Questions_and_Answers_-_75D301-19-Q-70644_v3.2.docx

Questions and Answers RFQ 75D301-19-Q-70644 v3.2 Assessment of STD Testing Rate and Positivity Before and After Initiation of Pre‐Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP), Stratified by Age, Sex, and Race/Ethnicity in U.S. Private Settings

Question: Literature review is reflected in the SOW, but not captured in the project deliverables table in Section VII of the RFP. Will the CDC update the deliverables table to include literature review?

Answer: The literature review is not a standalone deliverable and so is not in the table. The final manuscript will include it.

In the amended RFP that we released on 8/12, the Section IV has a repeated task for literature review in section D &E of Part IV. In Section E of part IV of the original RFP document, it has a task for the following:

“The contractor shall identify and describe the data for this study in terms of number of patients served per year and the number of years of the available data. This information shall be transmitted to CDC via email and shall include patient demographics of age, sex, and race/ethnicity.”

Question: Should offerors assume that the data description in the original RFP should still be proposed as Part E of Section IV?

Answer: Yes: offerors should assume that the data description in the original RFP should be proposed as described in Part E. Note that the request to identify the number of patients served per year and the number of years of the available data are for all patients, regardless of PrEP usage. The information is needed for the reviewers to have better understanding on data system. Also note that he data description (E) and literature review (D) are wholly different tasks.

Question: If offerors must propose this task, can the CDC please include the data description requirement to the deliverables table?

Answer: The data description does not need to be included in the deliverable table.

Question: In terms of race/ethnicity, should Offerors assume that race/ethnicity being available for less than 100% of patients is acceptable?

Answer: Yes: the SOW does not provide a minimum acceptable percentage of patients for whom race/ethnicity data are available.

The SOW states, “Develop algorithms for identifying PrEP users and the date of initiation of PrEP overall and stratified by demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity), insurance type (private, Medicare, Medicaid, or other) and physician specialty.”

Question: In terms of physician specialty, is an unknown physician specialty permittable? If so, what percentage of unknown would be acceptable?

Answer: Yes: unknown physician specialties are permittable. The SOW does not provide a minimum acceptable percentage of patients for whom physician specialty is known.

Question: Is this survival curve on persistence to therapy during follow‐up or something else?

Answer: Yes: the survival curve depicts persistence on PrEP once therapy is initiated. Persistence may end due to the following reasons: stopping PrEP, becoming HIV infected, or leaving the data system.

Question: can the CDC confirm if two sets of estimates are to be generated here? Namely:

1) Proportion of patients with positive tests for which treatment was prescribed among the sub‐study‐population group with STD tests

2) Proportion of patients with positive tests for which treatment was prescribed and treatment was received among the sub‐study‐population group with STD tests

Answer: The wording of the SOW calls for the offeror to determine both #1 and #2. Both of these use as the denominator the proportion of patients with STD tests.

The SOW states, “Medical claims and prescriptions drug claims will be included in this analysis to determine the proportion of positive tests for which treatment was prescribed and treatment was received.”

Question: Do we need to identify patients that treatment was prescribed and perhaps not received or filled (known as primary non‐adherence)?

Answer: Treatment received can be demonstrated through either a prescription drug claim or a documented medical claim for in-office treatment with injectable medication. The SOW calls for the offeror to determine the proportion of patients with positive tests for whom neither are available.

Question: Will publication(s) accepted for publication be allowed for this requirement?

Answer: Yes, a paper accepted for publication but not yet published is acceptable, as long as it is in a peer-reviewed journal that is indexed by PubMed.

Answer: This is additional infomation that can be provided by the offeror. The offeror should review the entire Request for Quotations document and provide information responsive to all requests.

a. Provide a list of key personnel, stating their experience, education, skills, and qualifications to do the job, including any applicable licenses or certifications. The backgrounds of the personnel will reflect the length and variety of experience and expertise in tasks similar to the tasks required by this program and any relevant training. Project Directors or Program Managers are considered key personnel and must be employees of the prime.

b. Describe management’s commitment and structure in place to ensure sufficient qualified resources to complete the tasks/requirements specified in the Scope of Work.

Question: The staffing plan does not mention the requirement for resumes for key personnel. Does the CDC only want the list described in part a. above, or does it want this list as well as key personnel resumes?

Answer: The SOW identifies the key criteria for key personnel that will be evaluated. This information may be provided in a CV or resume, but CVs/resumes are not required.

Answer: CO: Yes, you can. This evaluation factor should be called “Similar Experience,” not “Past Performance.” Past performance is a separate evaluation that is done by myself as the CO and is not tied to the evaluation criteria. I will make that change when I amend the solicitation.

Question: Is there a quote amount for this award?

Answer: CO: We are prohibited from divulging that information.

Question: In addition to addressing the items listed in IV “tasks to be performed” and the items listed in Section B, are there other items in the technical proposal we need to address?

Answer: No.