Follow-Up Questions 11-04-2020.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 6515--DTP-NG NATL CMOP RFP
- Solicitation number
- 36C77020R0003
About this file
This document contains questions and answers regarding a solicitation for a Direct to Patient medical supply distribution contract issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs. The solicitation seeks proposals for a single contractor to distribute over $1.7 billion in medical supplies annually to veterans across the United States through two warehouse locations. Proposals are due in January 2021 and the base period of performance is January through December 2021. The incumbent contractors may receive a 90-day transition period while new contractors would receive 120 days to transition the services. The solicitation requires handling fees to be proposed along with plans for quality assurance, staffing, small business subcontracting, and other operational elements. Compliance with various federal acquisition regulations and VA policies is also addressed.
View the file
Other files
Show all 21
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Question | Answer | |
| 1 | Was an NMR waiver, as discussed at Industry Day, requested? | The VA uses the Q&A to respond to questions seeking to clarifying the substance of its requirement. Your question is not seeking clarity on the substance of a requirement, but rather you are seeking an understanding of the VA's rationale underlying the requirement, as well as insight into the VA's acquisition planning process. Please note that agencies have the primary responsibility for determining their minimum needs and for drafting requirements which reflect those needs. The requirements specified within this solicitation are: (1) based on the VA's consideration of its needs as it pertains to this particular procurement and (2) reasonably related to the VA's needs. The VA is not offering insight into its acquisition planning process other than to note that it is in accordance with federal laws and regulations. |
| a. If so, what is the rationale for the waiver not being approved? | ||
| b. If not, what was the rationale? | ||
| c. Was the Government aware that all CMOP med/surg items were on a VA list of items for which the SBA had recently approved an individual NMR waiver? | ||
| 2 | At Industry Day, it was reported that the NAICs for this acquisition was 561910 (a change from the previously published NAICS 339112) This reduced the small business size standard to effectively eliminate ~90% of potential small business offerors. Yet, it appeared that this acquisition was going to be set-aside. 8 of 50 charts were from OSDBU and 30 of 50 charts from SBA on NMR. OSDBU briefed that “COs must now have additional supporting documentation and information supporting the reasonable expectation that two or more VOSBs will respond to a solicitation and an award can be made at a fair and reasonable price.” A year later the RFP was issued under NAICS 339112 – Unrestricted. The VIP database has 11,157 SDVOSBs. VIP shows that 292 of those certified SDVOSBs have capability within NAICS 339112. | The VA's market research and decision to procure unrestricted is in accordance with federal law and regulations |
| a. What was the rationale for not setting aside this acquisition? | ||
| b. What date did the HCA approve the strategy to proceed with an unrestricted competition? | ||
| c. FAR allows market research procedures to vary based on estimated dollar value. Did your research include whether small business suppliers using FAR 10 alternative arrangements such as teaming could meet your requirements? |
| 3 | The current two CMOP DTP contracts include one contract with a $442.5M ceiling and one with a $40M ceiling. These are now being potentially consolidated into a single contract. | The VA's market research and decision to procure unrestricted is in accordance with federal law and regulations |
| e. Was market research conducted to determine whether qualified SDVOSBs could perform either of these contracts? | ||
| f. Was a “consolidation analysis” performed? | ||
| g. Was market research conducted to evaluate the impact on small businesses and investigate potential alternatives to consolidation in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 657q(c)(1). | ||
| h. What acquisition strategies were adopted to incorporate small business participation? | ||
| i. When was the strategy finalized? Has it been amended to account for the change in Factor 4 in the 0004 Amendment? | ||
| 4 | C.13 (b) requires that SMALL BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS for individual subcontracting plans shall include minimum subcontracting goal for VOSB and SVOSB to be “at least commensurate with the Department’s annual SDVOSB and VOSB small business prime contracting goals for the total dollars planned to be subcontracted.” | |
| a. Are the agreements with product suppliers considered prime contractor subcontracts? If so, what clauses are required for Flow Down? | Yes, the product suppliers are considered subcontracts and FAR 52.212-5(e) discusses flow down. | |
| b. The VA Secretary has set the SDVOSB prime contracting goal at 15%. Please confirm that 15% is considered the commensurate SDVOSB subcontracting goal for CMOP SBSPs? | CMOP does not have a different goal than the VA Secretary. | |
| c. Do Small Business Plan Subcontracting Plan goals apply to both to the handling fee and product subcontracts? | The subcontracting goals would apply to the contract as a whole (both handling fee and product). | |
| 5 | Factor 4 (now Factor 3) provides “some” credit for proposing to use SDVOSBs or VOSBs as subcontractors. Is that credit based on proposing specific CMOP contract efforts that will meet the SDVOSB and VOSB prime contracting goals? Please confirm what those VA SDVOSB and VOSB prime contracting goals are for 2020—the first year of this contract. | The credit for this factor is not linked with meeting a particular goal; it is tied to whether or not a vendor proposes to use verified SDVOSB/VOSB vendors. |
| 6 | Large businesses are required to utilize SDVOSBs and VOSBs on this contract. Please explain how they will be assessed in terms of getting “some” credit. | Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. |
| 7 | The original RFP provided for SDVOSB/VOSB opportunities in Factor 4 that was equal to Factors 1, 2, and 3. Amendment 0004 shifted this Factor 4 into Past Performance Subfactor D. This change reduces the importance of the SDVOSB/VOSB Factor from 25%, to perhaps 8%. What is the rationale? Is this consistent with the acquisition strategy for encouraging utilization of small business? | Rationale behind decision making will not be addressed. |
| 8 | If an SBSP does not propose to meet the required SDVOSB subcontracting goals, is it evaluated lower—or is the plan inadequate to support contract award? | The contents of the subcontracting plan is not an evaluation factor for the purposes of reaching an award decision. Once an apparent awardee is selected, the CO will review the acceptability of that awardee's subcontracting plan as a part of CO's responsibility determination. |
| 9 | C.13 (c) If an offeror proposes to use a commercial SBSP, must that plan be amended to meet CMOP RFP requirements and specific SDVOSB/VOSB subcontracting goals? | VAAR 852.219-9, which are incorporated into the contract, clearly state the requirements for the subcontracting plan. |
| 10 | Must a commercial SBSP meet both VA 17.5% subcontracting goal and the VA SDVOSB subcontracting goal to be acceptable? Will an unacceptable SBSP remove an offeror from further consideration—or will some sort of SBSP discussions be allowed? | Once an apparent awardee is selected, the CO will review the acceptability of that awardee's subcontracting plan as a part of CO's responsibility determination. |
| 11 | E.10 (a) states “The subcontracting plan shall be negotiated within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. Failure to submit and negotiate a subcontracting plan shall make the offeror ineligible for award of a contract.” | The contents of the subcontracting plan is not an evaluation factor for the purposes of reaching an award decision. Once an apparent awardee is selected, the CO will review the acceptability of that awardee's subcontracting plan as a part of CO's responsibility determination. |
| a. When does this negotiation take place? | ||
| b. Will all offerors have the opportunity to negotiate the terms of their plans? | ||
| c. Does the RFP have to be modified to be consistent with this provision? | ||
| 12 | The RFP requires the VA to evaluate SBSP past performance in meeting SB goals on prior contracts. | Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. However, the contents of the subcontracting plan is not an evaluation factor for the purposes of reaching an award decision. Once an apparent awardee is selected, the CO will review the acceptability of that awardee's subcontracting plan as a part of CO's responsibility determination. |
| a. Please explain how that will be factored into the Past Performance evaluation. | ||
| b. Recommend the solicitation include their intent to evaluate the extent to which offerors proposed to meet SDVOSB/VOSB goals, and the risk probability that the offeror would achieve the proposed goals based on its past efforts. | ||
| 13 | The $1.7B CMOP ceiling is comprised of dollars paid for product warehousing and distribution (Handling Fees) and Product purchases (over $1.5B associated with subcontracts for brand-name products.) | |
| a. Will values be divided into subcontracts for Handling Fees and subcontracts for Products—the same manner that is required for CMOP contract invoicing? | No | |
| b. Are offerors required to propose to subcontract sufficient CMOP Products to SDVOSBs to meet the SDVOSB that is commensurate with the VA’s 15% SDVOSB prime contracting goal? | No | |
| c. Are offerors also required to propose to subcontract for warehouse and distribution support to meet that same commensurate goal with regard to payment for Handling Fees? | No | |
| 14 | Amendment 0004 makes Factors 1,2, and 3 of equal importance—and makes all Subfactors of equal importance. Please explain how Factor 3, with four equal subfactors can be equal to Factors 1 and 2—while at the same time, the eight subfactors are also of equal importance. | Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. |
| 15 | Clause C.11 appears to establish a separate factor where, for example, a verified SDVOSB offeror will receive full credit for that factor. What is the rationale for including this in the Past Performance Factor and as a sub-subfactor? | Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. |
| 16 | Clause C.14 encourages participation in the VA Mentor-Protégé Program and provides mentors a subcontracting plan incentive. Clause C.15 states that such participation is either a factor or subfactor. Clause E.10 does not make this either a factor or a subfactor. Please clarify. | It has been added to the evaluation as Factor 5 . |
| 17 | It appears that Factor 3 Subfactor D in the RFP (per amendment 0004) is inconsistent with Clause C.11. Factor 3, Subfactor D has combined many items that must somehow be evaluated into a single subfactor. Subfactor 4 will evaluate: | The VA is not providing offerors with a detailed source selection plan. Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. |
| · Individual or Summary Subcontracting Reports for the past three years | ||
| · Participation in the VA Mentor-Protégé Program | ||
| · Any large business Subcontracting Plan | ||
| · Whether the offeror is an SDVOSB for full credit, or whether the offeror is a VOSB for half-credit, or a non-veteran proposing to subcontract to SDVOSBs. Non-veterans must identify SDSVOSBs or VOSBs by name and describe the proposed subcontracts and approximate values. | ||
| Questions: | ||
| a. Are these four items sub-subfactors? | ||
| b. If so, are they equal sub-subfactors? | ||
| c. How will VA Mentor-Protégé participation be evaluated within Factor 3: Subfactor D? | ||
| d. How will the SBSP be evaluated within Factor 3: Subfactor 3? | ||
| e. How will VA Mentor-Protégé participation be evaluated within Factor 3: Subfactor D? | ||
| f. How will an offeror’s socio-economic status be evaluated within Factor 3, Subfactor D? | ||
| g. How will a total combined evaluation of Subfactor D from the Mentor-Protégé, SBSP, and socio-economic status be made? | ||
| h. Please clarify how this overall subfactor will be evaluated? E.g. If an offeror is an SDVOSB and therefore receives full credit for the factor, but also participates in theVA Mentor-Protégé program, how is that situation to be evaluated? If a largebusiness has poor Subcontracting reports for the past three years, but submits anexisting, previously approved commercial Subcontracting Plan that does notdescribe specific CMOP subcontracts, how is that combination evaluated? | ||
| 18 | With respect to PWS Page 23, paragraph N. Order Processing, subparagraph 4., the contractor is responsible for invoicing at the lowest current and correct contract price as determined from multiple sources, i.e. CCST (FSS/NAC contracts), MSPV, SAC, and eCAT on the day the Government orders the product. These prices are not public or readily available. The RFP requires the contractor to fill 33-line items a minute. Imposing this responsibility on the Contractor (even assuming sophisticated technology to track pricing) is commercially impracticable. Please reconsider these provisions. | No reconsideration. Read the contract solicitation, Contractor is responsible for invoicing at the price CMOP has provided at the time of order transmission. |
| 19 | The CMOP contractor will be reimbursed the price on multiple federal contracts. To negotiate contractor subcontracts for these items, a clear understanding of the terms and conditions of each federal contract is required. | The contractor is not required to monitor price changes as they will only be reimbursed at the price CMOP has provided at the time of order transmission. CMOP will notify the contractor of price changes that affect invoicing. The product cost is reimbursed and therefore should not impact handling fees. Vendor is authorized to purchase through FSS contract holders or through open market, this is a vendor decision. However, only the lowest FSS (or other contract price) will be reimbersed. |
| a. Will the VA be making the eCAT, MSPV contracts available to the CMOP contractor? | ||
| b. CCST/NAC Contract Pricing changes regularly with price increases and decreases with approval of the NAC CO. Is the contractor expected to monitor the data base for each contract source and matching the contract and invoice price? | ||
| c. Can the Government provide a consolidated product pricing sheet? This is likely to increase the cost of performance as this contract obligation and associated contingencies necessarily should be accounted for in calculating the handling fee. | ||
| d. Will CMOP arrange to provide copies of all CMOP DTP relevant contracts including terms, conditions, and prices, to the contractor post-award? | ||
| e. Will amendments of these contracts and any new contracts be provided to the Contractor? | ||
| f. Are the all the relevant contract holders of the FSS and other National Contracts required to support the CMOP DTP contractor? |
| 20 | The PWS states that product pricing at time of line item release/transmission will prevail. Does this mean the contractor must check/adjust pricing on each Rx in near real time? | The VA (CMOP) will provide the pricing at the time of order submission to the contractor. The contractor cannot deviate from this price. |
| 21 | Do any of the CMOP DTP relevant suppliers have contractual requirements to support CMOP—similar to the FSS requirements to support Prime Vendors? | No |
| 22 | The PWS says Payment to the Contractor for each line item dispensed will be at the current Federal Government Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) contract price in effect for the item at the time the order is released. | |
| a. If the product is on the FSS contract, is that the price the Government will reimburse the contractor? | The VA (CMOP) will reimburse the Contractor the pricing at the time of order submission to the contractor. The contractor cannot deviate from this price. |
Pricing for the items provided under this contract are not exclusively represented on FSS contracts.
| b. If the product is also on the eCat or another contract, what will be the reimbursed price? | That is up to the contractor. The reimbursement rate will remain the lowest rate on FSS or other Federal Government Contract. | |
| c. How is the contractor to handle temporary price reductions? | The VA (CMOP) will provide the pricing at the time of order submission to the contractor, which may be reflective of a temporary price reduction. The contractor cannot deviate from this price. The contractor may offer the temporary price reductions to the Government at the time of invoicing if the reduced price was not sent at the time of transmission. | |
| 23 | The RFP states: The Contractor shall be required to add products to inventory . . . Within forty-five (45) business days of initial Government request for items originating from an existing example Government contract source. Do the various Federal contracts that establish CMOP pricing include any requirements upon OEMs to support this schedule? | No, the contractor is required to provide the item specified at a price not to exceed the price transmitted with the order within the timeframes required. |
| The RFP advises that the Government may in the future enter into a separate contract for “Mail Manifesting” and requires price with and without Mail Manifesting. | |
| a. What are the requirements of the separate Mail manifesting contract? | Mail manifesting specifications are included in the PWS. Please refer to solicitation. |
| b. Will the Mail Manifesting contract add requirements to the CMOP distribution contract? If so, what are they? | See “a.”, above. |
| c. Will the Mail Manifesting contract delete requirements to the CMOP distribution contract? If so, what are they? | See “a.”, above. |
| d. If answers to the above questions are unknown at present, when will this critical decision be made? | See “a.”, above. |
| e. Without knowing the requirements for these future contingencies, it is very difficult to fairly price. Will you consider deleting the “without manifesting” pricing requirement given that a price increase/reduction can be achieved through a negotiated modification under the changes clause 52.212-4(c)? | No, the requirement is achievable as stated. |
24 The RFP states: In addition to any scheduled conference calls, any and all problems and critical issues will be addressed within three business hours by the Contractor upon written notification by the COR or Contracting Officer. Is this a 24/7/365-day requirement? See the “Definitions” section of PWS.
25 The RFP states: The Contractor shall provide support assistance to CMOP via e-mail within three business hours of receipt of inquiry when discrepancies are reported. Is this a 24/7/365 requirement? See the “Definitions” section of PWS.
26 The RFP states: All original orders for contract products that are identified for delivery must be processed for filling and placed within the transportation or delivery stream within a forty-eight (48) hour monthly average from transmission time/date stamp. Is this 48-hour period only during the business week or including weekends? It is an average calculated on a monthly basis and includes all hours.
| 27 | The RFP states: All original orders for contract products that are identified for delivery must be processed for filling and placed within the transportation or delivery stream within a forty-eight (48) hour monthly average from transmission time/date stamp. Question: Is this 48-hour period only during the business week or does it include weekends? | It is an average calculated on a monthly basis and includes all hours. |
| 28 | The previous RFP VA255-14-Q-0222 for the current CMOP DTP contracts reflects that the basic VA requirements are only slightly changed. What has dramatically changed in the current RFP are the QASP and extensive proposal requirements. Both are Commercial Item contracts governed by FAR Part 12. See 12.301 Solicitation Provisions and 12.302(c) Tailoring Consistent with Customary Commercial Practice. The previous RFP was consistent with customary commercial practices. It had vastly simpler information requirements. The Business Proposal had pricing, past performance, and certifications. A simple and normal RFP requirement. The Technical Proposal had only two “pass/fail” requirements—ability to enter into a BAA and provide redundant operations. However, the current RFP allows finding the proposal unresponsive if any one element of vast amounts of information is not adequately and appropriately provided. The RFP emphasizes the need to provide all information requested. Contrary to the current RFP, the previous RFP only required three detailed plans. In sharp contrast, the new RFP requires a Staffing/Management Plan, a “complete” quality assurance plan, a contingency operations plan, an implementation plan, a disaster recovery plan, a licensing plan, an IT security plan, and a patient information security plan. In addition to these plans, the new RFP calls for descriptions of inventory management processes, packing processes, Holiday workload processes, staging order processes, quality control processes, and product recall processes. In the previous RFP, there were no requirements for resumes or the number of employees dedicated to performing this contract. There were no requirements for contractor Standard Operating Procedures. There were no requirements for flow mapping. There were no requirements for pictures of packing workstations, packed boxes, and current inventory management system. There were no requirements for physical layouts, drawings, pictures, and dedicated fulfillment areas. There were no requirements for copies of federal, state, and local licenses. There were no requirements about which ISTA standard would be used. | The requirement are for the existing solicitation (not any previous procurements) and represent the VA's requirement and instructions for the current procurement. |
| Questions: | ||
| a. What is the rationale for the significant increase in the documents and information required for this commercial item fixed priced supply contract? | ||
| b. Will you revise/update/reuse the previous RFP VA255-14-Q-0222 instructions to enable and enhance competition? | ||
| c. Will you consider reducing the documents required from the bidders that have to be evaluated by Government in favor of requiring the offerors to demonstrate an Understanding, a Sound Approach, and perhaps Risk? | ||
| 29 | The RFP AQLs are all set at 100%. This appears to be commercially impracticable. There are few processes that can realistically and affordably achieve such perfection. Request you review the AQLs and consider more reasonable and affordable AQLs. | No. In medical care setting a goal below 100% is accepting substandard care and the VA CMOP will not do this. |
30 The RFP QASP establishes standards and acceptable quality levels. It states that the Government will perform surveillance to determine if a contractor exceeds these standards. Can you provide examples of how the contractor can exceed each of the 10 AQL standards that are all set at 100%? The VA will not provide technical responses to the solicitation. The contractor should provide this information in their response to the solicitation.
31 In addition to the AQLs, the PWS requires the contractor “to meet or exceed all NGDS Vendor regulatory requirements”. Will you provide the current NGDS Vendor regulatory requirements? The PWS requires a respondent that has experience in the field of direct to patient care. Contractor should be familiar with delivery system requirements.
| 32 | The current contract has a lower fill rate requirement and an incentive for higher performance | The requirement are for the existing solicitation (not any previous procurements) and represent the VA's requirement and instructions for the current procurement. |
| a. Why was the fill rate changed so significantly from the current contracts? | ||
| b. Is the RFP requirement affordably achievable with the required 100% AQL? | ||
| c. Why were AQL incentives removed? |
| 33 | The RFP AQL states: Contractor response to reports of complaints to the COR within 24 hours from time complaint received. Would these consist of only formal complaints to the COR? | Yes. Contact with the VA CMOP should be through either the COR or the CO. Any contact through either must be responded to as stated. |
| 34 | RFP Section 2 calls for this Staffing Management Plan. This Staffing Management Plan Subfactor includes 28 specific requirements for very detailed information. How is the government going to evaluate this information? | Refer to evaluations procedures in solitation. |
| 35 | Subfactor A requires specific information as to how an offeror proposes to meet the PWS requirements which includes the QASP—and also to meet 10 other Subfactor A requirements for multiple pictures, detailed plans, flow maps, descriptions, and process descriptions. Together, the PWS and QASP provide 32 pages of requirements. The total proposal page limit is 50-pages. Subfactor A is just one of 8 equal subfactors. In addition to the 24 PWS primary requirement paragraphs a through X, there are 86 detailed and numbered requirement subparagraphs that must be addressed in the proposal. The RFP requires “specific information as to how your firm proposes to meet the requirements of the PWS”. Will you adjust your proposal information requirements downwards to fit within the proposal page limits? | Clarity will be provided in amendment to solicitation. |
| 36 | Page 41, Paragraph 6- RATINGS, this provision appears to be inapplicable to this contract since there are no incentivized quality levels. | Correct |
37 The RFP states that “Contractor internal inventory replenishment/ordering schedule must be flexible to meet CMOP requirements in the event of sudden usage increases. This includes expedited delivery when necessary or changes from the routine delivery schedules of the suppliers. All costs for expedited deliveries will be the responsibility of the Contractor.” How often does the CMOP generally see sudden usage increases? Not germane to responding to this solicitation. The requirement is to maintain adequate inventory. The Contractor will need to be alert to sudden spikes in inventory requirements and take action to replenish accordingly.
| 38 | The RFP states: “The Contractor will also have a sufficient, well-trained staff to support the CMOPs.” | The reference to “support the CMOPs” is a reference to providing support to the program, not physically locating that support at a CMOP. |
| a. Is this a reference to the seven CMOPs? | ||
| b. If so, what support is required of these seven CMOPs? | ||
| c. Where is that described in the PWS? | ||
| d. What support do the CMOPs require for labor agreements? |
39 Page 50 - C.6 52.217-8 OPTION TO EXTEND SERVICES (NOV 1999). Is this an appropriate clause for a supply contract? Recommend considering FAR 52.217-9. Option to Extend the Term of the Contract and make the commensurate change in the pricing evaluation. Both clauses are in the solicitation.
40 The last date to order on current CMOP med/surg contract appears to be 12/31/2020. The total allowed extension extends that only to 3/31/2021. The RFP provides a 90-day transition for incumbents and 120 days for a new offeror. This requires a $1.7B award to a new offeror by Thanksgiving, or a new award to the incumbents by Christmas. This schedule appears to significantly favor the incumbents. Will the schedule be revised? Actions will be taken to ensure that the full transition period is afforded to incumbent or new vendors.
41 The usage report is critical to preparing any CMOP proposal. The original RFP usage data showing Total Dispensed Packs for “All ex-Puerto Rico” totaled 9,081,658. On 16 October 2020 amendment 0004 was issued to provide a revised 6-month usage report. The Excel report is cell-for-cell identical to the previous report and still shows exactly 9,081,658 Total Dispense Packs for both “all ex-PR” and “just PR.” Could you confirm the accuracy of the usage report provided in Amendment 004? A new usage report will be included in amendment.
42 The PWS states the Government will provide a Government contracted source and contract pricing as an example for each item. Can this list of current Government contracted sources and pricing be added to the usage report? This information will be provided at contract award.
43 The PWS states that “The Contractor shall utilize the shipping methods outlined by CMOP. CMOP will consult and provide shipping guidelines based upon product type and size upon contract award.” Since these guidelines impact handling costs, will you provide the current shipping guidelines now to support pricing Handling Fees? Provide the current shipping logic but note that transportation costs of the dispensed items are charged to the government since the Contractor uses our shipping accounts. Transportation costs of DISPENSED items are not reimbursable as the contractor does not pay these costs.
44 The PWS QASP requires the contractor to perform all work IAW VA agency policy applicable to CMOP and states that policies will be provided to the contractor. Since this task has a 100% AQL, will you provide offerors all VA agency policies applicable to CMOP—and identify which of those policies are applicable to this contract? We will be provided to the Contractor upon specific document request.
45 FPDS shows that the contract value of the med/surg CMOP contract was increased $42.5M for a 3-month extension. Amendment 0004 shows an estimated six-month spend is $56M. It is difficult to reconcile these numbers. Also, FPDS shows no dollars obligated on either of the CMOP contracts. Rather than estimates, can you provide the actual dollars obligated by year on each of these two contracts so that planning for contract growth to a possible $1.7B ceiling—as required by the RFP—can be improved? If detailed historical information is desired, the vendor can submit a FOIA request for such information.
46 The PWS does not include any contract phase-out requirement with regard to inventory. Similar VA contracts do. Such phase-in/out requirements are included to best meet the critical need to provide continuity of operations. As an example, the VA SAC MSPV 2.0 contract includes a provision for buy-out requests. This would be of significant advantage for CMOP. For example, the CMOP contract requires hundreds of line items be maintained in two separate warehouse inventories sufficient to fill 100% of orders within 48 hours. At the end of this $1.7B contract, the value of those leftover inventories may exceed $25M. VA Gray Market requirements limit how these leftover products may be distributed. Including a buy-out provision that enables the contractor to dispose of this necessary but leftover stock will avoid problems created by lower inventory levels as the contract ends, and/or higher handling fees to offset this significant risk. Question: Will your revise the PWS to address phase in/out issues including inventory buy-out? No buy-out provision will be included.
47 Is VA CMOP accepting of clinically equivalent products that are listed FSS (or MSPV, other federal contracts) on the formulary of medical supplies? NO, substitutions are prohibited without prior COR approval.
48 If the VA CMOP will accept clinically equivalent items, what criteria will the VA CMOP use to determine equivalent items? NO, substitutions are prohibited without prior COR approval.
| 49 | Will VA CMOP confirm total number of Rx product line items/year specifically for medical supplies? | No. The VA will provide historical data for the contractor to review. |
| 50 | Will VA CMOP please define the headings for the following? | See Attached Report |
See Attached Summary Email on how to read report
| · Will VA CMOP please define Dispense Packs Picked and Total Dispense Packs, the significance of each and overall relevancy to total item quantity? | ||
| · Will VA CMOP confirm if the quantity of Rx equals the number of product lines? | ||
| 51 | Will VA CMOP please provide Quantity per Unit of Measure, i.e. if dispensed by case - how many per case, if dispensed by box – how many per box, etc. | The VA has provided adequate dispensing information. |
52 What is the average number of Rx’s (or lines) included in each shipment to a veteran? 1.1 Rx's per shipment is the average.
53 The Solicitation groups all med-surg items (e.g., Incontinence, Diabetics, Ostomy, Urologicals, Wound Management) into a single category of “med-surg.” Would VA CMOP consider offers that focus on particular product categories of med-surg items (i.e., an offer that provides for distribution of a single category of med-surg items)? If so, would VA CMOP consider breaking up these med-surg categories in separate CLINs in the solicitation or after contract award? This question is asked because offeror believes there may be differences in med-surg category pricing between offerors and even within a single offerors med-surg pricing. We believe organizing the medical surgical categories by CLIN will allow the VA to recognize increased savings through more competitive pricing. NO. This question is irrelevant as the bid item(s) is a handling fee not the product cost which is reimbursable to the offeror
54 Will the VA exclude attachments from the Section 2 fifty (50) page limit? Offerors are required to submit a number of documents to the VA as part of their Section 2 response – Disaster Recovery Plan, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Past Performance Questionnaires, Compliance Plan. Additional information will be provided in an amendment.
55 In Modification 004, the VA added FAR 52.225-1, Buy American Supplies and FAR 52.225-3, Buy American-Free Trade Agreements-Israeli Trade Act. Given the value of the anticipated award for a supply contract, should FAR 52.225-5, Trade Agreements be applicable instead? Correct. After further review, 52-225-5 and 52.225-6 will replace 52.225-1 & 52.225-3.
56 With respect to country of origin under FAR Part 25, does an offeror have an affirmative obligation to obtain a certification from suppliers if the items are being acquired under the VA FSS or other procurement vehicles where there is already an obligation to comply with FAR Part 25? 52.225-6 will identify the requirements.
57 Solicitation 36C77020R0003 includes the requirement found in ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS, Section 2, Factor 2, Subfactor B v to provide a detailed plan describing how the offeror intends to achieve and maintain the Information Technology (IT) security requirements prescribed in the solicitation. Will the VA please clarify which IT security requirements it would like addressed? The previous VA CMOP Solicitation (VA225-14-Q-0222) included Appendix C VA Handbook 6500.9, Contract Security - VA INFORMATION AND INFORMATION SYSTEM SECURITY/PRIVACY LANGUAGE FOR INCLUSION INTO CONTRACTS, AS APPROPRIATE, which is absent from this Solicitation. The offerors may use the template attached, VA MOU ISA Approved Final Template – 12022019, to satisfy the question.
58 Is capturing Lot & expiration date be required for Med Surg products? RFP Page 22 of 101, Item 18. Yes, as per the PWS.
59 Will the VA be providing the pre-printed label stock with highlighting? Section 1.2 Label Stock. The contractor is required to provide all supplies .
60 What Does PMI stand for? Is this the patient information sheet? Section 1.5.12 Patient Medical Instructions
61 What are the ZC1 & ZC2 used for - do the providers need to do anything with this information? Confirm that these are intended to be communication between the medical center and the CMOP not the provider. Sections 8.2.9 & 8.2.10 ZC1 & ZC2 are optional comment fields that address special comments/instructions for the prescription (ZC1) and cancellations (ZC2). Communications are intended to be between medical centers and the CMOP, not directly with the providers.
62 With the longer patient name field what is the intent of the VA? Section 8.2.2 Not relevant to offering under this solicitation
63 With the longer ordering provider name field what is the intent of the VA? Section 8.2.4 Not relevant to offering under this solicitation
64 Patient Name field is too large to be printed legibly on labels - please confirm that a maximum field size of 40 will be acceptable when printing patient name Section 8.4.3 on HL7 Spec Contractor to provide as requested in the PWS.
65 Ordering Provider Name field is too large to be printed legibly on labels - please confirm that a maximum field size of 30 will be acceptable when printing provider name Section 8.4.5 on HL7 Spec Contractor to provide as requested in the PWS.
66 Will the VA allow for separate accounts for Med-Surg & Enteral if one contractor wins both businesses? Yes
67 What is the intent of the increase in size of the XAD field? - Other designation? Pg 2-229 on HL7 Spec. Not relevant to offering under this solicitation.
68 What is the intent of the Other designation field in XAD segment? Pg 2-229 on HL7 Spec. XAD SEQ 2 - Other Designation : will be the second line in the address. Example: 440 DRUM RD^PO BOX 37^SPRINGDALE^WA^991730037^US^PRIMARY^^^^^^20161207190338+0000
Line 1 440 DRUM RD
Line 2 Suite 39
Line 3 SPRINGDALE, WA 991730037
69 What fields in the XAD (extended Address) type will be increased in size (in reference to patient address)? Sections 8.2.2 & 8.4.3 & 8.6.2 & 8.9.3 & 8.11.2 on HL7 Spec Are there new elements to account for the increase in size? Not relevant to offering under this solicitation.
70 What fields in the XAD (extended Address) type will be increased in size (in reference to ordering facility address)? Sections 8.4.2 & 8.9.2 on HL7 Spec Are there new elements to account for the increase in size? Not relevant to offering under this solicitation.
71 Will the VA be sending a State name instead of the State Abbreviation, since the state field will be 50 long? Pg 2-229 on HL7 Spec. Not relevant to offering under this solicitation.
72 Do the longer names & addresses for the patient and ordering provider need to be printed on any documentation? (size limitations on labels can they be truncated, and if so, what is the VA guidance) See Vendor Interface Specs.
73 Will you be using parish code? Pg 2-229 on HL7 Spec. XAD Seq 9 to 12 are not used at this point in time.
440 DRUM RD^PO BOX 39^SPRINGDALE^WA^991730037^US^PRIMARY^^^^^^20161207190338+0000
74 Is the Copay form still inserted in the shipment? No specific mention of this document No.
75 Can you provide clarity on any security expectations when it comes to storing data internally and sending transactions electronically? The information being sent is classified as a prescription. It shall meet the standards of storing HIPPA and PII Data. All transaction electronically shall be over a secure connection. For transmission of prescription information and Fulfillment (filled or cancelled) will be HTTPS with a payload that is HL7 using MLLP. The internet connection between the VA and the DTP vendor will be a VPN Tunnel.
76 There are multiple time and date requirements called out in the solicitation, should the time provided by the contractor in responses represent the time zone of the CMOP that sent the order or will all time reporting be standardized to the same time zone EST/CST/Zulu?Are the pharmacy labeling standards outlined in the PWS a regulatory requirement? The local shipping warehouse time zone is used. However, this is a non-issue as the calculated times are such that contractor receives full stated time period to fulfill orders.
The label standards are a requirement of the PWS and will not be deviated from the specifications.
77 If the contract is awarded to a non-incumbent, would the transition to the new contractor be a phased approach or a hard start at the 120-day mark? The hard start will happen 120 days after award.
78 What is the anticipated contract award date? Jan-21
79 Will the VA accept alternate proposals to the QASP standards? No.
80 The submission instructions limit section 2 response to 50 pages but some of the requested information (copies of accreditations, detailed SOPs, small business subcontracting plans, and copies of licenses) accounts for more than the 50-page limit. How should contractors ensure adherence to requested detailed documentation within 50 pages? Additional information will be provided in an amendment.
81 The Buy-American clauses (52.225-1 and -3) requires compliance to the BAA/TAA. Because the VA is awarding all product awards to be utilized under this agreement, would compliance to TAA/BAA be the responsibility of the agency awarding the product contract? 52.225-1 & 52.225-3 will be replaced with 52.225-5 & 52.225-6.
| 82 | RFP Section B.3.C.2 states that Implementation/Transition Period is the "…time after contract award and before the contract effective date." RFP Section B.3.C.1 also states that Base Year is 01-01-2021 to 12-31-2021. | Dates will be adjusted through an amendment. Yes, the implementation/Transition date is part of the base year. |
| a. Is 01-01-2021 the anticipated effective date of the contract? | ||
| b. Is the 120-day or 90-day Implementation/Transition Period to occur before the Base Year period of this contract begins? | ||
| c. Is the Implementation/Transition Period part of the Base Year? |
| 83 | RFP Section B.3.U indicates that the awarded contractor will be processing/fulfilling Rx's during the Implementation/Transition period, but the Turnaround Time & Fill Rate requirement will not apply to the awarded contractor. In addition, RFP Section B.3.C.2 states that Implementation/Transition Period is the time after contract award and before the contract effective date. | The vendor will not process any RX's before the award effective date. |
| a. Can the Government confirm that the awarded/incoming contractor will be processing/fulfilling Rx's prior to the contract's effective date? | ||
| b. If so, will the awarded/incoming contractor be reimbursed for the processing/fulfilling of these Rx's based on the proposed handling fees for Base Year (i.e., CLINs 0001 through 0008), even though Implementation/Transition Period is defined as occurring prior to the effective date of the contract? |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .