Attachment_J.7_-_Question_Submission.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 38 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Post-Acute Care (PAC) Quality Reporting Programs (QRP) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 75FCMC19R0032
About this file
Attachment J.7 - Questions
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment_J.7_Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 19R0032_SF33_RFP.pdf | ||
| 19R0032_Amendment_2_SF33_and_RFP.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.7_Questions.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 19R0032_Cover_Letter.pdf | ||
| SF33_and_RFP.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.1_Statement_of_Work.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J.2_Schedule_of_Deliverables.docx | DOCX document | |
| 19R0032_Cover_Letter.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.8_Responsibility_Determination.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J.5_Ktr_Personal_COI_Financial_Disclosure_Template.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J.1_Statement_of_Work.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.6_Ktr_Bus_Ethics_COI_and_Compliance_Prog_Req.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment_J.4_565_Report_of_Accountable_Property.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.7_-_Question_Submission_Format.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| 75FCMC19R0032_RFP.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.2_Schedule_of_Deliverables.pdf | ||
| Attachment_J.3_Consent_to_Subcontract.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 18
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Type of Referenced Contract File (Select one type from drop down) | Section or Tab Name in Attachment | Page number | Offeror Question | CMS Response | Type of Referenced Contract File (Select one type from drop down) |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | 1. CONTRACT PURPOSE | 1 | What is the size of the current staff? | We cannot speak to current staff size for the incumbent - we can only confirm the key personnel that were identified. | Attachment J.1 - SOW |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | 1. CONTRACT PURPOSE | 1 | Is the overall scope of the new contract increased from the existing contract? | The overall scope of the contract has increased to account for the development of business requirements for public reporting and other quality reporting reports for HHAs; Updates to the BPMs for the compliance determination process for all 5 PAC settings; and quarterly outreach as needed for HHAs related to APU compliance . We have removed the requirement to set up and facilitate a maximum of 6 National Provider calls annually. | Attachment J.2 - SOD |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | HQCIS Collaborative Analytics and Data Sharing (CAADS) Platform Overview | 3 and 4 | Will CMS clarify which software products are currently supported within the HCQIS CAADS environment? For example, is SAS software one of the products supported in order to conduct PAC Analytics and create the required Dashboards? How many DCPAC user are there? Do they use all 3 tools (Arcadia Data, Trifacta, and Tibco Data Science)? | The products that will be provided to end users in September/2019 through the CAADS platform are: • Trifacta (Data Preparation/Data Wrangling) |
• Arcadia Data (Visualization)
• TIBCO Data Science (Advanced Analytics/ Predictive Modeling)
| ISG is evaluating solutions for offering SAS analytics software in the HCQIS Cloud environment in the future. Several DCPAC staff have access to Trifacta and Arcadia. Access to TIBOC is currently not required for the purposes of this contract, but is available if business need is presented. | Attachment J.3 - Consent to Subcontract | ||||||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Deliverable 7: Monthly Financial Report | 6 | Does the Monthly Financial Report provide the 'Funds expended to date and remaining balance' that is listed under the Monthly Status Report? If not, what is provided for the FFP contract? | Because this will be a FFP, the monthly Financial report will represent a fixed monthly invoice amount determined by dividing the annual obligation by 12. We defer to the contractor regarding additional information they determine to be relevant information to report. | Attachment J.5 and J.6 - OCI | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2: Program Education and Communication a) Develop Provider Communications: | 7 | Would CMS please provide the number of communication updates per month in 2018 and 2019 for each type of communication listed in the bullets under a)? | The volume of communications per month is dependent on the activities that are occurring. We refer the offeror to our QRP webpages for a review of the messages and resouces available on each. Messages posted on our Spotlight and Announcements webpages are also sent via our listserv. The contractor is only responsible for content related to compliance our APU-related activities. | Attachment J.7 - VPAT | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2: Program Education and Communication b) Provide website content management/support | 8 | How much website content was archived and added by month in 2018 and to date in 2019? | Please see response to other similar questions - the scope of this contract does not include the contractor making the actual revisions to the webpages. They are responsible for content of the Reconsideration webpages and review of the other QRP webpages. | Miscellaneous | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs d) Assume and maintain current operational activities within CAADS platform related to the PAC Program analytics, including but not limited to the following: | ||||||
| • Assume operation of the data ingestion pipelines into the CAADS data lake for data such as assessment, provider, claims, and CDC-provided hospital measures as appropriate for DCPAC mission and defined by the COR. bullet 1 | 8 | Regarding d) Would CMS clarify the databases that the contractor will access to obtain the data for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF, and HH, in order to perform the analyses described in the SOW? Do the data ingestion pipelines into the CAADS data lake for data such as assessment, provider, claims, and CDC-provided hospital measures currently exist or are they under development? | The data ingestion pipelines (assessments, CDC, and claims) into the CAADS data lake already exist. The contractor will access the data via CAADS - they will not require access to other CMS databases | Cover Letter | |||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs d) Assume and maintain current operational activities within CAADS platform related to the PAC Program analytics, including but not limited to the following - bullet 2 | Regarding d): Can CMS clarify if "PAC Analytics and Dashboards…" includes measure-engine functionality for calculating individual measures within each of the PAC programs? How many existing PAC analytics modules and dashboards are implemented in the CAADS environment? | The scope of this contract does not include calculation of individual measures witin each of the PAC programs. The data analytics are related to compliance determination activities. Additionally, the products that will be provided to end users in upon award through the CAADS platform are: |
• Trifacta (Data Preparation/Data Wrangling)
• Arcadia Data (Visualization)
| • TIBCO Data Science (Advanced Analytics/ Predictive Modeling) | Business Proposal | |||||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs d) Assume and maintain current operational activities within CAADS platform related to the PAC Program analytics, including but not limited to the following - bullet 5 | 9 | Regarding d) How many platform, tool access, performance, or other issues were identified in 2018 and to date in 2019? Are there any that are not resolved? | This question is outside the scope of this RFP as it relates to the current contract. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs e) Develop business requirements and business process models for capturing the data analytics processes used in generating the compliance determination files for each of the PAC programs. | 9 | Regarding e): Is the NHSN data from outside sources currently included in the requirements and BPM or is this new for this SOW? | Yes, the NHSN data from the CDC is included in the requirements and BPM as this is a critical component of the compliance determination process and public reporting. It is not new for this SOW. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs i) Targeted outreach to PAC providers not meeting the assessments and/or CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) requirements | 10 | Regarding i): What is the current method/ process for targeted outreach to PAC providers not meeting the assessments and/or CDC NHSN requirements'? | Currently, the incumbent maintains a database of providers that was originally created using the contact information in the QIES-ASAP system. Providers have the opportunity to contact them directly to add additional contacts to their listserv database. Outreach is performed via email approximately 30 days prior to each quarterly submission deadline to those providers who have not yet submitted their required data. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs j) Provide a list to CMS of facilities (including HHA when applicable) that meet or do not meet each APU criteria; the list should be provided in a tool that will allow CMS to view determinations by the APU requirements. | 10 | Regarding j): Does this tool currently exist and if so what technology is used in the tool? | CMS is not dictating the tool to be used for this task. The list would be generated from the analytics performed using CAADS and can be provided in any format, Excel, Word, etc. that is mutally agreed on by the contractor and CMS. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs k) Provide all communications with providers, including supporting documentation for reconsideration requests, to the reconsideration contractor in a format agreed upon by both contractors. | 11 | Regarding k): How much provider communication and how many reconsideration requests were provided to the reconsideration contractor in 2018 and so far in 2019? | For FY 2018 and FY 2019 APU, there has been a non-compliance rate of 5-10% for IRF and LTCH PAC providers; Hospice and HHA, approx 10-15% non-compliance rate; SNFs have had a non-compliance rate of <5% but were granted some leniencies due to newness of the QRP and other data submission system-related issues. Not all providers who receive initial notices of non-compliance submit reconsideration requests. For FY2019 APU - the number of reconsideration requests submitted by PAC was as follows: HHA - 122 recon requests; Hospice - 85; IRF - 32; LTCH - 20; and SNF 142 recon requests. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs m) Prepare/assist in the development of briefing documents/materials related to APU (including HHA when applicable) | 11 | Regarding m): how many briefing documents/ materials were developed in 2018 and so far in 2019? | Each program requires a minimum of 2 briefing documents - one for the pre-reconsideration briefing and one for the post-reconsideration briefing. Ad hoc briefing documents could be required for other circumstances (e.g. natural disasters, issues with provider ability to submit data via the data sytems ie, NHSN or QIES or iQIES) | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs n) Generate the initial and final notification letters of non-compliance that are sent via the CMS data submission system notifying providers they are subject to the 2% reduction in their annual payment update. | 11 | Regarding n) how many initial and final non-compliance notification letters were generated in 2018 and so far in 2019? How many were sent via USPS? | See response to question 14. FY2020 APU files still being finalized but appears to be following same estimates. Initial notifications are sent to all providers determined to be non-compliant. Final notification letters are only sent to those who submitted a reconsideration request to inform the provider whether CMS upheld or overturned their decision. In regards to use of USPS, CMS preference is to use the MACs and the QIES/iQIES reports folders. USPS will be used if we are unable to meet the timeline for sending via the other routes. However, the post-reconsideration contractor does mail final notification letters via USPS to those providers who submitted a reconsideration request. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support | 11 | Can CMS provide the average monthly helpdesk ticket volume for each of the PAC programs included in the SOW? How many inquiries were received into each program specific mailbox in 2019 and so far in 2019? | The largest volume of reconsideration helpdesk tickets occurs during the peak APU months: July (last year approx. 350) and August (last year approx 550) for FY APU programs and October (last year approx 100) and November (approx. 50) for CY APU programs. For the other months, volume has typically been 50-100 emails. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support | 12 | Can CMS clarify whether external users will submit questions solely to the awardees program-specific mailboxes stated in the SOW? Or will external users also have access to other centralized products such as JIRA for web-based ticket submission? Can CMS clarify how or whether external user questions submitted to program-specific mailboxes will interact with the ServiceNow application? | Reconsideration requests can only be submitted to each PAC program's specific reconsideration mailbox already established. This is the only mailbox used for questions related to compliance, APU, or thresholds. Currently Service Now or JIRA is not required for the operation of these mailboxes but if needed in the future, contractor would be required to obtain access so that they can support the reconsideration helpdesk mailboxes. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support | 12 | In section 4.G, CMS requires a two-day turnaround for answering public questions and submitting the answers to CMS for approval. However, at times additional information will be required from the submitter in order to better define the question or provide additional information/context. In these situations, would submission to CMS noting the additional information needed meet the two-day turnaround? | yes - as long as the submitter has received confirmation of the receipt of their question. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support c) Develop a tracking tool, for each provider type, for questions/ responses e) Develop timeline and format for reporting, to CMS or other contractors, questions received by the mailboxes g) Assist CMS by drafting answers for CMS approval in response to questions received in the mailboxes and generate a database to capture responses previously approved by CMS. | 12 | Regarding c), e), and g): Do the tracking tool, CMS reporting, and the database for capturing responses all currently exist or is this new functionality? | CMS does not have an existing database or tracking tool. We defer to the contractor to develop the tool to be used for these purposes. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 5: Support for Data Collection, Public Reporting, and Rule Writing: a) Provide subject matter expertise on all procedures necessary for providers and vendors to submit data to CMS including: • Access to reports and other resources on the CMS designated system portal (currently the Quality Improvement Evaluation System (QIES)). It is expected that the Contractor will also be an active participant supporting the PAC programs as they transition to the Internet Quality Improvement Evaluation System (iQIES) so they will be able to provide support for providers and vendors following the conversions. | 13 | What is the timeline for PAC program transition to the iQIES? Would CMS clarify the transition support required from the contractor? | The migration to iQIES is occurring in phases by program. Transition support required would be related to updating/revising existing business requirements for the provider QRP reports and BPMs; particpate in the review/development of the provider threshold report; and any support needed in regards to APU or other compliance activities to ensure that iQIES is capturing necessary requirements correctly. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 5: Support for Data Collection, Public Reporting, and Rule Writing: b) Applying lean principles, the Contractor shall assist with the development of business requirements for the provider reports, | 13 and 14 | Do business requirements and BPMs documenting the reports/data file specifications and exchanges required to support the annual public reporting releases currently exist for all 5 programs? | Yes - but not at the same level of detail. All require updating and we are requesting the format be aligned among all programs. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 6: Additional Business Requirements and Business Process Modeling for the Quality Reporting Programs b) Create business requirements for the quality reporting programs provider reports, (e.g. confidential feedback reports (QM reports), review and correct, and provider threshold reports), and provide support for other reports, or other system changes, necessary to support quality reporting program policy changes. | 14 | Do business requirements for the quality reporting programs provider reports, (e.g. confidential feedback reports (QM reports), review and correct, and provider threshold reports), other reports, or system changes currently exist for all 5 programs? | See above response. The requirements need to be updated when there are changes to the reports - ie, addition or removal of new quality measures, or other items as finalized in the rules. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 8: Data Analyses | 16 | In Task 8, CMS requires the creation of compliance report templates within the CAADS environment. Is the intent for these templates to be used by Task 3 analysts actually running the compliance analysis? Or is the intention of these templates for another purpose? Do the templates necessary to produce reports to identify each provider’s compliance with CMS’ quality reporting requirements currently exist in the CAADS tool? | Task 3 refers to the tasks required in CAADS to merge the data needed to generate and compile the list of compliant providers on a quarterly and annual basis. Task 8 requires the contractor to utilize the templates in CAADS to generate the reports to identify provider compliance for each of the PAC programs needed to communicate. These reports are required for the MACs and as support for the APU briefings. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 9: Monitoring and Evaluation | 16 | Is the current M&E strategy and M&E implementation plan available at transition? | No. CMS will work with the contractor to discuss steps for development of an M&E strategy as stated for Task 9 a (pg. 16). It is anticipated that these discussions would begin after the contractor has had some time to review the recent trends in compliance and data reporting so that they are able to actively participate in making knowledgeable recommendations regarding an M&E strategy. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Quality Assurance | 17 | Will documentation for the current 100% validation check of all data files submitted and the established business rules and data collection protocol be available at transition? | Quality assurance is the responsibility of the contractor to produce and implement. CMS expects the contractor to embed a quality assurance process within each task to ensure high quality deliverables. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Information Technology (IT) Requirements | 18 | Do any of the current pre-existing environments used in support of this task order exist outside of the HCQIS FISMA boundary? | CAADS is the data environment being used to support this contract and exists within the HCQIS cloud. Because data exchanges from other environments (e.g. NHSN) that support the tasks within this contract occur within the CAADS environment, no outside environments are necessary. | ||
| Attachment J.2 - SOD | F.3 SCHEDULE OF DELIVERABLES | 1 through 6 | Are all of the 32 listed written and electronic deliverables currently delivered in 504/508 compliant formats? | A. Yes | ||
| Business Proposal | SECTION B – SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/COSTS | 1 | Please verify that this contract replaces HHSM500201500309C awarded to Cormac in September 2015. | A. Yes | ||
| Business Proposal | C.5 Joint Ventures or Teaming Arrangements (if applicable) | 107 | What should be submitted for a standard prime/ subcontractor teaming agreement? | Details regarding what is should be submitted joint venture or team arrangements is located on pg. 107 of the RFP Section D). | ||
| Business Proposal | Business Proposal Organization c. Travel | 109 | Would CMS specify the approved travel required under the contract in 2018 and 2019 to date? | Approved travel for the current contract was related to the current SOW and has no relevance for the purposes of this RFP. As stated in the SOW for this RFP, travel expenses are anticipated in regards to Task 1 and Task 3. | ||
| Business Proposal | Business Proposal Organization d. Other Direct Costs (ODC) | 109 | Does the incumbent contractor hold any licenses or provide any equipment that are categorized as ODC? | A. No | ||
| Attachment J.5 and J.6 - OCI | Solicitation/Contract Section H.1 | all pages Attachment J.6 | Can CMS confirm whether a prime or subcontractor awardee on the recently released CMS MIDS TORP# 191461: Quality Reporting Program Support for the Long-Term Care Hospital, Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility, Skilled Nursing Facility QRPs and Nursing Home Compare, would be conflicted out of serving in a prime or subcontractor capacity on this Post-Acute Care Quality Reporting Program contract? | Please submit the information with your COI volume. | ||
| Cover Letter | Can CMS clarify whether the titles in the cover letter, SOW and SOD should be the same-- as the SOW and SOD have the title as: "Post-acute Program Analytics, Outreach and Support" whereas the cover letter has the more general title of: "Post-Acute Care (PAC) Quality Reporting Programs"? | This has been corrected. | ||||
| Miscellaneous | RFP: ii. Identification Card Application Process | 43 | Can CMS confirm whether the various accounts and accesses required within Task 3 to access Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF, HH, and CDC NHSN data require CMS EUA accounts and PIV cards? | EUA accounts and access are required for Task 3. PIV cards will be issued if required. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 1: Task Management, c, Weekly Contract Management Call | 6 | Is there one weekly contract management call per program or will one call cover all programs? | As stated in the SOW, the frequency of these meetings can be negotiated by mutual agreement of the COR and the contractor. However, it is expected that these meetings will initally occur weekly for each program. | Attachment J.2 - SOD | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 1: Task Management, b, Project Management Work Plan and Reporting | 6 | Contractor will provide an executive-level dashboard for each program. Will the contractor be expected to utilize the existing dashboard? If not, what is the timeline to develop a dashboard? | No. The contractor is not expected to utilize the existing dashboard. Per the schedule of deliverables, the dashboard is due within 30 calendar days of the contract award and updated monthly. | Attachment J.3 - Consent to Subcontract | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2: Program Education and Communication, a, Develop Provider Communications | 7 | The SOW states the contractor shall develop supporting materials for webinar-based trainings pertaining to topics such as Annual Payment Update (APU) compliancy requirements and quality reporting provider reports. |
| Does CMS anticipate that the contractor will provide the platform for the webinars? If so, how many participants per webinar does CMS anticipate? | No - we are only asking for the contractor to develop supporting materials, if needed, for trainings or webinars related to APU/compliance reporting requirements. | Attachment J.5 and J.6 - OCI | ||||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2: Program Education and Communication, a, Develop Provider Communications | 7 | Does CMS expect the contractor will provide direct calls to providers as an outreach mechanism for data reporting activities or is the expectation that all communications will be done electronically, i.e. email blast? | Currently outreach is via email however, there may be instances when it may be necessary to reach out to individual providers via telephone. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2: Program Education and Communication, a, Develop Provider Communications | 7 | How many webinars does CMS anticipate per program? | CMS anticipates no more than 2 webinars related to APU/compliance reporting per program per year. | Attachment J.7 - VPAT | |
| Task 2: Program Education and Communication, a, Develop Provider Communications | 8 | For webinar-based trainings pertaining to topics such as Annual Payment Update (APU) compliancy requirements and quality reporting provider reports, what is the minimum and maximum presentations for each program annually? | See above response. With the exception of the provider threshold reports, contractor would not be responsible for developing training materials for QRP reports however, review of the materials may be requested. | Miscellaneous | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA QRPs, bullet c | 9 | The SOW states that the contractor shall attend CAADS trainings as identified by the COR. Could CMS please indicate the anticipated time period, duration, and number of attendees for these trainings? | CMS expects the time required for in-person training for CAADS would be no more than 2 days. Staff expected to attend would be those staff directly involved with the data analytics for each of the programs. | Cover Letter | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs, bullet i | 10 | Does CMS expect outreach in the form of targeted emails, listservs, and phone outreach, or a combination of all of these methods? | For the purposes of this contract, CMS utilizes email and listserv messaging. Telephone outreach may be required on a case by case basis. | Business Proposal | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs, i | 10 | Can CMS comment on the percent or volume of providers that request not to be contacted? | CMS is not aware of any request from a provider to not be contacted related to outreach. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs, i | 10 | Can CMS comment on if there is a formal mechanism for those facilities that request not to be contacted? | Not sure of the ask - If you are asking if there is a formal process for a provider to request to not be contacted, then No, they simply send an email to the reconsideration mailbox and request removal of their contact info. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs, j | 10 | Can CMS comment on whether or not the contractor will be responsible for receiving, processing, and communicating related to extraordinary circumstances or exceptions/exemptions? | Yes. As this is related to compliance determination. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs, i | 10 | The SOW states, "Targeted outreach to PAC providers not meeting the assessments and/or CDC National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) requirements should occur no later than ten (10) business days prior to the quarterly data submission deadlines (for IRF, LTCH, and SNF), and as directed for Hospice and HHA, if an issue of incomplete data submission is detected." Is telephonic outreach required for these programs, and does the outreach include a Call Center? | No - see above response to similar question. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3: Determining Compliance Status for Hospice, IRF, LTCH, SNF and HHA Quality Reporting Programs; n | 11 | For the notification letters that are to be sent via USPS, could CMS please clarify the required method of delivery (e.g., Priority, Express, First Class) and whether delivery receipt will be required? | See above related responses. If USPS is used, CMS will request delivery receipt. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4 | 11 | Task 4: Help Desk Support. Please confirm Help Desk support does not include a Call Center. | Confirm - call center not required. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support; a | 12 | Will questions only be submitted through the ServiceNow or will there be individual email accounts for each program? Will there also be a telephone Help Desk? | See response above for similar question related to helpdesk support. Service Now is not currently used to support the PAC reconsideration mailboxes. The requirement to register for accounts in Service Now is included in the SOW in the event the current process changes. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support; g | 12 and 13 | Could CMS please clarify if the contractor will be responsible for tracking questions that are forwarded to completion, or will the responsibility shift to the party to which the question is forwarded? | If messages are forwarded to a 3rd party, that should be documented on the tracking log. CMS requests that 3rd parties copy us on any responses so we can ensure that a response was provided. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk Support | 13 | Could CMS estimate the number of questions that come into the help desk by email, telephone or other CMS-designated Q&A method? | See info provided above to similar question. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 5: Support for Data Collection, Public Reporting, and Rule Writing | 13 | The SOW states, "Applying lean principles, the contractor shall assist with the development of business requirements for the provider reports, including provider public reporting." Are there daily calls for each program for BRs? Is there a quarterly BR meeting that will need in-person attendance? | Defer to the contractor to establish the lean processes required to accomplish the respective tasks. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 5: Support for Data Collection, Public Reporting, and Rule Writing | 13 | Is UAT a part of the SOW in creating BPMs and business requirements? | Yes - we do ask for review by all contractors involved in the reports development and/or exchanges identified in the BPMs | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 6: Additional Business Requirements | 14 | Will the contractor be required to travel to any PI Planning events for the purpose of business requirement management? | No | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 8: Data Analyses; bullet c | 16 | Does CMS anticipate approximately 20 ad hoc requests overall or per each of the five programs? | 20 per year overall | ||
| Attachment J.2 - SOD | Deliverable 1: Kickoff Meeting | 1 | The SOW states that the kickoff meeting will be in person in the base period and option periods at the discretion of the COR, while the SOD indicates that it will be either in person or by teleconference and indicates "No" for the option periods. Would CMS please clarify that the kickoff meeting is to be in person for the base period? Will there be kickoff meetings in the option periods and will these be in person? | As stated in the SOW, in-person attendance is required in the base year, and at the discretion of the COR for the option years. | ||
| Miscellaneous | Section L. 10, Proposal Instructions | 100 | May offerors use Arial 10-point font for tables and graphs? | The SOW states documents formatted using 12 point font. | ||
| Miscellaneous | Section L. 10, Key Personnel and Essential Staff | 103 | May offerors use more than one person to fill a key personnel position? | CMS defers to the offerors regarding how they best want to fill key personnel positions. | ||
| Miscellaneous | Section L. 10, Proposal Instructions, Past Performance | 104-105 | May subcontractors send their confidential business information, including past performance, directly to CMS? | Yes, they may submit a separate proposal directly to CMS. Please ensure they follow the same format as directed in the RFP and their proposal is clearly labeled with whom the prime will be. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 1.a | 5 | The SOW states that the kickoff meeting "will be in-person in the Base Period" but the SOD has the format as "in person or by teleconference" Can CMS confirm the format for the Kickoff meeting? | The kickoff meeting will be in person with the understanding that all key personnel would attend. A call-in line/teleconference call would also be set up for those personnel who may not be able to attend in person. | Attachment J.1 - SOW | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 1.a | 5 | the SOW states that the Kickoff meeting Agenda must be delivered to the COR at least 5 days before the meeting and the SOD states the Kickoff agenda is due 2 days before the meeting. Can CMS confirm if the deliverable due date is 5 or 2 days before the kickoff meeting? | The SOD has been updated to reflect 5 days. | Attachment J.2 - SOD | |
| Attachment J.2 - SOD | Task 1.b, Deliverable 4 & 5 | 2 | Could CMS please advise if the due dates for deliverables 4 & 5 be as presented in the SOW or is the SOW (page 6) incorrect? | CMS does not see a discrepancy with deliverable 4 &5 in the SOD and SOW | Attachment J.3 - Consent to Subcontract | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3.b-3.d | 9 | Are there a specific number of CAADS tool licenses that will be provided by CMS to the Contractor or should the Contractor account for licensing costs for CAADS tools in the cost model? | Licensing costs for the base year will be covered by CMS. Contractor should account for this cost in the option years. | Attachment J.5 and J.6 - OCI | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3.j, 3.l, 3.m | 10, 11 | In these sub-tasks the SOW uses the following language: '(including HHA when applicable)' Can CMS provide clarification on scenarios when deliverables for HHA is not applicable? | CMS anticipates that these sub-tasks will be handled by the contractor for this contract, in collaboration with the HHA contractor, as we are working to align APU processes among all of the PAC QRPs. | Attachment J.7 - VPAT | |
| Miscellaneous | RFP Section L.10.5 (past performance) | 105 | CMS states in the Instructions that past peformance from the Offeror and all subcontractors should be within the past 3 years, in the Limits CMS states past performance should provide a list for the last 5 years. Could CMS please advise if we should include the last 3 or 5 years of relevant past performance? | Past performance request is for the past 3 years. The request for past 5 years relates to listing of all contracts and/or subcontracts for same or similar work for the prime and any subs. | Miscellaneous | |
| Miscellaneous | RFP Section - B.5 Transition Services | 4 | CMS states that "In the event that CMS requires transition services from the Contractor to a successor Contractor, CMS will request a separate technical and business proposal for these services.". | |||
| Question: Is our assumption correct that this refers to transition-out activity and if it is so, we do not have to provide technical or business content for transition-out as part of the current RFP response. This content will be provided only on request during contract execution period. | The offeror will need to identify transition deliverable as a separate task which will be initiated via modification if needed. | Cover Letter | ||||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3.d First Bullet | 9 | Are the data sources used by the current contractor finalized or should we plan for expect changes to the data sources and/or data pipleines during the contract period? | CMS does not anticipate any changes related to the data souces or exchanges required for this contract. | Business Proposal | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Section 2 | 3 | Will CAADS training cover all the tools listed in the table? | Yes, CMS expects that the primary tool within CAADS to be used for this contract is Trifacta. However, Arcadia and TIBCO will be aviable to end users and the traininig will cover these topics if needed. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 1 | 5 | Will CMS supply Government-Furnished Information (GFI) and does this include HCQIS equipment? | No. CMS will not be providing any Government Furnished equipment. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2 | 7 | Will the contractor need to provide the tools and platforms for communication efforts or will CMS provide these platforms such as Listserv. | Yes, CMS expects that the contractor will develop their own listserv for outreach and APU/reconsideration purposes, however, CMS will share the contacts that exist in the current listserv being used by the incumbent. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2 | 7 | What access will the contractor have to the website to manage content? | CMS staff currently manages the content for the individual QRP webpages. The contractor is responsible for the content on the QRP reconsideration webpages, however the deliverables for this contract includes quarterly reviews of the content on the other QRP webpages which includes suggestions for revisions, archiving when needed. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2 | 7 | Is the contractor responsible for deploying and managing website content? | See above response to similar question. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 2 c | 8 | Will there be JOA's established to receive necessary information from other contractors or will the contractor have direct access to the necessary data to complete this requirement? | Yes | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3 ,a and b | 8 | Will contractor computers attach through VPN or will the government provide GFE equipment setup for this? Will a HCQIS circuit be provided for direct access to HCQIS network? | CMS will not be providing GFE - contractor will be provided direct access to the HCQIS network | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | SOW Task 3 | 8 | Will CAADS be the only software we can use to process and QA analytic products? | Yes - unless new additions are made within the CAADS environment. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3 , h | 9 | Will all the data sources be part of CAADS? How will the contractor obtain timely access to outside data sources? | The processes for the data exchanges are already occurring the CAADS environment. No access to outside data sources is required for the purposes of this contract at this time. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 3, n | 11 | Can CMS provide an estimation on the quantity of letters mailed per year for bidding purposes? | See above responses to related questions. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Sow Task 3 | 9 | The contractor is required to attend CAADS training. This will be a new system to most applicants. It is not clear in the RFP how long the contractor has to complete training and familiarization before reports are due. Will CMS please clarify? | In order to meet the outreach deliverable for the November quarterly reporting deadline, the contractor should be able to generate the necessary reports in CAADS by mid October. Training could be scheduled to coincide with the in-person attendance at the kick-off meeting. In addition, training resources and staff support are available from ISG. The reports templates are already established in CAADS. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4 | 11 | Will CMS provide the Helpdesk platform or will the contractor be required to provide their own platform and licensing? | See response to similar question above. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4, c | 12 | Is this tool to be developed outside of ServiceNow and where will it be hosted? | See similar response above | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4, c | 12 | If the tool is developed outside of ServiceNow or HCQIS, will an ATO be required? | CMS already has established reconsideration mailboxes. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 6 | 14 | Is the role of IT contractors collecting and maintaining data received from the data sources e.g. MDS, OASIS, CDC? | The scope of this contract involves "use" of the data for purposes of compliance determination - not the collection and maintenance of the data from the assessment tools or CDC/NHSN. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | SOW Task 6 | 14 | Are BPM's done through CMS Enterprise Architecture? If not, is the contractor expected to perform these and If so in what format? | CMS is not prescriptive regarding the development of the BPMs. CMS can share existing BPMs | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | SOW Task 8 | 16 | Does CAADS have the flexibility to produce the reports with numerous changes from quarter to quarter in a timely manner to meet deadlines? Does CAADS enable easy "ad-hoc" analysis? | Yes to both questions. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 9 | 16 | What data sources will be available to perform this real time reporting? | The products that will be provided to end users in September/2019 through the CAADS platform are: |
• Trifacta (Data Preparation/Data Wrangling)
• Arcadia Data (Visualization)
• TIBCO Data Science (Advanced Analytics/ Predictive Modeling)
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Sow Task 9 | 16 | CAADS is not specified to be the analytic tool for M&E, what tool should be used? | Because the CAADS data lake is where the data will be stored, it is expected that CAADS would be the tool utilized for development of the M&E strategy. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | SOW Task 9 | 16 | Does CMS have a draft M&E plan for PAC? If so, will they consider sharing it for this procurement? | See above response to similar question. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Quality Assurance | 17 | Since CAADS analytics is conducted in a "recipe" with many steps, how can QA of that recipe be conducted to ensure the output is correct? | Regardless of the analytics tool used, e.g. CAADS, SAS, etc, CMS would expect that the contractor would develop a QA process to ensure the output is correct. In regards to CAADS, CMS expects that the contractor will work with the ISG support contractor to develop a QA process that would ensure the "recipe" is correct. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Transition Plan | 19 | Will CMS please confirm that this Transition Plan is not required with proposal submission, as it is not due to be implemented until 60 days prior to end of contract? | See response to prior question - this would be an optional task initiated via modification if needed. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | 4: Government Property | 19 | Can the government confirm that no government furnished equipment will be provided? | That is correct - CMS will not be providing any GFE. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | IT Requirements | 18 | Will HCQIS provide all equipment and software or will the contractor provide this? | The contractor will be responsible for providing any needed equipment to accomplish the tasks for this contract. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | IT Requirements | 18 | Will HCQIS provide the ATO and ISSO or does the contractor support the ATO and documentation process? | CAADS is within the ATO'd CMS CCSQ HCQIS environment. No additional ATO is required. |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | IT Requirements | 18 | Can the government clarify that all tools and systems must be moved into HCQIS and if this is a timely occurrence? | CMS will be using CAADS, located in the HCQIS cloud, for the purposes of this data analytics contract when awarded. |
| Business Proposal | SECTION B: Contract Forms (Prime Only) | 106 | Section G does not seem to have any places for the Offeror to complete/provide information or sign and date. Will CMS please revise this section to include a signature field? Will CMS please clarify what information is required to be completed for section G? | This has been corrected. |
| Business Proposal | SECTION B: Contract Forms (Prime Only) | 106 | Section B.2 states the type of contract is FFP. Will CMS please clarify if this should state "B.3. and B.4" instead of "B.2 and B.3"? | B.2 indicates that one (1) FFP will be awarded. B.3 is the FFP CLIN table B.4 is the schedule of payments. |
| Business Proposal | Section D: Subcontracts | 108 | Attachment J3 requires similar information to what is prescribed under section D (e.g., Negotiation Memo, Type of SubK, Price of SubK,); would it be acceptable to note "refer to Attachment J3" for responses? | Section D is packaging and shipping. Unable to provide a response to the question as it isnt clear what the question is. |
| Business Proposal | Section F: Business Proposal Spreadsheet | 110 | The instructions require that ," all proposed subcontractors |
shall submit a separate and complete business proposal spreadsheet in the same format as
| the Offeror’s business proposal spreadsheet no matter the dollar value." - If we have FFP or T&M subcontracts with our partners, are they still required to submit sealed bid or costs breakout to CMS? | Yes, CMS wants a cost breakout at the time of proposal. | ||||
| Business Proposal | G.3.A Direct Labor Rates & Escalation | 110 | Will please clarify if payroll information or letter of intent required to substantiate labor rates for Key Personnel only? | CMS requires detailed payroll information for all staff on the contract. | |
| Business Proposal | G.3.A Direct Labor Rates & Escalation | 110 | May the Offeror use market based salaries (BLS, payscale, salary.com, etc..) as salary/rate supporting documentations for non-Key personnel? | Yes - the offeror should reference the source for salaries for non-key personnel. | |
| Miscellaneous | L.10 Management plan and Corporate Capacity | 105 | Will CMS allow the offeror to provide a resource allocation chart in the Appendix? | Yes | |
| Miscellaneous | NA | N/A | What other software will be available in the HCQIS environment? | The software products that will be available to end users in September/2019 through HCQIS analytics platform are: |
• Trifacta (Data Preparation/Data Wrangling)
• Arcadia Data (Visualization)
• TIBCO Data Science (Advanced Analytics/ Predictive Modeling), including R and Python notebook.
Future additions:
• SAS Cloud-based service - might be offered in early Fall
• Open source analytics software - will be evaluated for toolkit expansion, some software might be offered by end of the year.
| Miscellaneous | NA | N/A | If CAADS is the "Data Warehouse" and other analytic tools can be used, how is the data accessed by those other tools? | ISG is establishing a centralized, Cloud-based data source repository in HCQIS environment. All HCQIS analytic products, including CAADS platform, will be accessing data for analytics directly from the data source repository. | |
| Miscellaneous | NA | N/A | Are web-interface based dashboards using open source software permissible in the HCQIS environment? | Prior approval will be required for all open-source, web-interface tools for use in the HCQIS environment. Such on-demand service might be offered as part of the bring-your-own-analytics solution. BYOA solution will not be available until end of 2019. | |
| Miscellaneous | NA | N/A | Will open source software be available? And if so what software would that be? | Yes, open source software might be offered as part of the HCQIS analytic toolkit. Decisions have not been made yet which open source software will be approved for use in the HCQIS environment. | |
| SOW- Registering for QualityNet Accounts (3.A) and HCQIS Active Directory Accounts (3.B). | Task 3.A, #.B | The requirements within section 3.A and 3.B state the relevant QualityNet and HCQIS Active Directory accounts and accesses must be in place within 30 and 15 days of the contract award, respectively. Can CMS confirm if these time frames are realistic if CMS EUA accounts and PIV cards are required in order to access the related CMS ISG CAADS environment since those processes typically take longer than the time frames listed? | CMS stands by this requirement to ensure that the processes are initiated timely and will work with the contractor and ISG to ensure we meet these timelines. PIV cards are not immediately required. | ||
| SOW- Assuming operation of the existing PAC Analytics and Dashboards | Task 3.D | Can CMS clarify if "PAC Analytics and Dashboards…" includes measure-engine functionality for calculating individual measures within each of the PAC programs? | Quality measure calculations for each of the PAC programs are not in the scope of this contract. | ||
| SOW-Help Desk Support (Tracking Tool) | Task 4.C | In section 4.C, CMS requires the development of a tracking tool, for each provider type, for questions and responses. Can CMS clarify whether this is duplicative of the information that would be in ServiceNow, and/or whether this information could be a report or export from ServiceNow for efficiency purposes? | Service Now does not currently support the reconsideration mailboxes for the QRPs. The contractor is expected to develop a tracking tool for questions and responses to questions received in the reconsideration mailboxes. | ||
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Background and Overview | Page 3 | Section states "HCQIS CAADS platform ingests data from different sources…" Please provide more description of the data and PII involved. | The CAADS cloud environment serves as the data lake for the data required for compliance determination for the Hospice, IRF, LTCH and SNF QRPs. Depending on the program, addtional data sources include QBIC, NHSN, and claims data. Use of this data requires compliance with HIPAA regulations as some data contains patient level data. The data exchanges occur within the HCQIS-CAADS cloud environment. | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 9: Monitoring and Evaluation | Page 16 | Does this task involve just data analysis or does CMS anticipate the support of data collection activities? | Details for this task are provided in the SOW on pgs 16 and 17. | |
| Attachment J.1 - SOW | Task 4: Help Desk | Page 11 | Will CMS be providing subject matter experts for the Help Desk or is that role being filled by the contractor? | The contractor is expected to act as a SME in order to respond to help desk questions received in the reconsideration help desk. CMS will approve all responses to the helpdesk questions -if responses have not previously been approved. CMS program coordinators are also availabe to assist as needed. | |
| Miscellaneous | 75FCMC19R0032_RFP | ||||
| B.4 Schedule for Payment for Fixed Price | Page 7 of 120 | The Schedule for Payment does not appear to include CLIN 0001, please revise. | This has been corrected. | ||
| Miscellaneous | 75FCMC19R0032_RFP | ||||
| 5. Past Performance: | Page 109 of 120 | "All CMS contracts/task orders greater than the simplified acquisition |
threshold"
Does the government want the Offeror to disclose all CMS contracts greater than the simplified acquisition threshold even though they are not relevant to the PAC QRP?
| Yes | |
| 75FCMC19R0032_RFP |
Section F: Business Proposal Spreadsheet
| Business Proposal Organization | Page 113 of 120 | Section b, 6th line - There appears to be an incomplete sentence - "however, under the subcontract line item." Can CMS complete or delete this text. | This is stating that Subcontract direct labor shall be shown in the same manner as the prime; however, it would be listed under the subcontract line item. It's correct. | ||
| Miscellaneous | 75FCMC19R0032_RFP | ||||
| M.3 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION | Page 119 of 120 | Can CMS confirm if the past performance experience of Prime and its subcontractors will be evaluated equally? | CMS will evaluate the past performance of the prime contractors. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it.