J-6_Question_and_Answer_Template_Final._7_16_2015_Posted.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 592 KB Posted Jul 16, 2015

Attached to: Fraud Prevention System2 ("FPS2")
Solicitation number: CMS-RFP-150097
Issued by: Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

About this file

From the source

Please see revised Q A Response spreashseet for updated responses to questions 41 55 269 328 330. Please be advised that some Q a responses refer to the revised CMS-RFP-150097 document uploaded on July 14 2015.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
CMS-RFP-150097.pdf	PDF	Jul 15, 2015
J-6_Question_and_Answer_Template_Final._7_14_2015_Postedxlsx.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jul 14, 2015
J-7_Project_Staffing_Plan_Template__Final.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jul 14, 2015
J-10_GFE_GFI_List_Attachment.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jul 14, 2015
CMS-RFP-150097_Revised.pdf	PDF	Jul 14, 2015
J-1_FPS2_SOW_2015-07-14_Revised.pdf	PDF	Jul 14, 2015
J-8_Key_Personnel_Qualifications_Matrix.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-4_Non_Disclosure_Statement.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-1_FPS2_SOW.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-7_Project_Staffing_Plan_Template__Final.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jun 9, 2015
J-3_Consent_to_Subcontract.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-2_Award_Fee_Plan.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
CMS-RFP-150097_Final.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-9_Small-Business-Subcontracting-Plan.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-5_PAST_PERFORMANCE_REFERENCE_SHEETS.pdf	PDF	Jun 9, 2015
J-6_Question_and_Answer_Template_Final.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jun 9, 2015

Show all 16

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

RFP ALL Q&A

Attachment J-6 Question and Answer template
RFP-CMS-RFP-150097
No.	Document Name	Page	Section	Question/Comment/ Suggestion	Government Response
1	J-1_FPS2_SOW	9	3.1 - Performance Objectives	Can you please provide recent Help Desk statistics to include by the hour for the contract period and average holding time (AHT). This should include statistics for telephone and email.	100 calls are handled monthly by the help-desk. Email correspondence is not a current standard procedure. At this time, CPI cannot share the AHT or hourly inbound calls. SOW has been updated.
2	J-1_FPS2_SOW	13	3.3.2, #5, Constraints - Marketplace	The SOW states "All Contractor personnel shall participate in and complete CMS Information Security Awareness Training." Contractor assumes this requirement only applies to personnel working on the FPS2 program. Please confirm contractor's assumption is correct.	Yes. All Contractor personnel, under this contract which supports the FPS2 program, shall participate in and complete CMS Information Security Awareness Training.
3	J-1_FPS2_SOW	24	4.2, Task 2 - UCM Integration	The SOW states "Identify the business needs and technical requirements for bi-direction integration with UCM." Please identify who the contractor should work with at UCM to address this?	The contact person will be provided at time of award.
4	J-1_FPS2_SOW	30	4.6.2 - End User Training	The SOW states "The Contractor shall be prepared to accommodate ad hoc training delivery requests for CMS-approved users and CMS contractors." Please identify how these ad hoc requests can be quantified for costing purposes?	In addition to the regular training (regular training schedule is defined every month and every release) up to 10 additional adhoc training sessions may be required.
5	J-1_FPS2_SOW	34	4.7.2.2, UI Requirements - Number of Users	In Section 4.7.2.2 the SOW states "Provide role-based access up to 1200 users at CMS and its Contractors." In Table 5, the requirement reads "Supports at least 2,500 registered users" Please clarify which is correct?	SOW has been updated to reflect 2500 users.
6	J-1_FPS2_SOW	55	4.15, Task 15 - Contract Transition	In relation to Transition In, the first paragraph of this section states "All transition activities will be completed 60 days after approval of final Transition Plan." In addition, the SOW states "[t]he contractor shall implement its Transition-In Plan no later than 60 calendar days after award." Please clarify the Government's intent for a timeline from contract award, to the start of transition, to the conclusion of the transition period.	SOW has been revised as follows: "The contractor shall propose a draft Transition-In Plan within 30 workdays of award. All transition activities will be completed 60 days after approval of final Transition Plan."
7	J-1_FPS2_SOW	66 and 30	6, Performance Standards, QA and Monitoring, Table 5, 4.6 - Trouble Tickets	Please provide current system statistics around trouble tickets by category that can be used to quantify this for the existing FPS1 program?	Currently there are approximately 100 calls per month. The tickets are presently not categorized, however, the most common occurrences are password resets.
8	J-1_FPS2_SOW	70	7.3, Equipment	The RFP states "The government will furnish the following equipment and software: 1. Hardware and software in the configurations and build specifications that are required to support its application as defined by the Contractor and as approved by the CMS Technical Review Board." The specific task requirements seem to indicate the offerors is responsible for furnishing various equipment and software. Please clarify what the Government is furnishing and what the offeror is expected to furnish.	The following is a list of item that will be provided to the new contractor:

A list of software products, vendor name, telephone number and point of contact, license expiration date, and whether the license is transferable, Computer software (source and object code and all utilities) owned by CMS (Figure 1 Section 2.1 Model Integration Engine to the right), all data, Source Code and source code repositories (I.E. SAS) and logic related to both Models and Edits.

COTs product and license owned by CMS, User Training Materials and data, Hardware purchased by CMS

Please refer to the revised SOW Sec. 7.1 and 7.3 and Attachment J-10 for GFI/GFE.

9	J-1_FPS2_SOW	13 and 44	3.3.2 #2 and 4.7.3.1 #1	In section 3.3.2 it states minimum security requirements of FISMA Moderate. In section 4.7.3.1 it refers to FISMA High. Based upon existing claims processing systems, contractor assumes FPS2 to have FISMA Moderate requirements. Please confirm contractor's assumption is correct.	FISMA Moderate is accurate. SOW has been updated.
10	J-1_FPS2_SOW	52	4.11, Task 11 - Mirrored Test Environment	Can you please indicate if any of the 7 environments will require de-identified test data? If so, can you identify the specific environments?	Only Production can have PII or PHI data.
11	J-1_FPS2_SOW	35	4.7.2.2, UI Requirements - Number of Users	Referring to the specification of the number of users (either 1200 or 2500) can you please provide an estimate of the average number of users that would be actually running queries on the system at the same time (concurrent users)?	2500. SOW updated.
12	J-1_FPS2_SOW	35	4.7.2.2 UI Requirements (?)	Is there a requirement that geospatial data must be on-premise on the Contractor site or is the use of web services to external geospatial data acceptable?	The offeror should propose a solution that fits their solution.
13	J-1_FPS2_SOW	13	3.3.1, #2, Assumptions - Disaster recovery	Can you please define the recovery time objective (RTO, i.e., the maximum tolerable length of time that a system can be down after a failure or disaster) and the recovery point objective (RPO, i.e., the age of the files that must be recovered from backup storage)?	The requirement is for 48 hours. The requirement is 24 month storage. SOW updated.
14	J-1_FPS2_SOW	73	8.1, Key Personnel, Business Analyst	The CBAP, CCBA and PBA certifications are not widely achieved by Business Analysts. Can experience as an analyst with concentration in fraud be used as equivalent experience to the certifications?	SOW has been revised as follows: "a. Have either a Certified Business Analysis Professional (CBAP), a Certification of Competency in Business Analysis (CCBA), or a PMI Professional in Business Analysis (PBA) Certification and a minimum of three years experience conducting cost/benefit analysis with a concentration in fraud, waste, and abuse. Or,

b. In lieu of a professional certification, a minimum of five years Eexperience conducting cost/benefit analysis with a concentration in fraud, waste, and abuse."

	15	J-1_FPS2_SOW	52	4.11, Mirrored Test Environment	Can you please identify who are the anticipated users of the Mirrored Test Environment? Can you describe if they are different than production users?	The users of the mirrored test environment will be testers, which will include MAC analysts, ZPIC Analysts, FPS team and CMS. Some users of the production environment may also be users of the test environment but not every production user will need to be established in the test environment. Please refer to Section 2.2 FPS2 Concept and Content.
	16	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	84	L.17.2, Video Technical Proposal Presentation Media	The instructions ask for chapters to be added to the video. Do we need to also create an interactive video table of contents? Does the CD/DVD need to be burned as a playable video DVD, or is it preferred to create a CD/DVD with a compressed video file? (e.g., a DVD you can put in a DVD player to play like a movie vs. file accessible storage media)	Section M indentifies chapter and a playable video DVD requirements.
	17	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	73	L.12	Due to the additional resources required and vendors needed to plan, develop, edit, and produce a video presentation, the offeror requests the due date for the video presentation portion of the proposal be extended to July 28th. This will enable maximum competition and enhance the quality of the products received by the Government.	Any changes to the proposal due date will be posted on FedBizOpps
	18	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	76	L.14.1 and L.14.2	The instructions identify required content as "TABs" in both Parts I and II of the proposal, but these two parts are to be submitted as separate volumes. Please clarify how the Government intends offerors to the use of TABs between these two volumes.	Part I is the written technical proposal volume and contains TAB A (Pass / Fail Criteria). Part II is the Cost Volume and contains TABs B through I.
	19	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	77	L.15.2	The RFP states "For those additional Key Personnel proposed, the offeror shall identify the specialized experience and the corresponding qualifications for this experience. " Offeror assumes this implies that contractors may propose additional key personnel beyond the positions required in the RFP/SOW. Please confirm offeror's assumption is correct.	Yes. Offerors may propose additional key personnel beyond the positions required in the RFP/SOW.
	20	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	78	L.15.3	The RFP states "Offerors and proposed significant subcontractors without relevant Federal government past performance experience may ask customers to submit no more than three (3) Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) for the same or similar work directly to the Contracting Officer". Contractor assumes that offerors with Federal government past performance are not required to submit PPQs. Please confirm offeror's assumption is correct.	Yes. Offerors with Federal government past performance that appear in the PPIRS registry are not required to submit PPQs.
	21	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	79	L.15.5	Offeror assumes the Draft Project Schedule, which is to be submitted as part of the Project Management Plan, is not included in the 10 page limit for the Project Management Plan. Please confirm offeror's assumption is correct.	Yes. The Draft Project Schedule, which is to be submitted as part of the Project Management Plan, is not included in the 10 page limit for the Project Management Plan.
	22	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	79	L.16	The RFP states "The offeror shall submit all proposed costs using Microsoft Excel software". Offeror assumes that supporting information related to cost, such as the cost narrative, may be submitted in a Word or PDF format. Please confirm the offeror's assumption is correct.	The assumption is correct.
	23	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	81	L.16.e	Will the Government publish the Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE ) for this program?	No, the Government will not publish the IGCE.
	24	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	77 and 84	L.14.3 and L.16.2	The RFP states the presentation slides from the video technical proposal "shall be separately bound, are due with Part I of the written proposal." Please clarify if the slides are to be submitted as part of the Volume I binder, or if the slides are to be contained within their own binder.	The slides are to be contained within their own binder and submitted with Part I of the proposal.
	25	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	84	L.17.2	In reference to the video proposal, the RFP states "The offeror shall provide the presentation in one of three formats:". There are only two formats specified. Please clarify as to what is the third format.	There is no third format. L.17.2 should read "The offeror shall provide the presentation in one of two formats". Please see the revised RFP.
	26	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	85	L.17.3.1.b	The RFP requires offerors to "describe its proposed solution to support tasks 1 through 16". There are only 15 specific tasks identified in the SOW. Please clarify.	Correct. There are 15 tasks. L.17.3.1.b should read "describe its proposed solution to support tasks 1 through 15". Please see revised RFP.
	27	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	79 and 84	L.16 and L.17	L.16 is labeled as "Parts II" while L.17 is labeled as "Part IV". Does the Government intend for there to be a "Part III"?	L.17 should be labeled as "Part III". Please see revised RFP.
	28	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	84	L.17.1	The RFP states "The three additional people (e.g., CEOs, company presidents, or contract representatives) from the offeror may appear for an introductory role, but will not be allowed to deliver the content of the offeror’s proposal. Since some areas of the presentation are more conducive to executive-level presentation (such as corporate experience), will the Government consider allowing the three corporate representatives to present select portions of the evaluated video proposal?	Only portions presented by Key Personnel will be evaluated. Any portion of the presentation presented by Non Key Personnel will count against total presentation time.
	29	L.14.1.b	76	Section L.14.1.b	Section L.14.1.b States: Key Personnel Qualification Matrix, including Letters of Commitment (limit of three (3) pages per Key Person) & Section L.15.1 states: The offerors Key Personnel Qualification Matrix (KPQM) will be evaluated on its adherence to the KPQM template identified in Attachment J.8. In addition, the KPQM will be assessed with respect to Section 8.1 criteria as well as how clear, relevant, comprehensive, and detailed it is and on its adherence to the instructions/and requirements identified the KPQM instructions identified in Section L.15.2.
The offeror’s Key Personnel Qualification Matrix (KPQM) will be evaluated on its adherence to the KPQM template identified in Attachment J.8. In addition, the KPQM will be assessed with respect to Section 8.1 criteria as well as how clear, relevant, comprehensive, and detailed it is and on its adherence to the instructions/and requirements identified the KPQM instructions identified in Section L.15.2. - To provide a "comprehensive and detailed" response we request the Government permit 4 pages for each KPRQ response, 1 page for the letter of commitment, and 1 page per certificate (there are personnel that have multiple certificates).	Certificates will not count in the page total, multiple certificates can be attached. Three page limit will not change.
	30	L.15.3.b.8	79	Section L.15.3.b.8	Will the Government permit the Offeror to structure the past performance table vertically instead of horizontally?	The Government does not prescribe the orientation of the document as long as the required information is provided.
	31	J-1_FPS2_SOW	46	Section 4.7.3.4	This section states that "FPS2 shall be capable of operating in active-active, high-availability configuration". Is the current system active-active?	Current system is active-active.
	32	J-1_FPS2_SOW	26	Section 4.3 Task 3	This section refers to a "Pre-Production Integration" environment. Is this the same as the "Mirrored Test Environment" identified in Section 4.11 Task 11, Mirrored Test Environment? Additionally, is the "Pre-Production Integration" environment the same as the "Integration" environment identified in Section 3.3.1 Assumptions?	Yes
	33	J-1_FPS2_SOW	71	Section 7.3	Will the government provide Parametric Technology Corporation (PTC) Integrity? If so, which of the PTC Integrity suite of products will the Government provide?	PTC is not mentioned in the SOW and we are unaware of its relation to the specified section (Section 7.3 SOW pg 71).
	34	J-1_FPS2_SOW	63	SOW Section 5 Table 4; RFP Section B.3; RFP Section F.2	SOW Section 5 Table 4 item 46 indicates that Task 14 is optional while the RFP Sections B.3 and F.2 do not list Task 14 as a separate CLIN. Is Task 14 an optional task as designated in line number 46 on page 63 of the SOW?	Task 14 is not an optional task. SOW revised to reflect not an optional task.
	35	J-1_FPS2_SOW	70	Section 7.1	Is there a PPA for FPS2, if so can a copy be provided?	PPA is not applicable to FPS2 and has been removed from the acronymn list.
	36	RFP	76	L.14.1.c&d	The Draft Project Management Plan (sub para c) has a limit of 10 pages. Sub para d. states that the Draft Project Schedule is part of the Draft Project Management Plan. Is the project schedule outside of the 10 page limit?	See Q.21.
	37	RFP		L.11	Offeror submission extension - request two additional weeks for submissions due.	Ref Q. 19
	38	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	3, 72	B.2 Type of Contract/Price/Payment; L.6 FAR 52.216-1 Type of Contract	These sections cite FAR 52.216-1 and state: "the government intends to award a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contract to a contractor with an adequate accounting system capable of accepting Government cost-type contracts. The Contracting Office reserves the right to award any other type contract." We note that this second sentence is not included in the FAR 52.216-1 clause. What flexibility, if any, does this clause in the RFP give offerors to propose a different contract pricing structure than a cost-plus-award-fee?	The Government determines the contract type. At this time, the Government intends to award a a Cost-Plus-Award-Fee (CPAF) contract to a contractor with an adequate accounting system capable of accepting Government cost-type contracts. However, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award any other type contract.
	39	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	3	B.2 Type of Contract/Price/Payment	Further, can a offeror submit a bid for this procurement using an existing GSA schedule contract?	This solicitation is under FAR part 15, not FAR subpart 8.4.
	40	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	3	B.2 Type of Contract/Price/Payment	Further, can an offeror submit multiple proposals, with one offering an alternative contract pricing structure?	The Government intends to limit the submission to one offer per offeror.
	41	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	20-23	H.1 Organizational Conflicts of Interest (Services)	Section H.1(e) describes various contracting restrictions an offeror must agree to depending on the type of work the Contractor performs. Please confirm whether all of these restrictions are applicable to the work contemplated under this contract. If they are not all applicable, please confirm which of these seven restrictions apply to the FPS2 contract.	All are applicable to each offeror but each offeror must make a determination which restriction relates to this requirement.
	42	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	47, 65	I.5 HHSAR 352.215-70 Late Proposals and Revisions; L.4 FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition	Section I.5 (and HHSAR 352.215-70) states "Notwithstanding the procedures contained in FAR 52.215-1(c)(3) of the provision of this solicitation entitled Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition, the Government may consider a proposal received after the date specified for receipt if it appears to offer the best value to the Government and it was received before proposals were distributed for evaluation, or within 5 calendar days after the exact time specified for receipt, whichever is earlier.” In contrast, Section L.4, which incorporates FAR 52.215-1 into the contract states that a proposal received late will not be considered unless the CO determines that “accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition; and -- (1) If it was transmitted through an electronic commerce method authorized by the solicitation, it was received at the initial point of entry to the Government infrastructure not later than 5:00 p.m. one working day prior to the date specified for receipt of proposals; or (2) There is acceptable evidence to establish that it was received at the Government installation designated for receipt of offers and was under the Government’s control prior to the time set for receipt of offers; or (3) It is the only proposal received.” Please confirm that HHSAR 352.215-70 controls with respect to late proposals.	The HHSAR implements FAR policies and procedures and provides additional policies and procedures that supplement the FAR.
	43	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	47	I.6 HSAR 352.234-3 Full Earned Value Management System	This section states that the Contractor "shall use an Earned Value Management System that has been validated and accepted by the Cognizant Federal Agency as being compliant with the guidelines in ANSI/EIA Standard 748. However, the clause also states that if at the time of award, the Contractor's EVM system has not been validated, the Contractor shall apply the current system to the contract and then take necessary and timely actions to meet the milestones in the EVMS plan. Please clarify that EVMS compliance will be measured as of the date of award. Furthermore, please confirm the reference to a contractor's EVMS plan. There are no other references in the RFP to an "EVMS plan." Is this referring to the Project Management Plan that is required as part of the Statement of Work Section 4.1.2?	Please reference guidance in HSAR 352.234-3 Full Earned Value Management System (OCTOBER 2008). Futhermore, the EVMS plan is in addition to the Project Management Plan.
	44	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	47	I.6 HSAR 352.234-3 Full Earned Value Management System	This same clause states that HHS requires Contractor to obtain validation and acceptance of EVM system by the Cognizant Federal Agency during base period of performance. Please confirm that a Contractor is in compliance with this section as long as its EVMS is validated and approved before the end of the base period of performance.	The Government will follow the regulations per the FAR and HHSAR.
	45	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	60, 65	K.7 52.219-1 Small Business Program Representations; L.3 NAICS Code and Small Business Standard	The RFP states that the NAICS code for the acquisition is 541512 and that the small business size standard for this code is $25.5 million average annual income. However, the SBA Table of Small Business Standards (effective as of July 14, 2014) states that the standard for this NAICS code is $27.5 million. Please confirm the correct size standard.	The NAICS 541512 small business size standard is $27.5M. Please see revised RFP.
	46	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	65	L.1 Procurement Timeline	In view of the complexity of this procurement and the anticipated volume of questions from prospective offerors, will CMS entertain an extension of the proposal submission deadline?	See Q.37.
	47	CMS-RFP-150097_Final

J-1_FPS2_SOW RFP p. 76, SOW p. 12-13 RFP Section L.14.1 Proposal Part I; SOW Section 3.3.1, 3.3.2 The RFP section states that an offeror must have a "FISMA compliant facility at time of proposal submission" and that the Government will reject a proposal where the offeror does not have a "FISMA compliant data center at time of proposal submission." Mindful that CMS must ensure compliance with FISMA, it is not clear to us why possession of a FISMA compliant data center is a necessary qualification requirement for bidding. We respectfully request that CMS revise the RFP to allow bidders to obtain FISMA certification in the ordinary course of contract performance, prior to putting CMS data in its data center. The Government requires the facility to be FISMA compliant at the time of proposal submission.

Please see the following links regarding the requirement to obtain a FISMA compliant facility. Note, the FISMA compliant facility is a requirement under the Federal Information Security Management Act (information pertaining to this Act is located under the last link listed below.)

http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/CMS-Information-Technology/InformationSecurity/Information-Security-Library.html http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SMA/fisma/ http://www.dhs.gov/federal-information-security-management-act-fisma 48 CMS-RFP-150097_Final

J-1_FPS2_SOW RFP p. 76, SOW p. 12-13 RFP Section L.14.1 Proposal Part I; SOW Section 3.3.1, 3.3.2 Further, the RFP section states that an offeror must have a "FISMA compliant facility." Please explain what constitutes a "FISMA compliant" facility, and the documentation (if any) that an offeror must submit to demonstrate this status. Please see the following links regarding the requirement to obtain a FISMA compliant facility. Note, the FISMA compliant facility is a requirement under the Federal Information Security Management Act (information pertaining to this Act is located under the last link listed below.)

J-1_FPS2_SOW	RFP p. 76, SOW p. 12-13	RFP Section L.14.1 Proposal Part I; SOW Section 3.3.1, 3.3.2	Further, the RFP section states that an offeror must have a "FISMA compliant facility." In the SOW, Section 3.3.1 states that the work "shall be performed at the Contractor's own facilities" and Section 3.3.2 states that the "Contractor shall secure CMS data at the Contractor's facility and ensure the system complies with Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA)." Does the offeror have to own or lease the actual facility / data center, or can the offeror arrange to use a data center owned or operated by a third party (such as a subcontractor in support of the offeror's proposal)?	It is acceptable for the contractor to use a data center owned or operated by a third party. The third-party facility must be FISMA compliant at time of proposal submission.
	50	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	76	L.14.1 Proposal Part I	The RFP states that an offeror must have "CMMI level III certification at time of proposal submission" and that the Government will reject a proposal where the offeror does not have "certification for Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), at a minimum Level III at time of proposal submission." It is not clear to us why possession of CMMI level III certification is a necessary qualification requirement for bidding. We respectfully request that CMS revise the RFP to allow offerors to obtain CMMI level III certification at some point prior to award or during contract performance.	Must be CMMI level III certified at time of proposal submission.
	51	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	76	L.14.1 Proposal Part I	Further, please explain the documentation that an offeror must submit to demonstrate it possesses CMMI level III certification.	Please submit your CMMI Level III (or above) Certificate.
	52	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	76	L.14.1 Proposal Part I	Further, will CMS accept other demonstrations of the sufficient capability of an offeror's business processes to perform the requirements of the RFP in lieu of a CMMI Level III certification?	No, as CMMI Level III is a requirement per this contract.
	53	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	76	L.14.1 Proposal Part I	Further, can an offeror rely on a proposed subcontractor's CMMI Level III certification to meet the RFP requirement that it have such a certification? If so, must the subcontractor perform certain tasks?	CMMI level III certification is applicable to the prime.
	54	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	78, 86	L.15.3 Past Performance References; L.17.3.2 Corporate Experience	Section L.15.3 requires relevant past performance information that is “similar in size, scope and complexity to this contract.” Section L.17.3.2 requires Corporate Experiences that reflect experience on projects that are relevant and “similar in size, scope, and complexity to the requirements contained in this Solicitation.” For the purposes of this procurement, what is the difference, if any, between Past Performance and Corporate Experience? Are offerors allowed to use the same experience for both of these sections?	Past performance measures how well the offeror performed on projects of similar size and scope. Corporate experience measures relevance.
	55	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	81	L.16.1 Cost/Price Proposal Tabs	The RFP states that in Tab B of the Cost/Price Proposal, the "offeror and each subcontractor, consultant, and teaming partner shall complete and sign an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Statement." Please clarify whether the OCI Statement is a document that CMS will provide to offerors or something that the offerors must develop themselves.	Please see section L.16.1 of the revised RFP.
	56	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	81	L.16.1 Cost/Price Proposal Tabs	Regarding Tab E, if an offeror does not have an approved CAS Disclosure Statement because it is not yet CAS covered, is an offeror required to submit a draft Disclosure Statement with its proposal?	If previously not subject to CAS, the proposal must include an initial CAS Disclosure Statement.
	57	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	86	L.17.3.2 Corporate Experience	The RFP states that the “offeror shall provide three (3) current (within last 5 years) Corporate Experiences that reflect/identify experience on projects that are relevant and similar in size, scope, and complexity to the requirements contained in this Solicitation. All corporate experiences shall be from the prime contractor or proposed subcontractor.” Can the corporate experience be from an affiliate of the prime contractor or from a subcontractor, assuming the affiliate/subcontractor is going to perform some of the work on the contract?	Corporate experience shall be from the prime.
	58	J-2_Award_Fee_Plan

Award Fee Determination Plan (AFDP)	2	1.1 and 2	Under the AFDP, the government has the right to unilaterally revise the AFDP at any time during period of performance and unilaterally change the Award Fee evaluation periods at any time. The Government is to "make every attempt" to notify the contractor of changes 15 workdays prior to the start of the evaluation period to which the change will apply. The government should be required to notify the contractor of any changes to the AFDP as opposed to making "every attempt." We respectfully request that CMS consider revising the AFDP to require such notification.	The government will provide the contractor 30 days notice prior to the start of the evaluation period to which the changes will apply.
	59	J-2_Award_Fee_Plan

Award Fee Determination Plan (AFDP)	6	1 Introduction; 6 Organizational Structure of Award Fee Determination	According to the AFDP, the amount of the award fee will be determined by the Award Fee Determination Official (AFDO) with the assistance of the Award Fee Evaluation Board (AFEB). The AFDO is in charge of approving the members of the AFEB and appointing the AFEB Chairperson. To the extent that the AFEB is supposed to remain independent from the AFDO in providing a recommendation regarding the award fee, the AFDO's ability to appoint the members of the AFEB may decrease the independence of the Board. Consider revising the AFDP to provide that someone other than the AFDO, such as the Contracting Officer, approve the members of the AFEB and appoint the AFEB Chairperson.	The AFDO is in charge of appointing all members of the AFEB.
	60	J-2_Award_Fee_Plan

Award Fee Determination Plan (AFDP)	10	7 Award Fee Determination Process	The AFDP does not contain any formal process on how the contractor can challenge the Award Fee determination. Please confirm that if a contractor wants to challenge the amount of an Award Fee determination, it may do so by bringing a claim according to the Disputes Clause.	The award fee determination and the methodology for determining the award fee are unilateral decisions made solely at the discretion of the Government. Ref. FAR sub-part 16.4.
	61	J-1_FPS2_SOW	12	3.3.1. (bullet 5)	The document refers to a review of the algorithms: "Before a model is implemented in FPS2 production environment, the CMS Model Owners and/or Model Contractor(s) need to review the algorithms and scripts to validate the build of the model logic used to implement is correct."
Please define the review process, specifically what level of detail will the FPS be required to provide to the Modeling contractor to validate the build?	Please refer to Task 8 Section 4.8 of the SOW for additional guidance.
	62	J-1_FPS2_SOW	7	2.2	The document refers to the a custom language to which FPS1 models were recoded to : "Decrease model time to market and eliminate recoding of models to custom language"
What software, languages, or tools were used to recode the current FPS1 models and in which language were they coded?	Currently all models are built outside the system in SAS and Java code and then passed to a proprietary (Sherriff) system where recoded using C+ and Clips tool. The database is Versant. Time to market is 6 months.
	63	J-1_FPS2_SOW	34	4.7.2.1	It is noted that 4.5 million transactions FFS claims are processed by FPS1 every day. What is the size of the data, in Gb or Tb, which gets generated every day? In addition, what is the size of the historical data which will need to be housed by FPS2?	4.5 million transactions daily is equivalent to 10GB (daily)
	64	J-1_FPS2_SOW	9	3.1 (bullet 8)	"Integrate edit module in the claims authorization processing and document the change order request to permit implementation of Edits"
Can you please provide further details on the existing edit module: # of edits etc.	Please refer to figure 2 for edit module. Year to date number of edits in system equals 14.
	65	J-1_FPS2_SOW	12	3.3 (bullet 10)	FPS2 will support bi-directional integration with the CMS Unified Case Management (UCM) system at the time of its initial release to production:
Is CMS envisioning ASRs to show the UCM information. Or FPS2 should have a stand-alone case manager?	It is the expectation that FPS will have a stand alone case management system; however, it is also the expectation that FPS will send and accept data feeds from the UCM.
	66	J-1_FPS2_SOW	18	4.1.2 (Figure 2)	The Figure refers to a task 16, which is not elaborated on in the rest of the document. Can you please provide further details?	There are a total of 15 tasks, there is no task 16. SOW was revised with the corrected figure 3 (formerly 2).
	67	J-1_FPS2_SOW	42	4.7.2.12	The Contractor shall process claims history and other sources through all models presented. CMS will provide access to claims history via the IDR for model development purposes.

- Please clarify the first statement – especially what is meant by all models presented?

- Is our understanding correct that historical data will be provided via IDR.

- Will the daily claim data also be routed via IDR or directly from the claim system? In addition, will CMS be able to share the IDR architecture and data model? Q1 - to clarify "models presented" simply means all active models in the FPS.

Q2 -Yes, this is correct.

Q3 - The daily claims data will be received via the shared systems feed, not by way of the IDR. For the last piece of the question regarding IDR data model, please clarify?

	68	J-1_FPS2_SOW	52	4.12 (Task 12)	Can CMS provide more details on current FPS1 models. E.g. code base, coding language, # of models, etc.?	Approximately 80. Currently all models are built outside the system in SAS and Java code and then passed to a proprietary (Sherriff) system where recoded using C+ and Clips tool. The database is Versant
	69	CMS-RFP-150097_Final	86	L.17.3.3 (Bullet b)	"describe, in detail, its rationale for proposed materials to include quantities proposed"
Can you please elaborate what "quantities" are referring to? Which assumptions in the cost proposal does it refer to?	If any materials/tools are to be procured as part of this requirement describe in detail their rationale and quantities.
	70	J-1_FPS2_SOW	35, 68	7th bullet	Provide role-based access up to 1200 users at CMS and its Contractors.. But on page 68 it mentions "Supports at least 2,500 registered users".
Please define the total number of users.	2500 users, ref. Q.11
	71	J-1_FPS2_SOW	10	Bullet 15	"Models transitioning from FPS1 shall be recreated and implemented directly in FPS2 by the CMS Modeling Contractors
Please provide estimate number of user who will perform this task as CMS Modeling Contractor?	Approximately 10-15
	72	RFP	76	L.14.1.f	The Proposal Part I requires Technical Assumptions (if any) to be submitted with proposal. Are the Technical Assumptions excluded from the page count?	Yes, technical assumptions are excluded from the page count.
	73	RFP	49	K.3	Is the value for NAICS Code 541512 $25.5M or $27.5M?	See Q.45
	74	SOW	58	Attachment 1	Is the Risk Prioritization Document referenced in SOW 4.1.3, the same as item #4 Risk Register in Table 4 - Table of Deliverables?	Risk Prioritization Document is a component of the Risk Register.
	75	Attachment 1 SOW	6, 21	2.1, 4.1.4.5	"Medicare Parts C and D, and Medicaid information will be added as it becomes available in the Integrated Data Repository (IDR)" is stated in Section 2.1. In Section 4.1.4.5 it states "The Contractor shall ensure that reports made available to MEDICs provide sufficient data for investigations". Since MEDICs are tasked with finding Medicare Part D trends that indicate fraud, how will the MEDICs use FPS2 alerts prior to Medicare part D data becoming available?	CMS does not currently have this information.
	76	Attachment 1 SOW	10, 12	3.1, 3.3.1	3.1-15. Models transitioning from FPS1 shall be recreated and implemented directly in FPS2 by the CMS Modeling Contractors.

3.1-16. New Models shall be developed and implemented directly in FPS2 by CMS Modeling Contractor(s).

3.3.1-3. Models transitioning from FPS1 and new models shall be developed by CMS model owners and the Model Contractor; however, implementation shall be completed directly in FPS2 by the FPS2 Contractor.

Can CMS clarify which contractor implements models in FPS2?	Modeling contractor and CMS analyst would implement the models into FPS; however, the Development contractor would be tasked with ensuring the code is set appropriately based off of the requirements.
	77	RFP	81	L.16.1	Is this information required for subcontractors on a T&M basis?	The Government does not understand the question.
	78	RFPL.17.1 & H.7	84, 33	L.17.1 & H.7	Section L.17.1 states that only Key Personnel listed in Section H.7 can be the evaluated speakers in the Volume III video presentation. If the offeror adds an additional Key Personnel as authorized in section L.15.2 (Pg 77) for the performance of this contract, may that Key Person appear in the evaluated portion of the video presentation in addition to the required key personnel?	Yes. All proposed Key Personnel may be part of the video presentation.
	79	RFP-CMS-2015-150097	76	L.14.1 PROPOSAL PART I	After evaluating the FPS2 Development RFP the most effective approach to fulfilling these requirements entails the employment of a broad spectrum of expertise that already exists within the CMS contracting community. Expertise will come from several companies working together to deliver the services required to meet the deliverables of the 15 Task areas. To create an environment of open competition, Prime Contractors will form teaming partner relationships to deliver valued services.

Can CMS please confirm that proposals submitted by bidding Prime Contractors, consisting of teaming partners possessing the FISMA compliant data center, will not be rejected by CMS.	Yes, RFP will be updated to reflect whomever owns the facility (prime or sub) where the data resides is the contractor that must have the FISMA compliant data center. Please see revised RFP.
	80	RFP-CMS-2015-150097	76	L.15.2 Key Personnel Qual Matrix	What level of security clearance is required at time of submission for the key personnel?	None
	81	CMS-RFP-150097	3	B.3	We understand that the 3-month Optional Transition Period can be exercised at any time. Please confirm, however, for pricing purposes offerors should assume the POP for the transition period follows the 60-month Period of Performance (November 25, 2020 until February 24, 2021).	Contractors assumption is correct.
	82	CMS-RFP-150097	17	G.15.a.1.ii	Please confirm that if CMS is not the Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA) for a bidder, CMS will accept the billing rates established by the contractors CFA (DCAA)?	Yes. CMS will accept provisional rates established by DCMA/DCAA.
	83	CMS-RFP-150097	18	G.15.2.b

G.15.3 Indirect Cost Rates	Due to uncertainty in the regulatory environment and its potential resultant impact on Health & Welfare plans, as well as other potential changes to both Public Law and the Federal Acquisition Regulations, would CMS allow flexibility to utilize DCAA approved rates and remove the indirect rate ceilings requirement from the RFP and allow the contractor to work within the ceiling dollars awarded?	No, indirect ceiling rate requirement will not be removed.
	84	CMS-RFP-150097	50	K.3	Please confirm that, if a contractor is registered in SAMS, they are not required to submit SECTION K with their proposal response.	As FAR 52.204-7, System of Award Management (JUL 2013) is included in the solicitation, paragraph (d) of Section K.3 applies.
	85	CMS-RFP-150097	76	L.14.1 Proposal Part I	This section indicates that the Draft Project Management Plan is limited to 10 pages, and then indicates that the separately-listed Draft Project Schedule is to be part of the Project Management Plan.

Please confirm that the 10-page limit for the Draft Project Management Plan does not include the Draft Project Schedule. In other words, the inclusion of the Draft Project Schedule does not count against the 10-page limit of the Draft Project Management Plan.	See Q.21
	86	CMS-RFP-150097	85	L.17.2 VIDEO TECHNICAL PROPOSAL PRESENTATION MEDIA	The RFP lists only two formats for the video media, BluRay not being one of them. Is a Blu Ray H.264 24mbps, file type .MP4 deliverable acceptable?	Blu-ray is not specified.
	87	CMS-RFP-150097	85	L.17.2 VIDEO TECHNICAL PROPOSAL PRESENTATION MEDIA	The RFP states, "While not being evaluated, the Government discourages the use of transitions and advanced video graphics or cinematic features." If a presenter completes a slide in two separate attempts, seamlessly meshed together with a Dissolve transition, is that discouraged?	No, it is not discouraged.
	88	CMS-RFP-150097	N/A	N/A	Would CMS consider it a conflict of interest (COI) if a Prime Contractor is owned by a Health Plan? Given that FPS system findings are related to fraudulent claims activity of providers, would that create a COI in this case and call into question the fairness or impartiality of FPS findings?	Each offeror should identify any potential OCI and submit a mitigation plan.
	89	Attachment J-1 SOW	35

68 4.7.2.2

Table 5	Please clarify whether the expected number of users is 1,200 as stated in Section 4.7.2.2 or 2,500 as stated in Table 5.	2500 users, ref. Q.11
	90	Attachment J-1 SOW	40	4.7.2.9	Please confirm that CPI will require any solution to retain and analyze at least 3 years of claims, provider and beneficiary data to support model development.	Yes
	91	Attachment J-1 SOW	73	8.1 Key Personnel	Regarding the Business Analyst position, CMS' past focus has been on the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) and its focus on requirements management. The PMI Professional in Business Analysis (PBA) Certification is a fairly new requirement and is less than 1 year old. Would CMS accept a PMP certification and a minimum number of years of experience (e.g., 5 or more) as an alternative to the listed certification?	Requirement has been revised Section 8.1.
	92	Attachment J-1 SOW	9	3.1 Performance Objectives	Would CPI please provide assumptions for number of modelers that will require system access by contract year? This will assist in determining # of licenses and HW scaling required year over year. It will also assist in overall architecture and data architecture design.	We are expecting up to 2500 users and approximately 40 amount of modelers (analysts building models in FPS2).
	93	Attachment J-1 SOW	21	4.1.4.5 Medicare Drug Integrity Contractors ("MEDIC")	In order to support additional user groups (such as the MEDIC), FPS2 would benefit from a additional data sources such as Part C and Part D data. Can CMS clarify whether new interfaces are expected for FPS2, and the timeline for which CMS desires these to be online? This will help us accurately size and price the environment for growth.	It is CMS' expectation that this will not be implemented in the base or option periods.
	94	Attachment J-1 SOW	27	4.4 Task 4 -Change Management and FPS2 Optimization	Both Section 4.4 (Change Management) and Section 4.1.8 (Enterprise Change Control) have requirements as to change management processes and working with the CCB. Can the government please clarify the difference between these sections?	Clarification, FPS2 will be governed by the a CCB, not by a ECC.
	95	Attachment J-1 SOW	45 and 13	4.7.3.1(1) AND 3.3.2(2)	Constraint 2 in section 3.3.2 (Page 12) lists that "The information security risk assessment and minimum security requirements for this system shall be based on "Moderate" impact level data", which contradicts this requirement ("FPS2 shall meet the CMS ARS as appropriate for a FISMA HIGH system."). Please clarify that CMS intends for contractors to assume "Moderate" as that is FPS' classification today.	Moderate. SOW has been updated.
	96	Attachment J-1 SOW	51	4.9.1 Maintenance of Edits Module with the Medicare Fee-for Service (FFS) Claims Process	The FPS1 SLA with the STC is a 2-hour turnaround, allowing STC to test multiple times a day. Please confirm that CMS intends to change this requirement to 8 hours for FPS2.	2 hours is the correct timeframe. SOW has been updated
	97	CMS-RFP-150097_Final.pdf	80	L.16.c	Please clarify the requirement for a "position classification plan", will the Government please define "class of labor". Is it the Government's intention for offerors to classify labor as FLSA exempt and non-exempt (hourly) labor?	The following language is removed from L.16.c: "The Government requires that the offeror also submit a position classification plan, which must identify the classes of labor employed by the offeror and the guideslins for determining the title and pay level of each position."
	98	FPS2 SOW Draft	42	4.7.2.13 Data Sources	The tools in the IDR are somewhat limited, do you envision using additional tools to do analysis and generate leads? If so, do you prefer tools that are proven in the commercial and government environments?	The principal function of the FPS is to generate leads. Yes, additional tools are acceptable and yes these potential tools need to be proven in the commercial and government environments
	99	FPS2 SOW Draft	42	4.7.2.13 Data Sources	Does CMS view using third party data assets as a vehicle to audit or improve the quality of the current internal CMS data systems? What quality elements in the current data systems should be considered as a priority to enhance in this RFP response?	No.
	100	J-1_FPS2_SOW	page 10 of J 1 SOW	Section 3.1.19	Is it expected from the contractor to design and develop “Business Intelligence Reporting Tools” or Custom-off-the-shelf (COTS) tools could be used?	Refer to Section 3 Scope.
	101	J-1_FPS2_SOW	page 33 of J-1 SOW	Section 4.7.2.1	Does this mean the data points would change every year which in turn means tweaking the Risk Scoring Algorithm to handle more data points or Does this mean only the amount of data would increase every year which means adding more software and hardware resources to support the input data?	The data points will not change every year. We may need to tweak certain models from to time which would potentially require a format change within data resources; however, it is possible that the transactions could increase from 4.5M over time.
	102	J-1_FPS2_SOW	page 34 of J-1 SOW	Section 4.7.2.2	Incorporate predictive modeling results and risk scoring into the system at least once every 24 hours.Incorporate predictive modeling results in real time as defined by CMS. Please elaborate the type of User Interface needed to incorporate predictive modeling and risk scoring results into the system. Usually such algorithms are self-learning, run in the background and affect the outcome	It is not the Government's expectation that the algorithms or the priority risk scoring will involve self-learning (automated adaptability). It is our expectation that that FPS will incorporate predictive modeling results in real-time with reporting functionality that allows CMS and Users to know where "tweaks" need to be made.
	103	J-1_FPS2_SOW	Page 6	section 2.1	The FPS1 system screens all national Medicare Part A, Part B, and DME claims during the adjudication process and consolidates alerts by provider. Medicare Parts C and D, and Medicaid information will be added as it becomes available in the IDR.Question: Is it possible for the screening process related to the adjudication be completed prior to the MAC review or is the contractor limited to the existing workflow.	It is not the Government's intent to change the current process/workflow.
	104	J-1_FPS2_SOW	Page 6	section 2.1	Question: Is the contractor limited to the process and equipment limitations of existing CMS edits or will the contractor be able to recommend and implement screening elements which differ from the existing and future “models” as generated by the secondary contractor.	No, they are not limited.
	105	J-1_FPS2_SOW	Page 6	section 2.1	Question: On a prior bid we able to use a proprietary scoring mechanism to identify with 100% accuracy 44% of the claims with error. The methodology was deemed improper by CMS with the following statement: “The Offeror did not adequately address approach in that it appears to recommend a probabilistic modeling technique instead of flagging claims that can be fully or partially auto denied.” The fundamental question is will Probabilistic Modeling techniques be scored in a similar fashion for this requirement?	No, we would not utilize probabilistic modeling techniques.
	106	J-1_FPS2_SOW	Page 6	section 2.1	Question: Can the government define the difference between Probabilistic Modeling techniques and the existing techniques used under the existing contract.	In FPS1, probabilistic modeling is used in the predictive models.

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.