 2023, 15 in March 2023, 34 in February 2024, and 29 in January 2026. These quantities represent evaluations billed and do not necessarily establish the dates on which the Government issued referrals.

Offerors should anticipate that periodic/annual evaluation workload may be concentrated during the first calendar quarter, with historical single-invoice volumes reaching approximately 30–35 evaluations. Pre-employment and directed/special Fitness-for-Duty referrals may occur throughout the year based on operational needs. The Government does not guarantee a particular monthly referral volume or distribution.

16. No-shows/incomplete evaluations: Is work already performed payable if someone cancels, fails to attend or declines to finish? How are participant-caused delays handled under the 30-day turnaround requirement? (SOW §§4.8–4.9, 8)

A: The Government pays only for evaluations that are completed and accepted; no payment will be made for missed appointments, cancellations, or incomplete evaluations. In the event an officer declines to finish the evaluation, the contractor may bill for the full amount of the evaluation if the cancellation is of no fault of the evaluator. The Contractor shall notify the COR within three calendar days if a referred individual fails to respond to scheduling attempts, fails to appear, declines to participate, or otherwise prevents completion. The 30-calendar-day period begins when the Contractor receives a complete Government referral. If circumstances outside the Contractor's reasonable control prevent timely completion, the Contractor shall notify the COR with the reason and anticipated completion date, and documented delays will be considered in the Government's performance assessment.

17. Additional testing: Must follow-up visits and repeat testing be included in the original unit price? What distinguishes a continuation from a separately authorized, billable new evaluation? (SOW §§4.6–4.7, 5.1, 7.1)

A: The fixed unit price for each evaluation shall include the professional services and assessment activities necessary to complete the authorized evaluation in accordance with the SOW, including required interviews, psychological testing, scoring, interpretation, any necessary follow-up activities, and preparation and secure delivery of the completed Police Officer Recommendation Report.

Additional testing or follow-up appointments determined necessary to complete the original authorized evaluation are considered part of that evaluation and are not separately billable.

A separately billable evaluation requires a distinct, Government-authorized referral.

Continuation of an existing evaluation, including additional testing necessary to reach a professional recommendation, does not independently constitute a new evaluation.

The Contractor shall not perform or invoice a separately billable evaluation without the required Government authorization.

18. Technology approval: What documentation or approval is required for our telehealth platform, secure report delivery and record storage? Are there hosting or security requirements beyond those stated? (SOW §§3, 5.2–6; BAA)

A: Refer to VHA Directive 0730(1), Section 7 for telehealth considerations. Refer to the BAA and Records Management attachments for more information security and records management. Any further concerns may be addressed prior to contract execution with the VA Privacy Officer and/or Information System Security Officer.

19. Record retention: How should the seven-year clinical-record retention requirement be reconciled with the BAA’s return/destruction provisions? Which records remain with the evaluator after the contract ends? (SOW §6; BAA §3.M;

records attachment)

A: See question 3.

20. Subcontract workshare: How should subcontract workshare be presented by period and CLIN, and has VA specified any allowable direct-cost exclusions for third-party test scoring or technology costs? We are not assuming clinical subcontract fees are excluded.

A: Offerors are to provide the percentage of work subcontractors will perform by task, based on the total contract dollar value. The VA has not specified any allowable direct cost exclusions. Offers should refer to VAAR 852.219-73 to determine compliance with the SDVOSB set-aside clause.

21. Insurance: Are there contract-specific professional-liability, cyber/privacy or general-liability limits and proof-of-insurance requirements? We did not find stated limits in the RFQ.

A: The solicitation does not establish separate contract-specific minimum coverage limits for professional liability, cyber/privacy liability, or general liability insurance.

The Contractor remains responsible for maintaining insurance required by applicable federal and state laws, professional licensing requirements, and the terms and conditions of the resulting contract.

22. For evaluations performed remotely, may a psychologist licensed in their state of physical practice evaluate officers located in Minnesota, or is Minnesota licensure or PSYPACT authorization also required? If additional authorization is required, would PSYPACT authorization satisfy the requirement without a separate Minnesota license?

A: A psychologist conducting remote psychological evaluations of individuals physically located in Minnesota must be legally authorized to provide those services in Minnesota. A current Minnesota psychology license or valid authorization to practice interjurisdictional telepsychology under PSYPACT may satisfy this requirement, provided all applicable conditions are met.

A psychologist licensed only in the state where the psychologist is physically located must also possess the authorization necessary to provide telepsychology services to individuals located in Minnesota. The Contractor is responsible for verifying and maintaining the required professional licenses and practice authorizations.

Valid PSYPACT authorization may satisfy the applicable interstate telepsychology authorization requirement without a separate Minnesota psychology license. The SOW has been adjusted to reflect these changes.

23. On-site requirements: May all three evaluation categories be performed remotely?

What circumstances would require attendance in Minneapolis, and how many on-site evaluations or visits should offerors anticipate annually?

A: All three evaluation categories—pre-employment, periodic/annual, and directed/special Fitness-for-Duty—may be performed remotely, provided the evaluations comply with VHA Directive 0730(1), applicable professional standards, and the requirements of the SOW.

The Government does not establish a mandatory annual number of on-site evaluations or visits. The SOW permits evaluations to be conducted on-site at MVAHCS or at an appropriate Contractor-provided or Contractor-arranged location when applicable.

The current requirement does not establish a mandatory on-site evaluation workload. Offerors should develop their pricing based on the performance requirements and authorized methods of service delivery identified in the solicitation.

24. Travel costs: If the VA requires on-site attendance, must travel, lodging, and related expenses be included in the fixed evaluation unit prices, or is separate reimbursement authorized? We did not identify a separate travel line item in the pricing schedule.

A: See above question 12.

25. Scheduling and referral materials: Our understanding is that the contractor contacts candidates and schedules appointments after receiving a complete referral from VA HR. Please confirm what background records and supporting materials the VA will provide, and whether the contractor must obtain any additional records directly from candidates, prior providers, or third parties.

A: MVAHCS Human Resources (HR) is responsible for initiating or authorizing psychological evaluation referrals. Upon receipt of a complete Government referral, the Contractor is responsible for contacting the referred individual and coordinating scheduling. HR may facilitate the initial connection between the individual and the Contractor.

A complete Government referral will identify the individual requiring evaluation, the evaluation type, the Government point of contact, and the information necessary to understand the purpose and functional requirements of the evaluation.

For periodic/annual evaluations, HR will provide the written request and documented reason required by applicable VA policy. For directed/special Fitness-for-Duty evaluations, HR will provide a written summary explaining the job-related concerns prompting the referral and the specific questions to be addressed.

The Contractor is responsible for obtaining the required written authorization from the individual and conducting the evaluation in accordance with the SOW. The Government does not routinely provide comprehensive medical records, prior treatment records, or other third-party records with every referral.

If additional information is professionally necessary, the Contractor shall coordinate with the COR or designated Government representative. Any acquisition of additional records must comply with applicable authorization, privacy, and confidentiality requirements.

If required referral information is missing, the Contractor shall promptly notify the COR and identify the missing information. The 30-calendar-day performance period begins upon receipt of a complete Government referral.

26. Acceptance and invoicing: Please confirm the process and expected timeframe for accepting completed evaluations after report delivery, and the applicable payment terms for proper monthly invoices.

A: An evaluation is considered complete when all required evaluation activities have been performed and the completed Police Officer Recommendation Report has been securely delivered to the designated MVAHCS Employee Occupational Health provider.

The Government will review the completed evaluation deliverable for compliance with the SOW and applicable contract requirements. Acceptance will be documented by an authorized Government representative in accordance with the contract's inspection and acceptance procedures.

The Contractor may submit one consolidated monthly invoice covering evaluations completed and accepted during the applicable billing period. Invoices shall be submitted electronically through the Government-designated invoicing system in accordance with VAAR 852.232-72 and the invoicing requirements of the resulting contract.

Payment will be made in accordance with the Prompt Payment Act, applicable federal prompt-payment regulations, and the payment provisions incorporated into the resulting contract.

The SOW does not establish a separate fixed acceptance period. The Government will process completed deliverables for review and acceptance in accordance with the applicable contract provisions and Government procedures.