Amendment 2 - Attachment 3 ClaimsCore Instructions to Offerors.pdf

Solicitation # 75FCMC26R0022 ClaimsCore Instructions

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. This solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation or submission of the quotation. This solicitation is not a contract nor a promise to contract in the future.

2. This procurement is subject to the future availability of funds.

3. The response should be prepared in a format capable of being viewed using Microsoft Office or Adobe Acrobat.

4. Digital submissions should be formatted for print using letter-sized (8-1/2 X 11”) pages, single-spaced, with one inch (1”) margins.

5. This solicitation may limit the number of pages associated with a given element of the offerors’ response. Within that context, one page equals one side of a sheet of paper. Use of landscape layout for certain pages when appropriate is acceptable and counts as one page.

Number the pages consecutively. Any pages in excess of any page limitations cited herein will not be considered. Any page limitations set forth herein do not include any “front matter” information such as a cover letter, table of contents, and definitions or acronyms. Any technical or pricing information submitted within the “front matter” will not be considered.

6. Responses should be 12-point font size. Smaller font not less than nine (9) point font size and single spacing is acceptable for any tables, graphics, illustrations, headers, and footers;

however, offerors should not submit an abundance of information in chart format.

7. Tables used throughout the narrative portions of the response should be formatted in such a way as to allow for the search and find functions in MS Office and Adobe Acrobat to discover text embedded in such tables. Offerors should avoid pasting images of such tables into the response, as the government wants to avoid situations where the search and find functions are not effective because words or numbers are embedded in the response as pictures/images rather than text.

8. If sending electronic mail, CMS recommends keeping attachment size below 25MB to reduce risk of the e-mail not being delivered.

9. If a Contractor Teaming Agreement (CTA) is being proposed, the proposal should indicate this is the case and identify all team members. Proposals must be consistent from the first phase to the last regarding identified CTA arrangements. The negotiation of CTAs will not involve the Government and are the responsibility of the offerors. The terms of any CTA must provide that the offeror providing the proposal will be identified as the contractor, such that the FPDS-NG record created for the contract reflects the offeror providing the proposal as the contractor. Furthermore, CMS will make payment only to the contractor identified on the contract; any further distribution of payment between teammates is the responsibility of the offeror identified in the contract.

10. In accordance with FAR 19.704 and FAR Clause 52.219-9, if required to submit a subcontracting plan, it is to be submitted with your Phase 2 proposals.

SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN QUESTIONS

All questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted via electronic mail (e-mail) no later than 11:00 am Eastern Time (ET) on 03/06/2026 to the Ordering Agency POC noted above.

Questions received after this date and time may not be answered prior to the closing date/time for receipt of responses. For each question, please include a reference to the specific section(s) of the RFP to which the question applies following the format below (i.e., the format below assumes a table with columns associated with each element). Contractors should use a file format that will facilitate CMS merging questions from multiple offerors into a single file. At its unilateral discretion, CMS may elect not to answer one (1) or more questions or to conduct one

(1) or more live question-and-answer sessions. The questions and any CMS response thereto may be shared with all contract holders on a non-attribution basis as to the name of the contractor that asked the question. In the event of any conflict between an answer provided by CMS and the terms and conditions of the solicitation, as amended, the solicitation will control.

In the event this solicitation includes more than one (1) phase, offerors have the opportunity to ask questions regarding each phase subsequent to the first. Any such questions are due no later than 11:00 am ET on the third business day following distribution of the Contracting Officer's notification.

Question Number SOO/RFP Section and/or Page Number

Question (for Offeror use)

Response (for CMS use)

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND PROPOSAL DUE DATE

Submit your proposal in accordance with the following format requirements to assist the Government in making a complete and thorough evaluation of the proposal.

Phase One proposals must be submitted via email to Contract Specialist, Lauren Holsey, Contract Specialist at Lauren.Holsey@cms.hhs.gov and cc: Contracting Officer, Candace Straker at Candace.Straker@cms.hhs.gov on or before the RFP closing date of 03/13/2026, at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. Offerors must cite their Unique Entity ID (UEI) and SAM EIN numbers in the proposal submission.

All Phase Two proposal documentation shall be provided via email to Lauren Holsey, Contract Specialist at Lauren.Holsey@cms.hhs.gov and cc: Contracting Officer, Candace Straker at Candace.Straker@cms.hhs.gov

Responses sent through other means will not be considered. Responses that are late will not be considered. If an offeror is late submitting any portion of the proposal, the entire response will be considered late. The offeror’s initial submission should contain the offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint, as applicable to the procurement.

mailto:Lauren.Holsey@cms.hhs.gov mailto:Candace.Straker@cms.hhs.gov mailto:Lauren.Holsey@cms.hhs.gov mailto:Candace.Straker@cms.hhs.gov

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD – GENERAL PROCEDURES

A. The Government will evaluate proposals using a tradeoff process to determine which offerors represent the Best Value to the Government, as defined in FAR 2.101 and described in FAR 52.212-2. The Government may award to other than the lowest priced offeror or to other than the proposal assessed the most non-price merit. The relative importance considering all evaluation factors is provided as follows: all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price.

B. The Government estimates up to four (4) awards will be made under this solicitation.

This estimate in no way prohibits the Government from making either fewer or more awards than estimated based upon the offers received and a determination of the best interests of the Government.

C. The Government may award without discussions with Offerors in accordance with FAR 52.215-1. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offerors’ best terms from a technical and price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed necessary.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD – EVALUATION PROCESS

In addition to price, the following factors will be considered when determining best value: Factor 1: Corporate Experience (Mission Focused), Factor 2: Performance Work Statement (PWS) & Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), and Factor 3: Past Performance. For these factors, the Government will assess a confidence level (e.g., high, some, or low confidence) that the Offeror understands the requirement, proposes a sound approach, and will be successful in performing the contract with little or no Government intervention. These non-price factors are listed in descending order of importance.

In addition, CMS will evaluate Conflict of Interest (COI) and 508 VPAT submissions for compliance and acceptability for the apparent successful offerors. The evaluation of the COI and 508 Volume will not be considered in terms of best value.

Proposal submission and CMS’ evaluation thereof will occur in two phases, as follows:

Two-Phase: Proposals will be submitted and evaluated in phases. The intent of the two-phase procurement is to minimize proposal development and presentation costs for those offerors with little or no chance of receiving an award, as well as to minimize evaluation time and effort on the agency’s part. In between each phase, CMS will make an advisory down-select and notify each offeror of CMS’s determination of whether the offeror should participate in the next phase. The Government will determine the appropriate number of offerors that is most beneficial to the

Government for each phase following the first. For those who are encouraged to participate, CMS will provide further instructions for proposal submission. For those who are not recommended to continue to Phase 2, CMS discourages further participation in the RFP process because such an offeror is unlikely to be a viable competitor for award. However, offerors who are advised not to continue may still participate in the next phase if they elect to do

so. Any such offeror is required to opt-in to the next phase by notifying the CO and CS via e-mail of their intent. Opt-in notifications must be received no later than 4:00 pm ET on the second (2nd) business day following the agency’s advisory notice, at which time CMS will contact the offeror to provide further instructions for proposal submission.

The submission of proposals and CMS’s evaluation thereof will occur as follows:

• Phase 1 includes evaluation of the following factor(s): Corporate Experience (Mission Focused).

• Phase 2 includes the evaluation of the following factor(s): PWS & QASP, Past Performance, and Price. Section 508, and Business Ethics, Conflicts of Interest (COI), and Compliance will be prepared and evaluated in this phase.

Phase One (1)

1. Corporate Experience (Mission Focused) (Phase One)

How to prepare this portion of the proposal:

Offerors must submit a narrative which demonstrates recent performance of work similar to that needed to meet the Government's intent as described in this solicitation. This submission is limited to six pages in total length. The narrative should be pertinent and specific, illustrating the depth and breadth of experience within each focus area specified below, with references to the particular project(s) from which the experience was gained.

"Recent" means a contract whose period of performance is currently on-going or, if finished, ended within the last five years of the date of proposal submission. Recent experience may be evaluated more favorably.

Experience may include those contracts entered into with the U.S. Federal, State, or Local Government agencies, or commercial customers.

The experience must be that of the proposed prime contractor (including affiliated entities) or a CTA teammate; experience from subcontractors, individual employees or consultants will not be considered. However, pursuant to 13 CFR 125.2(g), where a small business prime contractor includes a proposed team of small business subcontractors and specifically identifies the first-tier subcontractor(s) in the quotation, the experience of any such subcontractors may be considered. In the case of any subcontractor experience proposed pursuant to 13 CFR 125.2(g), the Contracting Officer will rely on the representations documented in SAM.gov under FAR 52.219-1 "Small Business Program Representations" when determining the business size of the subcontractor. Respondents must ensure that any subcontractor or CTA member whose experience is utilized in the response is also included as a proposed teammate in each future phase including any resultant award. Failure to do so may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award.

Also, experience gained by the proposed prime or CTA member while performing as a sub-contractor is acceptable. Finally, the experience of a parent, subsidiary, or affiliate company may not be included unless the resources of the parent, subsidiary or affiliate (i.e., its workforce, management, facilities or other resources) will be provided or relied upon for contract performance, such that it will have meaningful involvement in contract performance. Failure to demonstrate this within the context of the proposal (though not necessarily in the corporate experience narrative alone) may result in the proposal being removed from further consideration for award.

Proposals should, as applicable/relevant include the following information as it pertains to the sources of experience cited in the narrative:

1. Client organization name and point of contact information

2. Contract Number

3. Period of Performance

4. Explain whose experience is being proposed and the role of that firm in performance of the work envisioned under this solicitation

Exception – Commercial Nondisclosure Agreements (NDAs):

If an Offeror is contractually prohibited from disclosing a commercial client’s identity due to a nondisclosure agreement, the Offeror may withhold the client’s name. In such cases, the Offeror shall clearly state that the client’s name is withheld due to confidentiality restrictions and provide sufficient descriptive information (e.g., industry sector, size and type of organization, geographic scope, and nature of services provided) to enable the Government to assess relevance to this requirement.

Offerors are responsible for submitting sufficient detail to permit a meaningful evaluation of similarity, scope, magnitude, and complexity consistent with FAR 12.206 and FAR 15.305. The Government will evaluate corporate experience based on the information provided. If the information submitted is insufficient to support a meaningful evaluation, the Government may assign a lower confidence assessment or determine that the experience is not relevant.

Experience Focus Areas

1. High-volume cloud-based, near real-time, health care claims processing:

Experience designing, implementing, and operating high-volume (millions of claims per day), near real-time, cloud-native claims processing platforms, including horizontal scaling and performance at payer or equivalent national scale including the number, scale, and duration of live deployments, and evidence of product stability and maturity.

2. Systems Migrations: Experience conducting migrations from a legacy system to your system and evidence your preferred strategy (e.g. Run Out migration) will be successful in the Original Medicare environment. Experience measuring adjudication outcomes during parallel system operations with tight variance targets and explainability for differences.

3. Professional services capacity and relevant implementations: Experience providing scaled professional services to implement and support similar solutions, including recent implementations of comparable size, complexity, and stakeholder landscape.

4. Financial scale, stability, and growth: Experience operating a business with sufficient revenue, financial stability, and sustained growth (e.g., revenue levels and growth trends) to reduce risk to business operations interruption that could adversely impact CMS. For example, We do not expect references for the audited financial reports.

5. Provider Burden: Experience implementing novel tools, process, and policy designed to reduce the administrative burden borne by providers submitting claims, working though the adjudication process, and processing payment.

6. Edit/rule export, import, and parity validation: Experience extracting business edits/rules from mainframe environments (e.g., COBOL/ALC/assembler) and converting those rules into configurable edits, rules or code in equivalent in your system.

7. Payment integrity and fraud detection/mitigation: Experience implementing and operating sophisticated fraud, waste, and abuse detection and mitigation capabilities (e.g., rules-based, anomaly detection, machine learning, and/or integration with external risk scoring) integrated into claims workflows to support pre-payment and post-payment controls. Clearly state where outside partnerships are required.

How this factor will be evaluated

The Government will assess how well the previous experience demonstrates performance of work similar to that envisioned by the Government in pursuit of the intent described in this solicitation. Considerations may include specific technologies, architectures, stakeholders (e.g., clients, users, etc.), tools, methods or anything else the Government considers relevant within this context. Offerors are therefore encouraged to describe how the experience aligns to the Government's intent including the objectives of the SOO and the work envisioned under the PWS. Also, the Government may consider the source of the experience and the role of that source envisioned by the Government in performance of the work envisioned under this solicitation. The Government may consider information other than that included in the proposal (e.g., Client Organization point of contact) when evaluating this factor.

Phase Two (2)

1. Performance Work Statement (PWS) & Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) (Phase Two)

How to prepare this portion of the proposal:

Prepare and include in the proposal a Performance Work Statement (PWS) which describes in detail the proposed solution in light of the Government's intent described in the SOO.

Offerors should articulate their understanding of the agency’s needs and correlate them to the proposed solution. The PWS should describe the following things: (1) the tasks to be performed and deliverables to be provided; (2) the people, tools, measures and methods to be used in performance of the tasks and management of the overall effort; and (3) underlying assumptions.

The PWS should include an organizational chart and/or staffing plan illustrating, as applicable, the number of personnel assigned to each team (i.e., organizational alignment, including the Proof of Concept team), their job title and role. Offerors must carefully review the RFP and propose the estimated skill mix and level of effort which they believe necessary to deliver the approach described in the PWS. The PWS should describe the offeror’s approach to staffing the proposed team, including hiring plans/time-lines. The PWS should describe a process for management of the overall task order including working with the Product Owner, COR, and End Users.

The PWS must disclose and explain the planned use of any used, reconditioned, or remanufactured supplies, or unused former Government surplus property under the contract.

The PWS must disclose and explain the planned use of an Artificial Intelligence (AI) under the contract.

The PWS must include a consolidated list of any assumptions, exclusions, exceptions and clarifications. If not noted in the PWS, CMS will assume that there are no assumptions and that the Contractor agrees to comply with all of the terms and conditions as set forth herein.

It is not the responsibility of CMS to seek out and identify assumptions, conditions, or exceptions buried within the submission. The Government reserves the right to reject any proposal that includes any assumption that CMS determines may adversely affect the agency’s ability to have its needs successfully met. Details regarding this requirement are provided below:

Assumptions: The Government assumes that any assumptions that were provided in the RFP have been considered and utilized in developing the solution. Discuss any other assumptions developed when formulating proposed solutions. Provide sufficient detail to fully justify those assumptions, including any history that contributes to the belief in the correctness of those assumptions. Offerors are responsible for the accuracy of their assumptions, both during the evaluation of responses and task order performance.

Exclusions: Discuss any needed efforts that were not included in the proposed solution with the rationale for omission.

Exceptions & Clarifications: Discuss any caveats, exceptions and/or clarifications (including any deviations and conditional assumptions) to the requirements described in the RFP and the solution proposed in the PWS. Any exceptions must contain sufficient justification to permit evaluation by the Government.

Responses must include a draft Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for consideration by the Government in developing its own QASP. The proposed QASP and Performance Measurement approach should be commensurate with the delivery methodology described in the PWS (e.g. sprint exit criteria, milestones for Integrated Master Plan & Schedule). It should illustrate how proposed performance standards will be measured, evaluated, and reported.

The PWS must not exceed 20 pages (excluding the QASP). The QASP must not exceed 5 pages.

The PWS included in the Contractor’s proposal will be incorporated into the terms and conditions of the order. Therefore, CMS intends to remove any restrictive markings or legends from the PWS and the draft QASP at that time, and those documents will become government property at that time.

How this factor will be evaluated

The Government will evaluate the merits of the proposed PWS/QASP to meet the Government's intent described in the SOO. Specifically, how well the PWS demonstrates understanding of the Government's needs, and the extent to which the people, processes, performance measures and tools will serve to address the needs and challenges associated with performance of the work.

Inaccurate assumptions included in the PWS may be viewed as a lack of understanding with respect to CMS’ needs and such responses may be unfavorably evaluated or removed from consideration for award. Furthermore, the inclusion of caveats, exclusions, exceptions or clarifications (including any deviations and conditional assumptions) may result in a response being unfavorably evaluated or removed from consideration for award.

2. Past Performance

How to prepare this volume:

a. Past Performance Definitions:

Relevant – Relevant past performance information is described in FAR 42.1501, General.

b. Past Performance Instructions:

The Offeror (including affiliated entities) or a CTA teammate (Past Performance from subcontractors, individual employees or consultants will not be considered) identified in the proposal are required to provide a summary to disclose all of the following past performance information with a period of performance end date within the past three (3) years of the date of this solicitation:

1. All CMS contracts/task orders greater than the simplified acquisition threshold

2. All relevant contracts/orders entered into with:

• Other Federal Government Agencies,

• State Agencies,

• Local Governments, and

• Commercial Customers

The Offeror’s (including affiliated entities) or a CTA teammate summary shall provide the following information for each contract/task order mentioned above.

a. Customer or Agency

b. Contract number (if applicable);

c. Point of Contact (Contracting Officer or other for Commercial Contract);

d. Approximate total contract value;

e. Contract period of performance, by base and option year(s);

f. Description of contracted services/supplies; and,

g. Relevance (Y/N) o If the past performance is relevant, a description of the disclosed contract’s past performance information shall be provided indicating how it is relevant to the subject solicitation.

h. Additional Info: If performance was documented as less than satisfactory, the Offeror shall provide a summary of the issues identified, the steps taken to resolve the problem and the processes in place to improve future performance.

The below table shall be used when providing a summary of the past performance information:

Customer (Agency)

Contract #

POC

Total Contract

Value

Period of Performance

Description of Services/Supplies

Relevant (Y/N)

Additional Info

The Offeror (including affiliated entities) or a CTA teammate without relevant Federal government past performance may ask customers to submit no more than three (3) Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) for the same or similar work directly to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist (See Attachment J.4).

A joint venture having no past performance history itself may provide references based on the constituent companies. In addition, offerors having no organizational past performance record may provide references for proposed “key personnel.”

It is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure timely return of any/all PPQs to the Contracting Officer and Contract Specialist in accordance with the proposal due date and time established within this solicitation. PPQs should be submitted to the Contracting Officer up to 7 days after Phase 2 Proposal due date. Any PPQ received after this date may not be considered. Contractors may include those entered into with the State/Local Governments and/or commercial customers.

How this factor will be evaluated

The Government will assess its level of confidence that the Offeror (including affiliated entities) or a CTA teammate will perform the contract requirements successfully. The Government will base its assessment on its evaluation of past performance information.

The Offeror is advised that the Contracting Officer, using sound business judgment, may consider Federal contract past performance to be more relevant than State Agencies, Local Government or Commercial Customer performance assessments.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance, or for which information on past performance is not available, the Offeror’s Past Performance may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably.

3. Price

How to prepare the price volume:

The price volume must include a narrative portion and a spreadsheet. The narrative portion includes no page limit and should include a cover letter and a Basis of Estimate (BOE). The spreadsheet should provide a detailed build up by element of price for each CLIN. Further instructions for preparing each part of the price volume are provided below.

Cover Letter

1. Offeror’s company name & SAM EIN

2. Acknowledgement of receipt for any solicitation amendments issued by the

Government

3. Name and contact information of the offeror’s authorized negotiator(s)

4. Include a summary showing the price by line item as specified in the RFP.

Basis of Estimate (BOE)

1. The BOE should discuss the estimating methodology used to develop the proposed price (e.g., engineering estimates, should-cost analysis, historical benchmarks, subcontractor responses, vendor proposal or awarded purchase orders, catalog pricing, cost drivers and associated estimates of their activity, etc.). Further, it should describe the types of labor, material, and other direct costs (ODCs) as applicable. This should include a description of the qualifications associated with each proposed labor category and mapped to the position titles contemplated in performance of the needed work. It should include a description for material or ODCs as applicable (e.g., computer software) and any relevant performance information and rationale for the proposed quantity. The PWS should provide insight as to the scope of work envisioned under each line item. Offerors can choose to propose value added services under the services CLIN in each option period, at their discretion.

2. Proposal shall be provided in searchable PDFs and/or Word files and the cost information in Excel. The Excel file shall be unprotected, and include all formulas utilized in the formation of the spreadsheets.

3. For clarity, consider if the BOE should include a separate section for each task area / work-stream for cost elements such as labor hours and material, and an overarching section for things like labor rates, escalation, or assumptions that apply to all work in the order.

4. In accordance with FAR 12.209 and FAR 15.403-1(b), offerors shall provide support for proposed commercial prices as applicable:

• Published price lists

• Catalog prices

• Market prices

• Historical sales for the same or similar items

• Discounts offered to other customers

5. If subcontractors are proposed, the offeror shall provide:

• A description of the services to be subcontracted (i.e., PWS):

• Basis of subcontractor pricing (quotes, price lists, etc.)

• Identification of the pricing arrangement (e.g., Fixed Price and T&M);

• Results of the subcontract analysis in the form of a subcontract negotiation memorandum

6. The contractor should provide a copy of any forward pricing rate agreements or provisional indirect billing rates approved by a cognizant Government agency, if available. All indirect costs must be sufficiently explained.

7. Certified Cost or pricing data is not required however; Offerors shall provide any required data or documentation to demonstrate that the proposed prices are fair and reasonable. The Government may request additional information consistent with FAR 12.212 and FAR 15.403-3 if needed to determine price reasonableness.

Spreadsheet

1. Include a summary showing the price by line item as specified in the RFP. As needed, insert links and any additional tabs to complete the specified requirements of the spreadsheet.

2. Separate cost and/or pricing information should be submitted for each CLIN specified in the RFP, and then by task area or work-stream as specified in the

PWS.

3. It should be a fully-calculating spreadsheet with cells linked.

4. Prices should be broken down by element (e.g., labor, material and Other Direct

Costs (ODCs))

5. Proposed travel should be broken out into number of trips, number of travelers, and duration of trip for each destination. Details should be shown for all items, including commercial transportation, daily per diem rates, personal mileage, daily car rentals, etc. Travel costs will be reimbursed in accordance with the Federal Travel Regulation (FTR).

How this factor will be evaluated

Prices will be evaluated to ensure they are fair and reasonable, including consideration of the level of effort and the mix of labor proposed to perform the Statement of Objectives.

4. Section 508

How to prepare the 508 volume:

(HHSAR 352.239-78 Information and Communication Technology Accessibility Notice (Mar 2024) (Deviation)):

Any offeror responding to this solicitation must comply with established HHS Information and Communication Technology (ICT) accessibility standards. Information about Section 508 is available at https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/index.html.

The Section 508 accessibility standards applicable to this solicitation are stated in the clause at 352.239-79 Information and Communication Technology Accessibility. In order to facilitate the Government’s determination whether proposed ICT supplies, products, platforms, information, and documentation meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, offerors must submit an Accessibility Conformance Report (ACR) (based on the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) see https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat) in accordance with the completion instructions. The purpose of the checklists and conformance reports are to assist HHS acquisition and program officials in determining whether proposed ICT supplies, products, platforms, information, and documentation conform to applicable Section 508 accessibility standards. Checklists and ACRs evaluate—in detail—whether the ICT conforms to specific Section 508 accessibility standards and identifies remediation efforts needed to address conformance issues.

If an offeror claims its supplies or services meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, and it is later determined by the Government, i.e., after award of a contract or order, that supplies, products, platforms, information, documentation, or services support delivered do not conform to the described accessibility standards, remediation of the supplies, products, platforms, information, documentation, or services support to the level of conformance specified in the contract will be the responsibility of the Contractor at its expense.

In order to facilitate the Government's determination whether proposed ICT supplies meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, offerors must submit an Accessibility Conformance Report, in accordance with its completion instructions and tailored to the requirements in the solicitation. The purpose of the Report is to assist HHS acquisition and program officials in determining whether proposed ICT supplies conform to applicable Section 508 accessibility standards. The template allows offerors or developers to self-evaluate their supplies and document, in detail, whether they conform to a specific Section 508 accessibility standard, and any underway remediation efforts addressing conformance issues. Instructions for preparing the HHS Section 508 Evaluation Template are available at https://Section508.gov/.

In order to facilitate the Government's determination whether proposed ICT services meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, offerors must provide enough information to assist the Government in determining that the ICT services conform to Section 508 accessibility standards, including any underway remediation efforts addressing conformance issues.

Offerors to this solicitation must identify any inability to conform to Section 508 requirements. If an offeror claims its supplies or services meet applicable Section 508 accessibility standards, and it is later determined by the Government, i.e., after award of a contract or order, that supplies or services delivered do not conform to the described accessibility standards, remediation of the supplies or services to the level of conformance specified in the contract will be the responsibility of the Contractor at its expense.

Items delivered as electronic content must be accessible to HHS acceptance criteria.

Checklist for various formats are available at http://508.hhs.gov/. Materials, other than https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/index.html https://www.itic.org/policy/accessibility/vpat https://section508.gov/ http://508.hhs.gov/ items incidental to contract management, that are final items for delivery should be accompanied by the appropriate checklist, except upon approval of the Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer’s Representative.

(End of provision)

How this information will be evaluated

The 508 evaluation will not result in a score/rating as it is only applicable to the apparent successful Offeror. The evaluation of the 508 volume will not be considered in terms of best value. CMS will evaluate the offeror’s understanding of the requirements and ability to meet applicable accessibility standards. If deemed necessary prior to award, the Contracting Officer may have exchanges with the successful Offeror to remedy any issues or request additional information as it pertains to the successful Offeror’s submission. These exchanges with the successful offeror(s) do not constitute discussions and will be utilized to ensure that award is made to contractor(s) capable of meeting the 508 accessibility standards.

5. Business Ethics, Conflicts of Interest (COI) and Compliance

How to prepare this volume:

Complete and submit the solicitation attachment – “Contractor/Offeror Conflict of Interest” as a separate volume of the proposal. A response must be provided for all sections of the form even if no conflict exists. The proposed prime contractor(s) must conduct an analysis of each of its subcontractors’ COI submissions (attachment three (3) or similar information) in order to ensure that the subcontractor can perform services conflict-free. The Prime Contractor/Offeror shall include each of its subcontractors’ analysis with its proposal. The proposed Prime Contractor(s) must not submit the underlying attachment for subcontractor disclosures to CMS. However, the Contracting Officer may request a copy of the subcontractor submission(s).

How this information will be evaluated

(CONFLICT OF INTEREST EVALUATION (OCT 2020): The evaluation of the COI volume will not be considered in terms of best value. In accordance with FAR 9.504(e), the Government will evaluate the attachment “CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR CONFLICT OF INTEREST” as well as other information, as appropriate. The conflict-of-interest evaluation will not result in a score/rating as it is only applicable to the apparent successful Offeror.

(END OF INSTRUCTIONS)

How this factor will be evaluated

(END OF INSTRUCTIONS)