ATTACHMENT C-Vendor Questions and Responses 36C24226Q0530.docx

Attachment C- Vendor Questions and Responses- Question 1:

· (a) Will the Government publish the salient functional and performance characteristics an "or equal" product must meet, expressed as required outcomes (what the system must do) rather than brand-specific components or form factors?

· (b) Will the Government confirm that any solution meeting those salient characteristics - regardless of RF frequency, tag form factor, or manufacturer - will be evaluated as fully compliant and not downgraded for differing from any referenced product?

Responses to Question 1:

(a) We Can

(b) We can accept

Question 2

(a) Will the Government revise the CLIN descriptions to be technology-neutral (e.g., "patient wearable tag," "programming/configuration device") so that equal-or-better architectures can map their components to the CLINs without being deemed non-conforming?

Response to Question 2:

(a) We can edit Question 3:

(a) Does the Government require continuous, whole-floor real-time location of each tagged patient at all times, or only detection when a patient approaches a covered door or elevator?

(b) If continuous tracking is required, what is the maximum acceptable gap (in feet or square feet) between detection points within the protected wards?

Responses to Question 3:

(a) We only need to monitor the patients as they are approaching a covered door and elevator. Continuous, whole-floor real time location monitoring is not needed.

(b) Continued tracking is not required.

Question 4:

(a) Will the Government require that patient-tag tamper (band-removal) alerts be generated anywhere on the protected floor, in real time - not only when the patient is within range of a covered exit?

(b) Will the Government likewise require that low-battery alerts be generated anywhere on the protected floor, in real time, so staff can act proactively before a coverage gap occurs (e.g., tag status reported every 10 seconds)?

(c) What is the Government's required maximum latency between a tamper, low-battery, or elopement event and the resulting alert at the nurse, Police, and WHEN workstations?

Responses to Question 4:

(a) Tamper (band removal alert) is not required, can be an add-on feature if appropriate. Alerts can be when detected by covered exits. No need for continuous, whole-floor monitoring.

(b) Not required.

(c) 20 Seconds or less.

Question 5:

(a) Will the Government confirm that solutions using wall-penetrating sub-GHz RF (e.g., 433 MHz) for whole-floor coverage are acceptable equal-or-better approaches, given that they close the between-exit coverage gap inherent to 2.4 GHz door-only systems?

Response to Question 5:

(a) It is acceptable but not required.

Question 6:

(a) Will the Government accept, as an equal-or-better alternative, a reusable, cut-resistant, tamper-proof, key-locked patient band with a field-replaceable battery (replaceable in under two minutes at nominal cost) that provides continuous tamper and low-battery monitoring everywhere on the floor?

(b) Is the "at least 3 years" battery figure a fixed minimum, or a proxy for the underlying goals of low maintenance burden and reliable monitoring - in which case a reusable band with continuous monitoring and rapid battery replacement would satisfy the intent at lower lifecycle cost?

(c) Will the Government weigh total lifecycle cost (disposable replacement tags over the contract term vs. reusable bands with low-cost replaceable batteries) in the price evaluation?

Responses to Question 6:

(a) We can accept that. Not a required feature, but as an add-on feature. Can you explain on the key-lock feature at site visit?

(b) We would not accept a band with rapid battery replacement. Continuous monitoring throughout the whole floor is not a required feature.

(c) We can consider it, but we are curious about the battery replacement process. We would like to avoid the possibility of the patient opening up the bracelet and take out the battery on their own. Can discuss at site visit.

Question 7:

(a) Is the requirement for staff-carried tablets a mandatory deliverable, or will the Government accept a system that performs all programming, configuration, status monitoring, and troubleshooting centrally from the nurse, Police, and WHEN workstations (and via secure web/mobile client) without requiring staff to walk a tablet to each patient or device?

Response to Question 7:

(a) We can consider accepting this feature, but not a requirement.

Question 8:

(a) Please define the exact required elevator behavior on an elopement alert (hold doors open, hold/lock a landed cab so it cannot depart with the patient, and/or prevent cabs from landing at the floor), so all offerors price the same functionality.

(b) Does the Government require devices inside the elevator cabs, or will it accept detection in the elevator lobby that signals the existing elevator control system - with no in-cab equipment required?

(c) Please confirm fire/life-safety override of all elopement elevator logic is required (consistent with ASME A17.1 and NFPA 72).

Responses to Question 8:

(a) The elevator is required to hold doors open and hold the cab so it cannot depart with the patient inside the elevator.

(b) We can consider a system with no in-cab requirement. What are some limitations of a system without in-cab equipment? Would the elevator door be held open? Can discuss at site visit.

(c) Yes, life/fire safety override of all elopement elevator logic is required.

Question 9:

(a) Please confirm that all four elevators (P1, P2, P3, and S8 in Building 89) are located in a single shared elevator lobby and are serviced by one elevator control / machine room, and please specify the floor on which that control room is located.

(b) Please identify the elevator maintenance contractor and the elevator controller manufacturer/model in service.

Responses to Question 9:

(a) We can discuss on site visit.

(b) We can discuss on site visit.

Question 10:

(a) Please confirm the Government will accept the following approach: Vendor provides dry contacts to the VA's elevator contractor to (a) tie in to the elevator controllers, and (b) when a badged patient is detected in the elevator lobby, lock any cab(s) landed at that floor and prevent any cab from landing at that floor until the alert is closed, while staff are alerted to retrieve the patient.

(b) Please confirm the VA's elevator contractor will perform the controller-side terminations and programming, and whether that labor falls under the Vendors contract price or the VA's existing elevator-service agreement (per SOW 3.01.K).

Responses to Question 10:

(a) We can consider feature but not agreeing to it.

(b) This procurement is a turn-key meaning awardee’s contract price should include the agreement with the elevator maintenance company to execute the required feature of the system. The VA’s existing elevator service agreement would not cover such a service.

Question 11:

(a) Does the Government require electric/magnetic locking (maglocks) or access-control interlock at any egress doors, or detection-and-alarm only?

(b) If door locking is required, please identify which doors and the quantity, and confirm whether locks and power supplies are existing (awardee ties in via dry contact) or are to be furnished by the awardee. Please also confirm fire-alarm release/override of any locks.

Responses to Question 11:

(a) Maglocks are not required.

(b) Maglocks are not required.

Question 12:

(a) Will the VA furnish the application server (virtual machine or physical) so that it remains under VA enterprise image and patch management, with vendor installing and configuring the TRM-approved PatienTRAK software on it? Or is the server to be awardee-furnished?

(b) Likewise, will the VA furnish the six nurse, one Police, and one WHEN workstations on the VA enterprise image - with vendor providing the client licenses and configuration - or are the workstations awardee-furnished per CLINs 0002-0004?

Responses to Question 12:

(a) We require this system to be a completely standalone system without utilizing any existing VA network. The server would not be under VA enterprise image and patch management. The server is required to be awardee-furnished.

(b) The workstations are required to be awardee furnished.

Question 13:

(a) Please confirm the system will operate on a dedicated VLAN connecting all building infrastructures and all workstations across the campus, and confirm the VA will provision that VLAN and the required switch ports (and approximately how many ports per telecom/IDF closet and per building).

Response to Question 13:

(a) The system is required to be a standalone without utilizing any VA network infrastructure.

Question 14:

(a) Will the Government confirm that an offeror whose platform already holds an active VA TRM-Approved listing and current ERA (as vendor's SecurTRAK/PatienTRAK platform does) satisfies this requirement, and that this established VA security posture will be recognized in the Technical and Past Performance evaluation?

(b) Will the Government provide remote access (e.g., VA CAG/Azure) for the awarded vendor to perform configuration, updates, and 24/7 support, as is in place for vendor at other VAMCs?

Responses to Question 14:

(a) Yes, VA TRM approved software are preferred.

(b) No, We are not utilizing any VA Network infrastructure.

Question 15:

(a) Will the Government confirm that a non-PoE architecture is acceptable, and that offerors are not required to provide, depend upon, or have the VA install PoE switches - i.e., that the SOW's "capable of PoE or power within the CAT 6A jacket" language is satisfied by the contractor furnishing its own 24 VDC and distributing power and data over the bus cabling?

(b) Will the VA provide standard (non-PoE), supervised network switch ports for the contractor's IP Local Controllers (ELCs), and confirm the number available per closet/building?

(c) Will the VA provide a dedicated emergency / UPS-backed 120 VAC outlet in each closet where the contractor installs its 24 VDC power supply(ies) (the contractor furnishes the 24 VDC supplies and battery back-up; the VA provides the AC source)?

(d) Please confirm the SOW's loss-of-power / loss-of-communication supervision is satisfied at the controller/server level, rather than requiring PoE-based per-device supervision.

Responses to Question 15:

(a) Yes, this is acceptable.

(b) No

(c) Yes, we can provide the AC source

(d) Can you expand on this? Would the alert be at the workstation? We can discuss it on site visit.

Question 16:

(a) Does the Government require that alerts display patient location on facility floor-plan maps at each workstation (with real-time patient identifier, location, battery, and tamper status), and may the awardee use VA-provided AutoCAD floor plans for this purpose?

(b) Does the Government require integration to nurse-call and/or clinical-communication systems (e.g., Vocera/Stryker)? If so, please identify the system(s) and the integration method (dry contact, API, etc.).

Responses to Question 16:

(a) Whole floor coverage not necessary.

(b) Integration with other systems are not required.

Question 17:

(a) Please confirm the June 18 site-visit logistics (arrival time, sign-in/escort, and point of contact).

(b) Please confirm whether the "highly encouraged" site-visit language now governs, such that participation is not a mandatory condition of award, reconciling it with SOW 3.01.L.

Responses to Question 17:

(a) The location is ST Albans VAMC 179-00 Linden Blvd, Queens, NY 11424 Main Building #89 Main Lobby. POC is Yuxuan Li; she will meet you in the lobby. Her cellphone number is (347) 544-2754. Please call to confirm you will be attending or is running late.

(b) It is mandatory that you attend so that you can get the lay of the land and see what is required for the project. I wrote highly encouraged to actually require that vendors attend.

Question 18:

(a) Will the Government provide AutoCAD (.dwg) and/or PDF floor plans for all eight buildings (85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93), marked with the 76 door locations, the 4 elevators, the six nurse stations, the Police office, and the WHEN office - ideally before the June 18 site visit - so offerors can prepare accurate device counts, cable distances, and coverage and use the visit to verify field conditions? Accurate, responsive pricing cannot be finalized without them.

(b) For each protected ward, please confirm the number of floors, approximate square footage, and construction type (e.g., reinforced concrete, masonry), which directly affect coverage design.

(c) Please identify the telecommunications/IDF/MDF closets serving each building and confirm available rack/cabinet space and emergency power at each.

Responses to Question 18:

(a) We can provide the PDFs of the floor plans to the best of our ability. Markings of the location would not be provided.

(b) Each patient ward has two doors.

(c) The closest are available with spaces.

Question 19:

(a) Will infection-control (ICRA) containment be required during installation in occupied areas, and if so, what ICRA class? (vendor will fully comply where required; please note that ICRA containment carts/measures, if required, add approximately 10% to hardware installation labor.)

Response to Question 19:

(a) ICRA would be required during installation.

Question 20:

(a) Please state the total quantity of patient wearables to be priced (or the patient census/bed count per protected ward) so all offerors price an equal quantity.

(b) The SOW provides a 1-year warranty and a service-response standard, but the Price/Cost Schedule contains no option-year maintenance CLINs. Will the Government add option-year maintenance CLINs (software/firmware updates, parts, and remote support) so lifecycle support is competed on a common basis?

Responses to Question 20:

(a) 100 tags

(b) Maintenance service contract is to be awarded separately after warranty expires.

Question 21:

(a) Will the Government consider, as a best-value differentiator under the Technical factor, a platform whose installed infrastructure can support these additional use cases in the future without replacing readers, tags, or the server - even though only elopement is required today?

Response to Question 21:

(a) We are not looking to expand the system for any other purpose in the near future.