CMS Response to QA Session_Amendment 0001.pdf

Attachment J.6 Question Submission Template

Document or Attachment Name

Section or Tab Number/Name

Page Number Offeror Question Government Response

75FCMC22R0031

General N/A Will the government provide any detail on the sample size of bidders requested for this RFQ?

No; The Government will not provide information on the sample size of offerors for this solicitation.

75FCMC22R0031 Section B.4 Payment Schedule

11 Can CMS confirm that the offeror should propose the defined start point of the process (i.e., submission of the measure to the consensus-based entity) to a defined end point of the process for purposes of considering a measure completing the review process?

Offerors are only required to submit information that is explicitly requested in the solicitation, within their proposals.

As specified in Section B.4, Payment Schedule, of the solicitation, “[i]n order to be considered eligible for payment, a measure must have completed the entire review process, from the defined start point of the process (i.e., submission of the measure to the consensus-based entity) to a defined end point of the process. Please note that a process could have multiple potential end points, dependent on the results of the measure review” (Emphasis Added).

The start point, as identified above, is considered to be the submission of a measure to the consensus-based entity. The end point(s) will be defined based on the contractor’s submission of Deliverable 3-1:

Endorsement and Maintenance Process Proposal, Deliverable 3-2: Endorsement and Maintenance Project Proposal, and Deliverable 4-3: Final Multi- Stakeholder Group Plan, following award.

For measure set review and pre-rulemaking, a measure will be considered to have, “completed the entire review process,” upon receiving final recommendation from the multi-stakeholder groups.

For endorsement and maintenance, a measure will be considered to have, “completed the entire review process,” upon rendering a final endorsement decision. Measures that do not reach the final recommendation and/or final endorsement decision phase of the processes are not considered to have, “completed the entire review process,” and are therefore ineligible for billing under SLIN 000[#]AA-

SLIN 000[#]AG.

The solicitation has been revised to reflect this guidance.

75FCMC22R0031 Section B.4 Payment Schedule

11 Can CMS clarify if a measure is submitted for review by multiple programs in different review cycles, the measure would be considered to complete the review process one time per review cycle?

Section B.4, Payment Schedule, of the solicitation has been revised to reflect that, “[i]f the same measure is submitted for review by multiple programs, during a given review cycle, the measure will only be considered to have completed the review process once (i.e., the contractor will only be permitted to bill for that measure once) during that cycle. However, if the same measure is again submitted during a separate review cycle, the measure may be counted as “reviewed,” and therefore be considered eligible for payment, again during a separate review cycle. A measure may only be considered “reviewed” once per cycle”

Therefore, during a single review cycle, each measure that has “completed the entire review process”, is counted as “reviewed” once, regardless of the number of programs for which the measure has been reviewed. For example, if a measure on the Measures Under Consideration (MUC) List has been proposed for four (4) programs, spanning the hospital and clinician settings, the measure will be counted as “reviewed” only once.

If the same measure is submitted for review during separate review cycles, the measure may be counted as “reviewed” once per review cycle, upon the measure having “completed the entire review process.” For example, if during a 2023 pre-rulemaking review cycle, a measure “completed the entire review process” for three programs, the measure will be counted as “reviewed” only once, as detailed above. If the same measure is then submitted again during a 2024 pre-rulemaking review cycle for a fourth program, or is submitted with substantive changes to the three programs previously reviewed, the measure would be counted as “reviewed” for a second time.

75FCMC22R0031 Section G.3

Government Representatives and Responsibilities

(SEP 2021)

19-20 Will the government please identify and specify the contact information for the CO, CS, and COR?

The Contracting Officer, Contract Specialist, and Contracting Officer’s Representative will be identified at award of the contract.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.3 Conflict of Interest

(OCT 2020)

34-37 Can the prime contractor also be a prime contractor of a MIDS measure development and/or reporting contract? Our reading of Section H.3 is that this is permissible so long as a mitigation plan reduces any risk of COI to an appropriate level.

As stated in Section H.3.c.2 of the solicitation, “[t]he contractor, including all internal staff performing in their role within the contractor’s organization, shall not engage in, or finance, any activity or production involving (1) measure conceptualization, (2) measure specification, (3) measure testing, (4) measure implementation, and/or (5) measure use, continuing evaluation, and maintenance.”

The prime contractor may be a Measure and Instrument Development and Support (MIDS) Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contractor. However, the prime contractor shall not engage in any of the restricted activities (i.e., measure development) within their task orders under the MIDS

IDIQ.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.3 Conflict of Interest

(OCT 2020)

34-37 Can a subcontractor be a holder of a MIDS measure development and/or reporting contract?

As stated in Section H.3.e of the solicitation, “the prime contractor shall flow-down all terms and conditions of Section H.3, Conflict of Interest (OCT 2020), of this contract in all subcontracts.”

Therefore, a subcontractor may be a MIDS IDIQ contractor. However, a subcontractor shall not engage in any of the restricted activities (i.e., measure development) within their task orders under the MIDS

IDIQ.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.3 Conflict of Interest

(OCT 2020)

34-37 Similarly, if a prime bidder or a subcontractor is, or plans to, develop measures for a non-government client, is this considered a COI? If so, is this permissible as long as a mitigation plan is in place?

The language in Section H.3 of the solicitation, including the restraints detailed in Section H.3.c.2, applies to all measure development, including measure development for Government and non- Government clients. Therefore, the prime contractor, and any subcontractor(s) under this contract, cannot engage in measure development for non-Government clients.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.3.c.2 Proposed Restraint on Future Contractor Activities

36-37 The RFP proposes to restrain future contractor activities in five listed areas. Can the government please clarify that the time frame for this restraint is during execution of the National Consensus contract, and does not extend past the period of performance?

The terms and conditions of the contract, including the restraint on contractor activities identified in Section H.3.c.2 of the solicitation, are applicable during the entire duration of the contract period of performance, unless otherwise specified.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.5 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)

39 To ensure compliance, Contractor and Subcontractors must know the specific covered entities. Upon award, can the sponsor specifically identify those portion(s) of CMS subject to the HIPAA Privacy Rule?

For the purpose of this contract, all portions of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are considered to be Covered Entities.

75FCMC22R0031 Section H.5.c.

Obligations of Covered Entity

43 Covered Entities shall notify Business Associates of any (1) limitation(s) in their Notices of Privacy Practices in accordance with 45 CFR §164.520, to the extent that such limitation may affect Business Associates' use or disclosure of PHI;

As a Business Associate, will sub-contractor be expected to post its own Notice of Privacy Practices (NOPP) to reflect CMS requirements OR will subcontractor reference CE's established NOPP(s)?

As stated in Section H.5.b.2.vi of the solicitation, “any agent or subcontractor agrees through a written contract, or other legally enforceable arrangement, to the same restrictions and conditions that apply through this [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)] contract clause, when creating, receiving, maintaining, or transmitting PHI from, or on behalf of, Covered Entities.”

Therefore, a subcontractor is required to comply with the Covered Entity’s Notices of Privacy Practices.

Section L.6 Proposal Organization

75-76 May each volume have a cover sheet, and is that cover sheet excluded from the page count?

The contractor may include a cover sheet for each proposal volume. However, a cover sheet is not required for each proposal volume. A cover letter is only required to be included in Volume I:

Administrative Requirements. As stated in Section L.7.a of the solicitation, “The information provided in the cover letter [of Volume I: Administrative Requirements] shall be representative of the offeror’s proposal submission in its entirety, inclusive of all components and/or volumes of the proposal.”

Cover sheets will be included in the page limits for proposal volumes. The only content not included in the page limits are those proposal components detailed within the solicitation, with the statement “Not Included in Page Limit”.

Organization

75-76

Do a cover page, executive summary, and table of acronyms count against the page limit?

Yes; The only content not included in the page limits are those proposal components detailed within the solicitation, with the statement “Not Included in Page Limit”.

Organization

75 Can the place of performance be the contractor site or a combination of Government workspace and contractor facilities?

The place of performance for this contract shall be contractor’s facilities. The use of Government facilities is not required, or permitted, for this contract.

75FCMC22R0031 Section L.6 Proposal Organization

75 Proposal Organization Table - Volume III Technical Proposal states 50 pages. Would the government consider increasing the page count to 75 total (not including appendices) to allow for full size process diagrams and other pertinent data (website screenshots/models, user manuals etc).

Follow on: If the government does not allow for a page increase, can offeror provide an additional appendix (Appendix D) to provide any attachments (e.g., process flow charts) that provide additional detail for those located within Volume III?

The Government is amendable to increasing the page limit for Volume III: Technical Proposal to sixty (60) pages. The solicitation has been revised to reflect this guidance.

The proposal structure/format will not be changed.

The only content not included in the page limits are those proposal components detailed within the solicitation, with the statement “Not Included in Page Limit”.

Section L.7.b. Tab 2: Capability Statement

77 In accordance with the FAR, will the government consider past performance of a subcontractor in the event of both the prime and the subcontractor(s) small businesses?

The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria detailed in the solicitation. Past performance is not an evaluation criterion for this solicitation.

Statement

77 Will the government consider the capabilities, past performance, and experience of each subcontractor that is part of the team as the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime contractor if the capabilities, past performance, and experience of the small business prime does not independently demonstrate capabilities and past performance necessary for award?

The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria detailed in the solicitation. Past performance is not an evaluation criterion for this solicitation.

As detailed in Section M.2 of the solicitation, the information available in of Volume I: Administrative Requirements, including Tab 2: Capability Statement, will be used to evaluate the offeror’s ability to meet the administrative requirements detailed within the solicitation, including “[w]hether or not the offeror is considered to be responsible, in accordance with FAR 9.104-1.” Prospective contractors must be determined to be responsible, in accordance with FAR 9.104-1.

This requirement must be met by the prime contractor.

Certain subcontractor capabilities will be considered under the “Technical Requirements” evaluation criteria, as detailed within the solicitation. Please refer to Section M.2.c.2.i.A and Section M.2.c.2.ii.B of the solicitation for further details.

Statement

77 How will the government rate past performance in which the offeror is a prime contractor vs a sub-contractor?

The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria detailed in the solicitation. Past performance is not an evaluation criterion for this solicitation.

75FCMC22R0031 Section L.8 Volume II:

Mandatory Requirements

78 What is meant by the term “certified CBE”?

Can CMS provide a list of CBEs meeting this certification level? What constitutes, or what documentation is required, as “verification of status as a certified CBE?

A consensus-based entity is an entity that meets the requirements of Section 1890(c) of the Social Security Act, which are detailed in Chapter 2.A, Mandatory Requirements, of the Statement of Work.

The solicitation has been revised to remove the term “certified” and to remove the request for “verification of [the offeror’s] status as a certified consensus-based entity”.

75FCMC22R0031 Section L.8 Volume II:

Mandatory Requirements

78 Is a contractor eligible to serve as prime contractor if they themselves are not a certified CBE, but a subcontractor is a CBE?

Section 1890 of the Social Security Act requires that the Government contract with a consensus-based entity, that meets the requirements described in Chapter 2.A, Mandatory Requirements, of the Statement of Work. These requirements must be met by the prime contractor.

The solicitation has been revised to remove the term “certified.”

Section L.8 Volume II:

Mandatory Requirements

78 Are subcontractors required to be certified consensus-based entities?

No; Subcontractors are not required to be consensus-based entities. The solicitation has been revised to remove the term “certified.”

Section L.9.d Appendix B:

Small Business Utilization (Not Included in Page Limit)

83 Will the government evaluate teams with certified small business subcontractors more favorably?

As stated in Section M.2.d of the solicitation, “[s]mall business utilization will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.”

Section L.10 Volume IV:

Business Proposal

78 Is there an incumbent on this contract? If so, who is the incumbent contractor?

Yes; The contractor currently holding the Government contract for this work is National Quality Forum.

Section L.10 Volume IV:

Business Proposal

84 In order to propose the most logical and feasible price, would the government consider providing their estimated level of effort, or a methodology for how they are considering that

No; The Government will not provide their estimated level of effort. The Business Proposal will be evaluated in accordance with Section M.2.f of the solicitation.

component of this RFQ?

75FCMC22R0031 Section L.10 Volume IV:

Business Proposal

85 The government only specifies Deliverable 2- 13 for SLIN 000[#]AJ (Final Annual Report).

We consider Deliverable #2-12 (Courtesy Copy Annual Report) to be associated with the same SLIN. Can the government verify that both Deliverables 2-12 and 2-13 can be allocated within the “Total Price” column for SLIN

000[#]AJ?

Yes; All work to be performed in relation to Deliverable 2-12 and Deliverable 2-13 shall be accounted for under SLIN 000[#]AJ. The solicitation has been revised to reflect this guidance.

75FCMC22R0031 Section L.10 Volume IV:

Business Proposal

85 The government only specifies Deliverable 2- 17 for SLIN 000[#]AK (Health Care Ad Hoc Tasks). We consider Deliverable #2-18 (Outreach, Education, and Dissemination of Ad Hoc Materials) to be associated with the same SLIN. Can the government verify that both Deliverables 2-17 and 2-18 can be allocated within the “Total Price” column for SLIN

000[#]AK?

Yes; All work to be performed in relation to Deliverable 2-17 and Deliverable 2-18 shall be accounted for under SLIN 000[#]AK. The solicitation has been revised to reflect this guidance.

75FCMC22R0031 Section M.2 Evaluation Procedures

87 Can the Government provide additional detail on how price will be evaluated? Will price be evaluated at the CLIN or SLIN level? Will transition-in be excluded from the total price evaluated as the transition cost for the incumbent would be $0.

As stated in Section M.2.f of the solicitation, “The Business Proposal evaluation shall consist of a price analysis. In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options, the Government shall evaluate the total overall price, including all contract periods (i.e., Transition Period, Base Period, Option Period 1, etc.) and all optional CLINs and SLINs. At the determination of the Contracting Officer, the Government reserves the right to perform a price realism analysis, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to do so” (Emphasis Added).

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

General N/A The SOW uses both CMS review/approval and Government review/approval. Should we assume these are synonymous or are references to the Government an agency outside of CMS?

Yes; The terms “CMS” and “Government” are used synonymously within the Statement of Work, unless a separate Government agency and/or entity is explicitly listed.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

General N/A Are there specific aspects of the NQF process and structure that CMS believes must be retained by the new contractor?

The process and structure shall be determined at the contractor’s discretion, and in accordance with the contract requirements detailed within the Statement of Work, Schedule of Deliverables, etc.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 2.B.

Coordination and Project Management

7 #3 states “A status tracker of each measure submitted for endorsement and maintenance (E&M) review under the contract, including the identification of programs under which each measure is implemented (e.g., Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program).” Does the identification of programs include programs outside of CMS?

No; The contractor is only required to identify CMS programs under which each measure is implemented, within the status tracker. The Statement of Work has been revised to reflect this guidance.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 2.B.

Coordination and Project Management

8 The SOW request submission of a Courtesy Copy Annual Report and the Final Annual Report. Can we assume CMS will want to see and comment on earlier drafts of the Annual Report? If yes, when would CMS like to see the drafts?

No; In accordance with the Schedule of Deliverables, the contractor is only required to submit Deliverable 2-12: Courtesy Copy Annual Report to the CMS Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and Task Lead (TL).

In accordance with the Schedule of Deliverables, Deliverable 2-13: Final Annual Report shall be submitted to Congress and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The contractor is not required to submit any deliverables outside of those listed within contract.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.A.

General Requirements and Standard Operations

14 Would CMS be amendable to including in-person meetings?

As stated in Section L.4 of the solicitation, “the opportunity to submit questions should be used by offerors to request additional information on any areas of the solicitation that are unclear. Question submissions should not be used as an opportunity to request changes or updates to the solicitation, including changes or updates to the contractual requirements, due dates, evaluation criteria, etc.”

As stated in Chapter 3.A, General Requirements and Standard Operations, of the Statement of Work, “[a]ll conduct of consensus-based activities related to the [endorsement and maintenance (E&M)] process, including meetings, workgroups, and gatherings shall occur within a virtual setting.” This requirement will not be changed.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.A.

General Requirement and Standard Operations

15 The SOW states all finalized drafts of public facing documents shall be submitted to CMS for clearance at least 20 days prior to anticipated release. Can CMS confirm that this is 20 calendar days (rather than business days)?

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101, the term “day” means “unless otherwise specified, a calendar day.”

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.A.

General Requirements and Standard Operations

15 Would CMS be amendable to shortening the clearance review from 20 days to 10 days?

As stated in Section L.4 of the solicitation, “the opportunity to submit questions should be used by offerors to request additional information on any areas of the solicitation that are unclear. Question submissions should not be used as an opportunity to request changes or updates to the solicitation, including changes or updates to the contractual requirements, due dates, evaluation criteria, etc.”

As specified in Chapter 3.A, General Requirements and Standard Operations, of the Statement of Work, “[a]ll finalized drafts for public facing documents … shall be submitted … for clearance review at least twenty days prior to their anticipated public release.”

This requirement will not be changed. The existing due date is necessary for clearance and review.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.B.1.

Endorsement and Maintenance Process Proposal and Chapter 3.B.2.

Endorsement and Maintenance Projects

15 & 17 Given the sequential steps required for measure review, constraining the process to six months puts some of the CBE requirements at risk. Is CMS amenable to Offerors proposing a process of longer than six months?

As stated in Section L.4 of the solicitation, “the opportunity to submit questions should be used by offerors to request additional information on any areas of the solicitation that are unclear. Question submissions should not be used as an opportunity to request changes or updates to the solicitation, including changes or updates to the contractual requirements, due dates, evaluation criteria, etc.”

As specified in Chapter 3.B.1, Endorsement and Maintenance Process Proposal, of the Statement of Work, the contractor is required to implement innovative approaches to E&M, in order to “limit the length of E&M review of measures to no more than six (6) calendar months.” Additionally, as specified in Chapter 3.B.2, Endorsement and Maintenance Projects, of the Statement of Work, “[e]ach E&M project shall last no more than six (6) months…” These requirements will not be changed.

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.B.4.

Measures

17-18 The SOW states “The contractor is responsible for accommodating the submission of the following measures types, in order to increase the flexibility of measure submissions.”

However, there are no measure types listed.

What immediately follows is “1. Measures at varying levels of analysis, (e.g., measures

The Statement of Work contained a formatting error that removed language from the section of the document identified. The Statement of Work has been revised to amend the formatting error.

developed and tested at the population, facility, plan, accountable care organization (ACO), and individual clinician levels);” The next paragraph (no number) “dQMs; The contractor should ensure a balance of viewpoints during discussions, by providing each stakeholder with comparable amounts of time to articulate their viewpoints and assuring that no group member(s) dominate the discussion at the expense of the engagement of other members.”

Is the implication that measures at varying levels of analysis are measure types? Should dCQMs be #2? Is there a return missing in the next paragraph?

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.C.1.

Technical Assistance, Education Materials, Webinars, and Workshops

19 The SOW does not specify the required format of the Measure Development Workshop. Can this be an in-person meeting, or would CMS prefer that this be held virtually?

As stated in Chapter 3.A, General Requirements and Standard Operations, of the Statement of Work, “[a]ll conduct of consensus-based activities related to the [endorsement and maintenance (E&M)] process, including meetings, workgroups, and gatherings shall occur within a virtual setting.”

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 3.C.6.

Technical Support for the Measures Management System (MMS) BluePrint and Other CMS Projects

23 Is the Blueprint contractor eligible to serve as a prime contractor or subcontractor on this contract?

Yes; The contractor responsible for assisting the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) with the BluePrint is eligible to serve as a prime contract or subcontractor on this contract.

In accordance with Section G.10, Duplication of Effort, of the solicitation, the contractor shall ensure that all work performed is billed under the appropriate contract (i.e., the work performed under the subject contract is solely billed for under the subject contract).

Attachment J.1- Statement of Work

Chapter 6.A.

Phase-In Transition Process

35 Does the contractor need to continue the current NQF process/structure for any measures that are mid-stream during the transition period?

The incoming contractor shall complete the “Fall 2022 Cycle” using the existing criteria for evaluation, implemented by the incumbent contractor. The incoming contractor may implement revisions to the process/structure and/or a new process/structure, at their discretion, and in accordance with the contract requirements detailed within the Statement of Work, Schedule of Deliverables, etc., after the “Fall 2022 Cycle” is completed.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 2-2:

Draft Project Management Plan- Deliverable 2-6:

Kick Off Meeting Minutes

1-2 Does CMS expect project management deliverables (e.g., Kick-Off Meeting [Deliverables 2-4 to 2-6], Project Management Plan [Deliverables 2-2 and 2-3) to cover all four bodies of work (Chapters 3, 4, and 5 and Deliverables 2-12 to 2-13 as laid out in the SOW) or will each body of work have its own set of project management deliverables?

As specified within the Statement of Work, “[t]he contractor shall submit a Project Management Plan that addresses all project management activities associated with the performance of this contract” (Emphasis Added) and “[t]he contractor shall host a Kick Off Meeting … [t]he purpose of the meeting will be to identify and clarify issues relating to the work to be performed under the contract.”

Therefore, the Project Management Plan and Kick Off Meeting, including all associated deliverables, shall cover the entire scope of the contract.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 2-7:

Monthly Status Report

2 For Deliverable 2.7, Monthly Status Report (MSR) (MSR), would CMS be amenable to the Offeror providing the report by the eighth (8th) business day of the month instead of the third (3rd) business day of the month? This allows the Offeror to confirm all actual expenses from the previous month. This information will be required in order to develop the Incurred Cost Report that will be an Appendix to the MSR.

The Government is amendable to revising the due date to the fifteenth (15th) day of each month. The Schedule of Deliverables has been revised to reflect that the due date for Deliverable 2-7: Monthly Status Report is “Monthly; By the fifteenth (15th) day of each month” (Emphasis Added). As stated within the Schedule of Deliverables, “[t]he number of days … refers to calendar days, unless otherwise specified.”

Attachment J.2-

Deliverables

Deliverable 2-11:

Meeting Summary

3 If the Offeror schedules a meeting with a subset of multi-stakeholder group members (e.g., co-chair prep calls), will CMS expect a meeting summary, per Deliverable 2-11?

The contractor is not required to submit Deliverable 2-11: Meeting Summary for preparation calls with co-chairs.

However, as specified within the Statement of Work, Deliverable 2-11: Meeting Summary is required for meetings, “in which multi-stakeholder groups discuss measures reviewed for [endorsement and maintenance (E&M)], pre-rulemaking, or measure set review under this contract, unless otherwise specified within this Statement of Work.” Therefore, if the contractor conducts meetings with a subset of multi-stakeholder group members to discuss these topics (e.g., strategic direction, gathering feedback on evaluation criteria, etc.), the contractor will be required to submit Deliverable 2-11: Meeting Summary.

The Statement of Work has been revised to reflect this guidance.

Attachment J.2-

Deliverables

Deliverable 2-11:

Meeting Summary

3 The SOD states meeting summaries are due four (4) days after each Multi-Stakeholder Group Meeting. Request the Gov’t consider change to 4 business days rather than calendar days?

The Government is amendable to revising the due date to seven (7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting. The Schedule of Deliverables has been revised to reflect that the due date for Deliverable 2-11: Meeting Summary is due “Seven

(7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting” (Emphasis Added). As stated within the Schedule of Deliverables, “[t]he number of days … refers to calendar days, unless otherwise specified.”

Attachment J.2-

Deliverable 2-11:

Meeting Summary and Deliverable 4:10: Draft Multi- Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials

3 & 6

Can CMS clarify the difference between Deliverables 2-11 and 4-10? Are Multi- Stakeholder Group meeting summaries for Chapter 4 required four or five days after the multi-stakeholder group meetings? Is CMS amenable to seven (7) days after multi-stakeholder group meetings to enable production of high quality, detailed summaries? What is the difference between a meeting summary and post-review meeting materials?

Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials (Deliverable 4-10 and Deliverable 4-11) require a greater level of detail than Deliverable 2-11:

Meeting Summary.

As described within the Statement of Work, Deliverable 2-11: Meeting summary, “shall document the purpose of the meeting, measures discussed, and any decisions made or recommendations provided within the meeting.”

As described within the Statement of Work, Multi- Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials (Deliverable 4-10 and Deliverable 4-11) require, “1.

[a] verbatim transcript, audio-recording (with closed captioning and/or transcription), or video-recording (with closed captioning and/or transcription) of the meeting; and 2. [a] detailed and comprehensive meeting summary, containing all details necessary to provide an understanding of the background and nature of all topics discussed. The meeting summary should include a description of major arguments supporting or opposing the specific issues discussed during the meeting. The meeting summary shall also include a summary of the multi-stakeholder group’s recommendation(s) for each measure discussed, the rationale for those recommendations, and the recommended next steps.”

The Government is amendable to revising the due date to seven (7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting. The Schedule of Deliverables has been revised to reflect that the due date for

Deliverable 4-10: Draft Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials is “Seven (7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting” (Emphasis Added). As stated within the Schedule of Deliverables, “[t]he number of days … refers to calendar days, unless otherwise specified.”

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 2-13:

Final Annual Report

3 Can the Government confirm the incumbent contractor will supply the information needed for the Annual Report for finances and activities from October 1, 2022 through February 26, 2023 at transition?

Yes; The incumbent contractor shall share the information required for the completion of the 2023 Annual Report, during the Transition Period.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 2-14:

Public Facing Website(s)

3 Does the requirement for a public-facing website suggest that the website and any underlying database will be government-owned, contractor-operated?

Yes; As specified in the Statement of Work, “[a]ll deliverables and/or work products … under this contract shall be and remain the exclusive property of HHS/CMS without restriction upon their use.” As a deliverable under this contract, Deliverable 2-14:

Public Facing Website(s) will be property of the Government, and maintained by the contractor.

The Statement of Work has been revised to reflect this guidance.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 3-5:

CMS-Developed Measures Communication Plan

4 Please clarify that Deliverable 3-5 is due 15 days after CA.

As stated in the Schedule of Deliverables, Deliverable 3-5: CMS-Developed Measures Communication Plan is due “Annually; Five (5) business days prior to the Kick Off Meeting” (Emphasis Added).

Deliverable 2-4: Kick Off Meeting is due “Annually;

Twenty (20) days after [Contract Award (CA)] or [Option Period (OP] exercise” (Emphasis Added).

As Deliverable 2-4: Kick Off Meeting may be scheduled prior to the due date listed in the Schedule of Deliverables, and Deliverable 3-5: CMS- Developed Measures Communication Plan is due five

(5) business days, not calendar days, prior to the Kick Off Meeting, the assumption that Deliverable 3-5:

CMS-Developed Measures Communication Plan is due fifteen (15) days after CA is inaccurate.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 3-18:

Feedback on Drafts of the MMS BluePrint

5 The SOD states “Ten (10) after being provided with the draft MMS BluePrint release.” Should the contractor plan for ten (10) calendar days, ten (10) business days, or some other timing?

The Schedule of Deliverables has been revised to reflect that the due date for Deliverable 3-18:

Feedback on Drafts of the MMS BluePrint is “Ten

(10) days after being provided with the draft MMS

BluePrint release” (Emphasis Added). As stated within the Schedule of Deliverables, “[t]he number of days … refers to calendar days, unless otherwise specified.”

Attachment J.2-

Deliverable 4-8:

Draft Multi- Stakeholder Group Review Meeting Materials

6 Is CMS amenable to reducing the timeframe for the delivery of Deliverable 4-8 to two weeks prior to multi-stakeholder meeting (rather than three weeks)? Due to interdependencies between meetings and between the meetings and release of the MUC list, producing meeting materials three weeks prior to the meeting is not enough time for updating materials based on other interdependencies.

As stated in Section L.4 of the solicitation, “the opportunity to submit questions should be used by offerors to request additional information on any areas of the solicitation that are unclear. Question submissions should not be used as an opportunity to request changes or updates to the solicitation, including changes or updates to the contractual requirements, due dates, evaluation criteria, etc.”

The due date for Deliverable 4-8: Draft Multi- Stakeholder Group Review Meeting Materials will not be changed. The existing due date is necessary for clearance and review.

Attachment J.2- Schedule of Deliverables

Deliverable 4-10:

Draft Multi- Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials

6 The SOD states Draft Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials are due Five (5) days after each Multi-Stakeholder Group Meeting. Request the Gov’t change this to 5 business days rather than calendar days?

The Government is amendable to revising the due date to seven (7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting. The Schedule of Deliverables has been revised to reflect that the due date for Deliverable 4-10: Draft Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials is “Seven (7) days after each multi-stakeholder group meeting” (Emphasis Added). As stated within the Schedule of Deliverables, “[t]he number of days … refers to calendar days, unless otherwise specified.”

Attachment J.2-

Deliverable 4-10:

Draft Multi- Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials and Deliverable 4- 11: Final Multi- Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials

6 Can CMS clarify the difference between Deliverables 4-10 and 4-11? Does Deliverable 4-10 include a draft verbatim, audio-recording, or video-recording, and a draft meeting summary?

Deliverable 4-10: Draft Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials is a draft version of the Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials, submitted to the Government for review.

Deliverable 4-10: Draft Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials shall comply with all requirements for the Multi-Stakeholder Group Post- Review Meeting Materials, including the requirements to include “1. [a] verbatim transcript, audio-recording (with closed captioning and/or transcription), or video-recording (with closed captioning and/or transcription) of the meeting; and 2.

[a] detailed and comprehensive meeting summary…”

As specified within the Statement of Work, Deliverable 4-11: Final Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials is a final version of the Multi-Stakeholder Group Post-Review Meeting Materials, “incorporating any necessary revisions indicated during the Government’s review”.

Attachment J.2-

Deliverable 4:12:

CMS Program and Measure Lead Education Meeting(s)

7 In reference to Deliverable 4-12, what does CMS mean “prior to requesting information on measures” as the due date?

If the contractor requests that CMS provides information on measures, Deliverable 4-12: CMS Program and Measure Lead Education Meeting(s) shall be held three (3) weeks prior to the subject request.

Multiple CMS Program and Measure Lead Education Meeting(s) may be proposed, if necessary, based on the timelines for measure set review and pre-rulemaking.