J.23-A_KCER_SIP_Instructions.pdf

CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS Attachment J.23-A Special Project KCER

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

General Instructions for Special Innovation Project - “Kidney Community Emergency Response (KCER) Program”

This amendment is being issued in accordance with Section H.16 “Participation in Special Innovation Projects (SIPs)” of the Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016-ESRD- NETWORKS. Only those Offeror’s that have submitted proposals for RFP CMS-2016-ESRD- NETWORKS should propose on this SIP. Offerors shall develop its proposal based on firm-fixed price.

This Special Innovation Project is optional to propose on and the Offeror must be awarded an ESRD Network Contract to receive the Special Innovation Project Award. This SIP will be incorporated into the winning offerors ESRD Network Contract. The period of performance for this Special Innovation Project is estimated to start on December 1, 2015 and will run concurrently with Section F.2 Period of Performance for the base year and all options years under Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS.

I. SOLICITATION QUESTIONS

A. Question Submission:

All questions concerning this Special Innovation Project shall be submitted electronically via e-mail and shall be received at Michael.Milanese@cms.hhs.gov and Jonathan.Chattler@cms.hhs.gov by 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time, September 16, 2015. CMS will answer relevant questions by amendment to this solicitation, with copies of both the questions and answers being supplied to all prospective Offerors via FedBizOpps, without reference as to the originating source. Questions submitted by telephone or verbally will not be honored.

As soon as an Offeror is aware of any problems or ambiguities in interpreting the specifications, terms and conditions, instructions or evaluation criteria of this solicitation, the Contracting Office shall be notified.

1. Submission of Questions

Failure to follow these specific directions may result in questions not being answered. It is at the discretion of the CO to answer questions submitted after the cut-off date and time.

Offerors shall, as a part of their question(s), cite the specific solicitation Section, paragraph, subparagraph (if applicable) and page number (e.g., page 82). For questions of a “General Question” nature, Offerors shall identify the question as “General”. Refer to Attachment J.21, Question Submission Template (in Microsoft Excel format).

mailto:Michael.Milanese@cms.hhs.gov mailto:Jonathan.Chattler@cms.hhs.gov

Submission of Questions shall include at a minimum: Company Name, Address, Point of Contact and Phone Number for questions submitted. The subject line of each submission shall specify RFP number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS Special Innovation Project KCER Questions.

2. Posting of Questions and Responses

All reasonable and relevant Questions and Responses will be made available through issuance of a solicitation amendment.

B. Intent to Submit a Proposal Submission:

The Offeror shall indicate its intent to submit a proposal by September 30, 2015. This notice shall be submitted via e-mail with the subject title “CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS Special Innovation Project KCER Intent to Submit a Proposal” to the following addresses:

Jonathan.Chattler@cms.hhs.gov.

Please be advised that intent to submit a proposal is not binding on the Offeror and is for planning/scheduling purposes only. In addition, an Offeror that does not submit an intent to propose response is not precluded from actually submitting a proposal.

II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

A. Communication prior to contract award shall be directed to Contract Specialist, Jonathan

Chattler, at Jonathan.Chattler@cms.hhs.gov.

B. The proposal must be prepared in three (3) parts, each consisting of:

Volume I - Technical Proposal Volume II – Business Proposal Volume III - Conflict of Interest

C. Each of the parts shall be separate and complete in itself so the evaluation of one may be accomplished independently of evaluation of the other. The technical proposal must not contain reference to price/cost; however, resource information such as data concerning labor hours and categories, subcontracts, etc., may be contained in the technical proposal so that your understanding of the scope of the work may be evaluated.

D. The Government will evaluate proposals in accordance with the evaluation criteria set forth in Section VII, Evaluation Criteria.

E. The solicitation does not commit the Government to pay any cost for the preparation and submission of a proposal. In addition, the CO is the only individual who can legally commit the Government to the expenditure of public funds in connection with the proposed acquisition.

F. Late Proposals will be handled in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition.

G. CMS reserves the right to amend or cancel this SIP as necessary.

H. Offerors’ proposals that simply repeat the requirements or state “we will conform to the requirements as stated” are not acceptable and will be considered non-responsive.

I. Offeror is advised that its proposal may become part of the official contract file.

III. PROPOSAL DELIVERY

Offeror shall deliver the proposal to CMS no later than 11:00 AM, OCTOBER 6, 2015.

The Offeror shall mail or hand-deliver proposals with original signatures to:

Mailing and Fed-Ex/UPS Address:

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

OAGM/ASG/DQC

Attention: Jonathan Chattler, Contract Specialist 7500 Security Boulevard, Mailstop B3-30-03 Baltimore, MD 21244-1850

RFP: CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS KCER SIP

Hand Delivery Address:

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

OAGM/ASG/DQC

7111 Security Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21244 Attention: Jonathan Chattler, Contract Specialist, (410) 786-0352

NOTE: Please be advised that CMS Security Guards will not accept proposals for CMS staff. If you are hand delivering your proposal, an appointment is required. Please contact Jonathan Chattler at Jonathan.Chattler@cms.hhs.gov a minimum of 24-hours in advance of your anticipated delivery date to schedule an appointment. Proposal delivery must be made to the exact location stated in this solicitation on or before the date and time specified. The proposal is not considered to be delivered until it is in the hands of the Contracting Specialist.

Proposals delivered by a mail carrier service other than the U.S. Postal Service or Federal Express are not accepted in the CMS mailroom and, therefore, Offerors’ proposals may not be delivered timely to the location and person specified in this solicitation. Offerors are advised to take that possibility into consideration in determining when and how a proposal must be received at the specified location to meet the date and time requirements. Offerors are also advised to make sure that each proposal and CD is clearly marked as to:

a. The solicitation number,

b. The date and time for receipt,

c. The intended room/cube location (7111 Security Blvd.)

d. The intended recipient, and

e. The telephone number of the intended recipient

Proposal Organization:

The Offeror’s proposal submission shall consist of Volume I Technical Proposal, Volume II Business Proposal and Volume III Conflict of Interest.

1. Volumes - The following instructions will establish the acceptable minimum requirements for the format and contents of the proposal. The proposal shall be organized (e.g. Indexed) to clearly identify the files on each Compact Disk (CD). All PDF files included on the CD shall contain bookmarks indicating each indexed section. Offerors must submit as follows:

Volume Hard Copies CDs Due Date

I – Technical Proposal One (1) Original Two (2) 11:00 am, October 6, 2015

II – Business Proposal One (1) Original Two (2) 11:00 am, October 6, 2015

III – Conflict of Interest One (1) Original Two (2) 11:00 am, October 6, 2015

2. Specifications for CD submissions:

a. The files on each CD shall be compatible with Microsoft (MS) Office 2010.

b. Each file shall be printable to 8x11 paper and be readable (12 point font or larger) without requiring formatting adjustments.

c. All PDF files shall contain bookmarks indicating each indexed section. The indexed sections shall coincide/match the hard copy sections.

d. The Offeror is responsible for document/file version control and as such shall ensure the multiple CDs contain the exact documents that make up the official submission.

e. The Offeror shall certify that each CD has been checked using the latest version of virus detection software and is virus free. The certification shall identify the virus detection software and version used.

f. Each electronic copy will be on an individual CD (i.e., The Technical Proposal shall include 2 CDs, the Business Proposal shall include 2 CDs, and the Conflict of Interest Proposal shall include 2 CDs. That equals 6 CDs.

3. Binding and Labeling:

All hard copy proposals shall be in locking 3 ring binders. A binder cover sheet shall be affixed to each volume, which clearly identifies each volume, volume number, copy number (i.e., copy 2 of 4), the solicitation identification, and Offeror’s name.

4. Indexing:

TAB indexing shall be used to identify all sections listed in Section L.14. Each volume shall be organized such that an extensive search of required documents is not necessary to review the proposal. All PDF files sent electronically and included on the CD shall contain bookmarks indicating each indexed section, to coincide with the hard copy.

5. Page Size, Typing, Spacing and Page Numbering:

Page size shall be 8 ½ by 11 inches. Fold-outs will count as two pages. All pages in the proposal shall be numbered. Submit proposals, to the extent possible, on high grade white paper that can be recycled. Type size shall not be less than 12 point. Margins shall be no less than 1". Graphs and tables shall be no less than 10 point font and single spaced. The CO, at his/her discretion, shall have the authority to waive minor deviations from the above specifications.

6. Cover Page:

A cover page shall be included at the beginning of each volume which clearly identifies the SIP title, number, name of organization, Dun and Bradstreet Number, Tax Identification Number, identification of the proposal part, indicate whether the proposal is an original or a copy, name of authorized negotiator(s) with their phone number(s) (including extension) and email address(es).

IV. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS (Volume I)

A. General

The proposal shall consist of a technical, business and conflict of interest proposal. The page limitation for the technical proposal is 32 total (16 double sided) pages (not including resumes). There is no page limitation for the business and conflict of interest proposal.

The technical proposal must not contain reference to price/cost; however, resource information such as data concerning labor hours and categories, materials, subcontract(s), etc., must be included in the technical proposal.

B. Technical Proposals Contents

CMS has identified specific requirements that the ESRD Networks must address in its written technical proposal. Each ESRD Network shall prepare and submit a document addressing the specific requirements as specified below:

Technical Proposal Organization

Tab Content Table of Contents 1 Technical Approach 2 Past Performance/Experience 3 Management Plan 4 Staffing Plan and Personnel

1. Technical Approach:

While describing your technical approach, also indicate how the Network will accomplish the following for Tasks 1 - 2 of the SOW:

• What innovations will you bring to your activities as the national leader of emergency preparedness and response to the kidney community?

• How will you measure and ensure the effectiveness of these activities and your strategic planning?

• How will collaboration and/or stakeholder engagement (including patients) be utilized and how will it impact outcomes?

• What challenges are anticipated and what proposed solutions will be implemented?

Indicate how the Network will accomplish the following for Tasks 3 - 9 of the SOW:

• A Specific plan and approach to completion of all requirements of each Task of this statement of work;

• Barriers the offeror anticipates to the success of the project and strategy or methods the offeror believes likely to be effective in overcoming those barriers; and,

• Document evidence or experience that the offeror bases its opinion that the proposed strategy or methods to overcome barriers must be effective.

2. Past Performance/Experience

• The offerer shall describe their experience developing and fostering partnerships to accomplish the services described in the SOW.

• The offerer must describe how their existing experience supports the proposed approaches used to collaborate with stakeholders to meet the activities outlined in the SOW. The offeror must also demonstrate how the proposed meetings and collaborations with stakeholders will meet the specific major activities proposed.

• The offeror shall provide a brief explanation of how the performance or the work that has performed relates to the requirements of the ESRD KCER SOW. The explanation must include a correlation between the experience and the work under the ESRD KCER SOW requirements.

• In order to facilitate the Government’s evaluation of the offeror’s past performance, the following protocol is hereby established for this solicitation. The Government may also use past performance information from sources other than those included in the offeror’s proposal. The Government reserves the right to make only two attempts to contact any given reference. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure that the appropriate point of contact for any and all references is aware that they may be contacted by CMS/OAGM relative to this solicitation.

• Offerors are advised that CMS will evaluate past performance utilizing any or all of the following: (1) information obtained from the CPARS database, (2) information submitted for offerors as provided in their technical proposal and (3) information available to Government through other sources known to CMS.

3. Management Plan

CMS will evaluate the offeror’s description of proposed management plan to the extent that the offeror demonstrates and documents the necessary management structure to successfully perform the contract including:

• Ability to conduct and manage all of the areas described in the Statement of Work

(Section C.)

• The offeror demonstrates and documents the necessary management structure to successfully perform the contract.

• Offeror’s management structure must be consistent with the proposed management plan and with efficient, effective implementation of proposed strategies.

• Offeror must explain in detail the performance management process and system that will be used to continuously monitor progress at meeting desired goals.

4. Staffing Plan and Personnel

The offeror shall submit a staffing plan that demonstrates its ability to provide qualified personnel in sufficient numbers for the contract and for ensuring its proposed team, including subcontractors (if proposed), has the skills to meet the requirements stated in the SOW. The offeror shall provide a proposed labor mix that demonstrates an accurate and effective understanding of the technical requirements of the SOW. The offeror shall also demonstrate an appropriate approach to managing the workloads posed by the number and types of providers in the state or territory, including the FTEs (labeled as prime or subcontractor, if proposed) required to perform the tasks. The offeror shall provide a summary of the roles and responsibilities of each labor category with the associated FTEs, including subcontractor labor categories, if proposed. In addition, the offeror is required to submit a staffing chart for the proposed plan. Labor hours and

FTEs are required to be specified. Do not include labor rates and indirect rates in this section.

The proposal shall demonstrate:

a. Offeror ability to assemble a team with the appropriate skills to meet the requirements of the SOW;

b. Offeror’s proposed labor mix accurately reflects the offeror’s technical approach; and

c. Offeror’s proposal presents and describes its rationale and method for staffing the contract that can be accomplished.

CMS will evaluate the offeror’s description of proposed staff to the extent that the offeror demonstrates and documents the necessary expertise to successfully perform the contract.

Therefore, the offeror shall identify and provide resumes (not included in page limit) for all personnel of the contract. Each resume shall contain sufficient detail to clearly demonstrate the candidate is qualified for the position proposed. Each resume shall contain, at a minimum, the following information:

• Name and position.

• Educational background, including academic degrees and the year conferred.

• Technical training, including program year completions.

• Years of applicable experience.

• Citizenship.

• Immediate availability

• History of applicable employment experience and the technical qualifications relevant to the SOW and labor categories.

• History of other experience and professional accomplishments that the offeror may wish to present to demonstrate the qualifications of the proposed candidate.

V. BUSINESS PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS (VOLUME II)

A. Table of Contents and Cover Letter

Offerors shall include a Table of Contents that identifies and clearly labels the various business proposal sections. The cover letter shall include the names of organizations that make up the teaming arrangement. The cover letter shall also describe any assumptions made by the Offeror in preparing the business proposal.

B. The Offeror shall use business proposal spreadsheets and summarize total costs for the project using Form 685, in accordance with Attachment, J.22 in addition to breaking out costs by major task listed in the SOW or major activity or set of activities as described in the project plan. The business proposal shall be submitted in an electronic version of the spreadsheet on a CD using Excel. Offerors also need to provide a PDF version of the complete business proposal. The Business Proposal is unlimited in page count. When completing Attachment J.22, please reference Attachment J.22a, Business Proposal Form Instructions.

C. Subcontract and Consulting Agreements

1. A statement as to the adequacy of the subcontractor’s accounting system, with supporting documentation. Include what agency made the determination of adequacy, and provide supporting documentation of the determination. If a subcontractor does not have an adequate accounting system, the subcontractor will be unable to be awarded cost reimbursement subcontracts until their accounting system is deemed adequate.

2. If the subcontractor is required to submit a disclosure statement has this been done and has the submitted disclosure statement been reviewed for adequacy and compliance? Please identify the agency that made the determination and copy of the adequacy and compliance determination.

3. Provide a statement as to whether the proposed subcontractor is on the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs.

4. Extent to which adequate price competition was obtained, or justification for its absence.

5. Identification of the type of subcontract to be used (e.g. Time & Materials, Firm- Fixed- Price)

6. Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data; not required for IDIQ award

7. The Offeror shall furnish information concerning the need for such consultant services, copy of the consultant agreement, a description as to how the consultant was selected and the reasonableness of the fees to be paid.

D. Equipment and Property

If additional equipment must be acquired, you must include in your business proposal the description and estimated cost of each item and whether you propose to furnish the item with your own funds.

It is the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) policy that contractors provide all equipment and facilities necessary for performance of the contract; however, in some instances, an exception may be granted to furnish government owned property or to authorize a purchase with contract funds.

1. You must identify all government-owned property in your possession and all property acquired from federal funds, to which you have title, which is proposed to be used in the performance of the prospective contract.

2. The management and control of government property must be in accordance with HHS Publication OS-686 entitled, "Contractor's Guide to Control of Government

Property (1990)," which can be accessed at http://www.knownet.hhs.gov/log/AgencyPolicy/HHSLogPolicy/contractorsguide.htm

E. Other Administrative Data

• Statement of Proposal Validity: Your proposal must stipulate that it is predicated upon all the terms and conditions of Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016- ESRD-NETWORKS. In addition, it must contain a statement to the effect that it is firm for a period of at least 270 days from the date specified for receipt of offers by the Government.

• Responsibility Determination: The Contracting Officer will make a responsibility determination in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1. The offeror shall demonstrate the degree to which it has met each area of responsibility. The offeror shall submit sufficient, current and adequate documentation that demonstrates the offeror has addressed each area of responsibility below. If no information is available, offerors shall state not-applicable. CMS will evaluate and assess the documentation and other available information in making a responsibility determination. The responsibility determination is not point-scored; however, it will be used as a factor in making a recommendation for contract award.

1. Proposal Details

a. Labor Rates – Offeror shall provide labor rates for proposed personnel expected to be used in the performance of this requirement. The proposed labor rates should be supported with payroll information, letters of intent or salary survey information.

b. Indirect Rates –

1) An Offeror with current government approved indirect rate agreement should provide a copy of the forward pricing rate agreement with the proposal.

2) An Offeror without a current forward pricing rate agreement needs to provide the following:

i. The last two years of actual indirect rates with a rate schedule showing both the pool (by cost centers) and base of allocation for each indirect rate.

ii. Provide budgeted out year rates with sufficient detail to support the basis of estimate for each cost center in the overheard pool. The indirect bases should be in line with anticipated future work.

c. Independent Research & Development (IR&D) – In accordance with the Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulations (HHSAR) 352.216-72, the cost of independent research and development, including its proportionate share of indirect costs are unallowable. Any Independent Research & Development (IR&D) is required to be excluded from indirect rate calculations.

d. Subcontract Costs – If the Offeror includes subcontractors as part of their proposal, they are required to obtain and analyze cost/pricing data from the subcontractor in accordance with FAR 15.404-3. A copy of that analysis should be included with the proposal submission.

e. Uncompensated Overtime – The Offeror is required to include a copy of its policy on “uncompensated overtime” with its proposal (FAR 52.237-10).

Uncompensated overtime is defined as “hours worked without additional compensation in excess of an average of 40 hours per week by direct charge employees who are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act.”

2. Completed copy of the Standard Form 30

3. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

(Note: The requirement to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan is not applicable to Small Business Concerns responding to this solicitation.)

In accordance with FAR 52.219-9 revised Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Section J, Attachment J.17) incorporated by reference in Section I of the Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS, Offerors are required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan for any contract that exceeds $650,000.

In accordance with FAR 19.702 (a) (1), Statutory Requirements, contract modifications that individually is expected to exceed $650,000 and that has subcontracting possibilities, shall require the apparently successful offeror to submit an acceptable subcontracting plan. If the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the contracting officer within the time limit prescribed by the contracting officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award.

Offerors should refer back to Section L.15 “Business Proposal Instructions (VOLUME II)”, Section 4 “Small Business Subcontracting Plan” for details regarding the contents of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

VI. CONFLICT OF INTEREST INSTRUCTIONS (VOLUME III)

NOTE: The information below applies to anything not already identified in the proposal response under Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS.

The Offeror’s conflict of interest proposal shall be organized as follows:

TAB A Organizational Conflict of Interest – Summary List of Contracts TAB B Conflict of Interest – Program Information Detail TAB C Compliance Program Attestation TAB D Contract Integrity/Misconduct

Volume III shall include the following:

A. TAB A: Organizational Conflict of Interest – Summary List of Contracts

Offerors must disclose all contracts, both government (local, state and federal) currently held with CMS, other government health care agencies, or with non-government entities, as a Prime and/or as a Subcontractor, for itself, its parent company, subsidiaries or other affiliated entities that a prudent business person and/or the Government would view as an actual, apparent or potential conflict of interest with the work to be performed under this SIP that differs from Section H.1 of the Conflicts of Interest, already submitted as part of the RFP number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS. For each contract, Offerors or contractors must provide the following:

a) Identify contract as a Prime, Subcontractor, parent company, subsidiary or other affiliated entity

b) Contract Number

c) Period of Performance

d) Point of Contact (Project Officer and Contracting Officer)

e) Contract Amount

f) Short Description of Work or Service Performed

g) For each contact listed under this category, the Offeror or contractor must provide a statement to the effect whether or not the identified entity has an actual, potential or apparent organizational conflict of interest (OCI) for each OCI type: 1) Unequal Access to Information, 2) Biased Ground Rule, and/ or 3) Impaired Objectivity. If an actual, potential or apparent OCI is identified, then the Offeror or contractor must submit a mitigation plan.

(1) Unequal

Access to Information

(“Unfair” access to non-public information) – Consists of situations in which a firm has access to nonpublic information (including proprietary information and non-public source-selection information) as part of its performance of a Government contract and that information may provide the firm with a competitive advantage in a later competition for a Government contract. In these “unequal access to information” cases, the concern is limited to the risk of the firm gaining an unfair competitive advantage; there is no issue of bias.

(2) Biased Ground Rules

Consists of situations in which a firm, as part of its performance of a Government contract, has helped (or is in a position to help) set the ground rules for another Government contract by, for example, writing the statement of work or the specifications, or establishing source-selection criteria. In these “biased ground rules” cases, the primary concern is that the firm could skew the competition, whether intentionally or not, in favor of itself and/or its affiliates.

These situations may also involve a concern that the firm, by virtue of its special knowledge of the agency’s future requirements, would have an unfair competitive advantage in the competition for those requirements.

(3) Impaired Objectivity

Consists of situations where a firm has an interest (typically financial) that may conflict with the interest of the Government to whom the firm has a contractual obligation, and the firm’s work under the Government contract could give the firm the opportunity to benefit its other business interests. If the firm is using subjective judgment or giving advice, and its other business interests could be affected by that judgment or advice, the firm’s objectivity may be impaired. An example would be if the firm was evaluating itself, an affiliate or a competitor, either through an assessment of performance under another contract or an evaluation of proposals. In these “impaired objectivity” cases, the concern is that the firm’s ability to render impartial advice to the Government could appear to be undermined by its relationship with the entity whose work product is being evaluated.

All proposed subcontractor(s) must disclose to the Prime contractor all contracts, both government (local, state and Federal) and non-government, currently held as Prime and/or as a Subcontractor, at the same level of detail required under (a) through (g) as stated above.

Sample Disclosure Format for TAB A

(a) Type of Contract

(b) Contract

(c) Period of Performance

(d) Points of Contact

(e) Contract Cost

(f) Short Description

(g)

*OCI

Y/N

*If answer in block (g) is “yes”, see TAB A paragraph (g) for instructions (i.e., mitigation plan).

B. TAB B: Conflict of Interest – Program Information Detail

In order to be eligible for award of a contract the Government must ensure that an Offeror or contractor is free, to the greatest extent possible, of all conflicts of interest. Therefore, the Offeror or contractor is required to submit the disclosure of information contained in Section H.1 Conflict of Interest Certificate, that differs from RFP number CMS-2016- ESRD-NETWORKS in order to be considered for award. Failure to submit the required Conflict of Interest Certificate information may deem an Offeror’s or contractor’s proposal to be non-responsive to the solicitation.

Examples of methods an Offeror or contractor may use to mitigate conflicts of interest, including conflicts created as a result of the financial relationships of officers, directors and managers within the organization are provided below. The examples are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all the possible methods to mitigate conflicts of interest. Further, the CO is- not obligated to approve a mitigation method that uses one or more of these examples. An Offeror’s or contractor’s method of mitigating conflicts of interest will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis during the proposal evaluation process.

• Divestiture of the financial relationship the organization or individual has in another organization;

• If shared responsibilities create the conflict, a plan, included in the Conflicts of

Interest Certificate, to separate or create firewalls between lines of business and management or critical staff from work on the contract; or

• If the conflict exists because of an individual’s indirect interest, recusal of the individual on decisions related to the indirect interest, divestiture of the interest or removal of the individual from the work under the contract.

C. TAB C: Compliance Program Attestation

In order to be eligible for award of a contract, the Offeror or contractor must have in place a compliance program that is acceptable to CMS. The compliance program shall submit a Compliance Program Attestation at the time of the proposal in the format specified by CMS. Include Attachment J.19 with COI submission.

The compliance program shall describe in detail the elements, personnel, processes and procedures the Offeror or contractor intends to utilize to assure that the Offeror or contractor, including any business associates or subcontractors of the Offeror or contractor, is in compliance with all appropriate statutes, regulations and contractual requirements. In addition, the Compliance Program shall address compliance with the Offeror’s or Contractor’s own policies and procedures.

If the Offeror or contractor has an “enterprise” compliance program already in place with a dedicated “corporate” compliance officer, then the Offeror or contractor shall demonstrate that a Medicare-specific compliance program supplement has been created, including required documentation (see below) and the appointment of a Medicare compliance officer who is dedicated to the Medicare line(s) of business, and who is a member of the senior management team and has day-to-day responsibility for the Medicare lines of business. The Medicare-specific program must be provided with adequate financial and staffing resources.

The Offeror or contractor shall provide the following documents. To determine which of the below documents are applicable. Refer to FAR 52.203-13.

1. Position descriptions for the Compliance Officer and other members of the

Compliance Department. CMS prefers that the Compliance Officer not be involved in operations.

2. Code of Conduct

3. Written compliance policies and procedures

4. Compliance training materials used or developed in the last year

5. Names and positions of the Board of Directors and/or Compliance Committee members charged with oversight of the compliance program.

6. Charters for the Board and/or Executive Compliance Committees.

7. Conflict of interest questionnaire(s) (blank) that are completed by employees, managers, officers and Board members.

8. Risk assessment protocol(s) developed by the Compliance Department.

9. Internal audit plan

Failure to submit the required documentation may deem the Offeror’s proposal to be non-responsive to this solicitation. For additional guidance, Offerors may reference the compliance guidance located at:

http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Contracting/Medicare-Administrative- Contractors/Downloads/compliance.pdf

D. TAB D: Contract Integrity/Misconduct

CMS will review any and all available information relating to administrative misconduct. CMS will review any and all available information relating to integrity violations, and contractual or administrative misconduct. Offerors shall disclose any and all known False Claims Act, Civil Monetary Penalties, criminal investigations and/or indictments, qui tam lawsuits or other administrative misconduct of the Offeror or contractor and/or of any parent or affiliated company of the Offeror or contractor whose conduct may be attributed to the Offeror or contractor, within the past ten (10) years.

VII. EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. GENERAL PROCEDURES

Award will be made to the Offeror(s) whose proposal offers the best overall value to the Government. This will be determined by a trade-off technique that allows the Government to consider award to other than the lowest cost Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror. It permits tradeoffs among cost and non-cost evaluation factors. Offerors are advised that primary consideration will be given to the technical quality of the proposals in the evaluation process. All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price. The non-cost evaluation factors are as follows:

• Technical Approach

• Past Performance

• Key Personnel and Essential Staff

• Management Plan & Corporate Capacity

• Small Business and Small Disadvantaged Business Utilization Subcontract Plan (if applicable)

The non-cost evaluation factors are approximately equal in importance to each other, with the exception of Technical Approach which is of the highest importance. CMS will conduct a cost realism analysis.

The business proposal will not be point scored. CMS will evaluate the Business Proposal to assess CMS' level of confidence in the Offeror's ability to deliver efficient, risk free performance at a fair and reasonable cost. CMS will evaluate cost in this procurement by evaluating the costs of the Special Innovation Project cost proposals, including indirect rate history and accounting system adequacy. Cost is not the most important evaluation factor. However, as the degree of the equality of the non-cost factors increase then cost may be the determining factor. Further, after evaluation of the other factors cost may be the deciding factor for selection, depending upon whether a highly evaluated technical proposal warrants the evaluated cost differential.

B. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Technical evaluation factors are listed in descending order of importance.

Each offeror shall submit a technical and business proposal in accordance with the instructions specified in Section L of this solicitation. CMS will review and assess the information provided in the written technical proposal to assess each ESRD’s approach to the work requirements of the new special project. Review and assessment of the technical proposal will place specific emphasis on the ESRD Network’s demonstration of capability to satisfactorily perform the requirements of the Statement of Work. The ESRD Network’s past performance will be assessed as part of the technical evaluation. CMS will utilize the ESRD Network’s current CPARS past performance evaluation as well as any other information available to CMS for this past performance assessment.

If a proposal is deemed unacceptable, the proposal will not be included within the competitive range.

Proposals shall be evaluated in accordance with the methodology and criteria set forth herein to determine the offeror’s ability to complete all technical requirements for conducting the proposed effort.

CMS will identify each proposal’s strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies. The Government will consider the degree to which the offeror demonstrates its ability to meet or exceed the requirements in the Statement of Work (SOW) as they relate to the evaluation factors. The TEP will evaluate the offeror’s proposal against the evaluation factors listed below:

1. Technical Approach

The technical approach will be evaluated based on the offerors ability to perform the requirements of the statement of work.

2. Past Performance/Experience

Experience will be evaluated based on your prior, existing and proposed approach(es) to meeting and collaborating with vested stakeholders and past performance.

In accordance with FAR 9.104-1, General standards, the Offeror must have a satisfactory performance record in order to be considered for award. See also FAR 9.104-3(b), Satisfactory Performance Record, and FAR 42.15, Contractor Performance Information. Past performance information will be used to assess responsibility and to evaluate technical merit in accordance with FAR 15.305 and any requirements of this solicitation.

In evaluating the Past Performance factor, CMS will consider past performance information available in PPIRS and/or CPARS and the past performance documentation submitted with the proposal. In addition to these sources, CMS may consider information from a range of CMS internal and external sources to develop an adjectival rating for past performance.

When developing the past performance factor rating, CMS may consider information available to CMS up to the date of the most recent proposal submission. Moreover, the Government may consider any other relevant past performance information that may become available.

The CMS evaluation of past performance will be based on the Offeror’s demonstrated ability, under contracts of a similar nature, scope, and complexity as the ESRD NCC contract to successfully meet the requirements of the SOW in this solicitation. The CMS will develop past performance findings based on its review of the Offeror’s past performance record.

3. Management Plan

• Ability to conduct and manage all of the areas described in the Statement of Work

(Section C.)

• The offeror demonstrates and documents the necessary management structure to successfully perform the contract.

• Offeror’s management structure must be consistent with the proposed management plan and with efficient, effective implementation of proposed strategies.

• Offeror must explain in detail the performance management process and system that will be used to continuously monitor progress at meeting desired goals.

4. Staffing Plan and Personnel

• Offeror’s ability to assemble a team with the appropriate skills to meet the requirements of the SOW;

• Offeror’s proposed labor mix accurately reflects the offeror’s technical approach;

and

• Offeror’s proposal presents and describes its rationale and method for staffing the contract that can be accomplished.

• Offerors shall provide resumes of all personnel for this contract.

C. BUSINESS PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

The business proposal evaluation will consist of a price analysis, and limited cost analysis, as necessary, utilizing information other than cost or pricing data to determine the reasonableness of the proposed costs.

D. CONFLICT OF INTEREST CERTIFICATION AND COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

EVALUATION

The Government will review the Offeror’s or contractor’s Conflict of Interest (COI) submission of information required in Section H.1 of the Request for Proposal (RFP) number CMS-2016-ESRD-NETWORKS. and Section VI of Attachment J.23-A and make a determination if the Offeror or contractor meets the COI requirements. CMS will not enter into a contract with an entity that CMS determines has, or has the potential for, an unresolved organizational conflict of interest unless CMS determines that the risk can be sufficiently mitigated. If the Offeror’s proposal is determined to be in the Competitive Range and if the CO determines a COI exists, the Offeror or contractor will be informed of the conflict and be provided an opportunity to submit clarifications before the final best value determination is made. Failure to submit the required Conflict of Interest Certificates will determine the Offeror or contractor to be non-responsive to the solicitation requirements and therefore, ineligible for award.

OCI Responsibility determinations will be made in accordance with FAR PART 9.

Compliance Program:

The Offeror’s or contractor’s proposal will be evaluated to determine the degree to which its Compliance Program incorporates the elements, personnel, processes and procedures it intends to utilize to ensure that all Federal, State, local laws and regulations and all terms and conditions of the contract are observed by the Offeror or contractor and any of the Offeror’s or contractor’s business associate(s) or subcontractor(s) of the Offeror or contractor.