Solicitation Questions 8 Jan 2021.pdf

Solicitation FA487721R0001 – Questions/Answers (Current As Of 8 Jan 2021)

Black Text indicates questions asked by contractors.

RED Text indicates answers provided on 23 Dec 2020. Based on updates to the solicitation some answers in red text may be have a strike through and replaces with answers in green text.

GREEN Text indicates answers provided on 8 Jan 2021

1) Will the Past Performances of Subcontractor/Teaming Member be evaluated and counted as Relevant should the Prime Offeror not have Relevant Past Performance.

Answer: Subcontractor/Teaming Partners may be evaluated as relevant past performance. IAW Addendum to 52.212‐1 para 7.1 consent must be received and submitted with proposal to be considered. Additionally, per para 7.3.5. prime contractor past performance will be weighted more heavily than that of a subcontractor or teaming partner.

2) Please clarify if the Relevant Past Performance requirement of 25 FTEs has to be on a Single Contract/Task Order OR Can this requirement be met by a combination of FTEs on multiple contracts (example 10 FTEs on a contract with Air Force and 15 FTEs on a different contract with Army).

Answer: Requirement is to show performance was for 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel on a contract. An IDIQ could be utilized to meet this requirement. So an IDIQ contract with 3 TO’s with a combined 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel could be utilized to meet this requirement.

Updated Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

3) Please provide Incumbent Contractor Name, Contract Number, Period of Performance, Contract Value, # of FTEs, Unfilled positions and Seniority dates of Incumbent Personnel.

Answer:

Contractor Name: Avosys Technologies Contract Number: FA4877‐15‐D‐B001 Period of Performance: 8 Jun 2015 – Present Contract Value: $48M Cap # of FTE’s: Current FTE’s is 78.

Unfilled Positions: Cannot be provided Seniority Dates: Cannot be provided

4) Reference: “To be considered relevant the past performance must show that the performance was for at least 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel.”

Question: Does this mean that a contract with at least 25 medical personnel in at least two (2) disciplines would be considered relevant?

Answer: Yes. The past performance must show at least 2 separate disciplines were on the contract/task order.

Updated Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

5) Reference: “The offeror shall provide a narrative of at least one (1) but not more than five (5) of the recent and relevant contracts performed for Federal, State, Local Government and private industry.”

Question: What is the definition of contract? Will an IDIQ contract with multiple task orders be considered a relevant contract?

Answer: FAR 2.101 defines a contract as, “a mutually binding legal relationship obligating the seller to furnish the supplies or services (including construction) and the buyer to pay for them. It includes all types of commitments that obligate the Government to an expenditure of appropriated funds and that, except as otherwise authorized, are in writing. In addition to bilateral instruments, contracts include (but are not limited to) awards and notices of awards; job orders or task letters issued under basic ordering agreements; letter contracts; orders, such as purchase orders, under which the contract becomes effective by written acceptance or performance; and bilateral contract modifications.” In addition, any agreement to provide services to a private entity will be considered a contract.

An IDIQ itself would be considered a contract. Additionally, individual task orders under an IDIQ could also be considered a contract.

6) Question: Will the experience and past performance of parent or subsidiary companies be evaluated if the proposal shows that a sister company lending its experience and past performance has made a firm commitment to have a meaningful involvement in contract performance?

Answer: In order for past performance of another firm, parent, sister, or other wise to be evaluated some agreement whether it be a subcontracting plan or teaming arrangement must be submitted with the past performance.

7) Question: Are there any additional requirements that an offeror must address in its proposal in order to utilize parent or subsidiary company experience and past performance if the proposal shows that a sister company lending its experience and past performance has made a firm commitment to have a meaningful involvement in contract performance?

Answer: Please see answer to question number 6.

8) Question: Are there specific or special evaluation criteria for rating the experience and past performance of an offeror who utilizes parent or subsidiary company experience and past performance if the proposal shows that a sister company lending its experience and past performance has made a firm commitment to have a meaningful involvement in contract performance?

Answer: As long as the criteria given in question 6 is met the past performance will be evaluated.

However, per Addendum to 52.212‐1 para 7.3.5. prime contractor past performance will be weighted more heavily than that of a subcontractor or teaming partner.

9) Reference: Bullet 5 stating, “Capability to manage large workforce at one location (over 25 employees)” Question: Given the relevancy parameters described in Section 7.3.5 of Attachment 9, will a contract with management of a large workforce of 25 or more employees at multiple locations also receive the highest potential confidence assessment regarding manpower efficiencies?

Answer: Having a large workforce at one location will assist in receiving the highest potential confidence rating. However, the confidence rating is a cumulative review of all criteria. Therefore, an offeror that excels in all other areas but may not have 25 employees at a single location may still receive the highest confidence rating.

Updated Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

10) Within the Addendum with Instructions for the Proposal in section 5.3 Para. 6‐9 and Sect. I‐IV you indicate hard copies are required. Will the government consider ONLY electronic submissions with 1 Original and 3 Redacted versions sent to you by email response?

Answer: No, the government will only entertain proposals that are hard copy. Please reference Addendum to 52.212‐1 para 5.8 and 5.10.

12) Is a Glossary and Abbreviations tab required to remain in compliance with the response?

Answer: If abbreviations or acronyms are not utilized in the proposal or adequately explained within the proposal a glossary and abbreviations tab will not be needed.

13) Past Performance: Our team is an SBA Certified 8(a) Joint Venture:

a. Is there a requirement for each member of the JV to provide past performance?

Answer: Per Addendum to 52.212‐1 para 7, past performance is required for all teaming partners, subcontractors, and JV partners. Additionally para 7.1 expands upon teaming arrangement requiring recent and relevant past performance be provided, if it exists.

Updated Answer: An amendment to the solicitation was posted with these questions changing this requirement. Please review the amendment posted a beta.sam.gov.

b. Do you need us to provide the SBA JV Agreement in the Proposal?

Answer: Yes.

c. If so, what section should we place this agreement and will this go towards the page count within that section?

Answer: Please provide in Part IV, tab 5, Additional Offeror Information. This section has no page limit.

d. Do we need to provide an agreement from each member of the JV that allows use of each member's past performance or is this understood with the SBA JV Agreement?

Answer: This is understood as a part of the SBA JV Agreement.

14) Past Performance ITO: 7.3.5. Relevant Past Performance The offeror shall submit past performance that is relevant. To be relevant, the performance information provided must resemble the scope, magnitude and complexity of this solicitation. The offeror’s submissions shall be recent and demonstrate the ability to perform the proposed effort.

The offeror’s proposing past performance as the Prime Contractor will be weighted more heavily than past performance as a subcontractor. Any past performance information submitted that does not meet relevancy will not be evaluated. To be considered relevant the past performance must show that the performance was for at least 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel.

As a point of reference, many 8(a) contractors will not be considered relevant as many 8(a)s do not have at least 25 multi‐disciplined on one Task Order or one contract award.

a. Please clarify whether our interpretation is correct

Answer: Requirement is to show performance was for 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel on a contract. An IDIQ could be utilized to meet this requirement. So an IDIQ contract with 3 TO’s with a combined 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel could be utilized to meet this requirement.

Updated Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

b. May we use a D Type IDIQ as 1 past performance at the BASE Level since this competition is also an

IDIQ.

Answer: Yes an IDIQ may be used as past performance. It is the offerors responsibility to establish recency and relevancy.

15) If we need to provide past performance at the task order level for a D Type contract, may we reference the BASE Level as 1 past performance and then include all TO's that provide recent relevance within that 1 Base Level Past Performance?

a. In other words, may we still consider this 1 past performance at the base level listing all TOs that are relevant.

Answer: Yes. The IDIQ itself could be one past performance and all task orders can be additional past performance.

16) Will you allow our DHA MQS Benchmark report as Past Performance?

Answer: This will be answered with the next round of answers. We are unfamiliar with that report and will need to research what data it provides before giving a firm answer.

Updated Answer: The contractor must make the determination if the DHA MQS Benchmark Report provides data relevant to the past performance criteria. If it does those reports may be submitted as part of the past performance narrative.

17) Given covid and in the interest of protecting the source selection personnel, will the Government consider accepting proposal volumes digitally?

Answer: No. All proposal must be sent as hard copies.

18) Will the Government evaluate previously completed PPQs submitted with the proposal? (This is the norm on DHA Medical Q‐Coded Services—that is, offerors submit as part of the proposal previously completed PPQs signed by CORs.)

Answer: No. Questions on PPQ’s can vary and therefore only the PPQ attached to this solicitation will be considered.

19) Addendum to 52.212‐1(7.3.5): Are there relevancy ratings of “Somewhat Relevant” and “Very Relevant” and, if so, what are the criteria for those ratings? If not, is the rating scale binary with only “Relevant” and “Not Relevant”?

Answer: Relevancy will only be rated as Relevant or Not Relevant. Amendment to the solicitation posted with these questions better defines relevant.

20) Addendum to 52.212‐1(7.3.5): Would a contract with 25+ FTE that includes various nursing specialties and advanced practice nurses (NPs, etc.) be “multi‐disciplined” under the Government’s definition, or would it be considered not relevant?

Updated Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

Please see the answer to question 87 for a definition of multi‐discipline.

21) PWS Para 1.2.1. The contractor shall designate a primary on‐site Contract Manager (CM) and at least one alternate CM, who shall be responsible for the performance of contract services. The CM shall have full authority to act for the contractor on all matters relating to the daily operation of the contract, and shall be available on‐site during the hours of 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.

a) Will office space and furnishings be provided to the CM?

Answer: Yes, a desk and chair.

b) Will telephone/internet/copier/fax be available?

Answer: No internet/no copier/no fax. Only Government desk phone (local calling only).

22) PWS Para 1.2.2.3. The contractor shall submit potential candidate’s resume for open positions to the CO, within 30 calendar days after contract award and upon vacancy notification. Notification begins upon written notice from the Government (Task Order Award) of a new requirement or upon notification of a vacancy by a current employee. What is the Government’s response time to accept a candidate resume?

Answer: Normally within five (5) duty days

23) PWS Para 1.2.7. Medical Evaluation Boards (MEB). Credentialed contractor employees shall perform MEB duties when tasked, including, but not limited to, writing narrative summaries for MEB and/or Deployment/Permanent Change of Station (PCS) waivers, IAW AFI 48‐123, Medical Examinations and Standards and Air Force Manual (AFMAN) 41‐210, TRICARE Operations and Patient Administration. Will any additional training be provided for MEB duties? If so, will this training be considered billable hours?

Answer: Yes, on job training during normal billable duty hours./days.

24) PWS 1.2.9.2. Contractor Inspection Records. The contractor shall maintain inspection records and make the records available to Government personnel throughout the contract performance period, and for the period after contract completion until final settlement of any claims under this contract. Will physical inspection records be kept on site? If so, will the Government provide secure location?

Answer: No physical inspection records will be kept on site.

25) PWS 1.2.14. Contractor Employee Start Date (Credentialed). Credentialed health care worker(s) shall physically begin performance within 90 calendar days after contract award or upon notification of a vacant position. Credentialed healthcare workers may begin performance earlier than 90 calendar days if an earlier start date is mutually agreed upon between the Contracting Officer and the Contractor.

a) How long is the credentialing process?

Answer: Dependent on Vendor supplying completed Credential Packet to MDG Medical Staff Manager for review. (See PWS 1.2.2.4 and 1.2.3)

b) Will incumbents need to be re-credentialed?

Answer: No.

26) PWS Para 1.2.16.3. Flu Vaccinations. Contractor employees are required to receive the flu vaccination every year on their own time and at their own expense, unless a contractor employee presents a valid medical waiver (e.g. adverse effects) to CM. The CM will track and forward the certificate to the MTF Occupational Health Office.

a) Will the Government require COVID‐19 vaccinations?

Answer: Currently the COVID vaccine is not a mandatory vaccine. However, many factors may change the status of the vaccine. If 355 MDG policy changes to make this mandatory then the contractors will be expected to comply. At that time a modification to the contract will be made to include the COVID vaccine as a mandatory vaccine.

b) What will the grace period be?

Answer: Grace period would be determined at the time the vaccine becomes mandatory based on the availability of the vaccine.

c) Will the Government provide COVID‐19 vaccinations to the healthcare workers?

Answer: This will be determined at a later date based on the availability of the vaccine to healthcare workers. Typically vaccines, such as the flu vaccine, are the responsibility of the contracted employee and not provided by the government. However, if there is a shortage the government may consider providing the vaccine from their supply.

27) PWS 1.3.1.5. Procedures for Criminal Background Checks. On or about the first day of employment the contract employee will meet with one of the MDG Security Managers to initiate the Government background check (National Agency Check). The contract employee shall bring a completed SF85P along with two forms of identification in order to begin the process. Utilize below link to access document mentioned above: https://wwwpm.gov/forms. The contract employee must have a favorable background/fingerprint check in order to receive a Common Access Card (CAC). If employee is unable to obtain a CAC employment will not be authorized.

a) How long will adjudication take?

Answer: Time varies but on average 15‐20 days.

b) Will the health care worker be able to work while pending adjudication without a CAC?

Answer: Yes, limited capabilities

c) Will the healthcare worker be issued a CAC which will be surrendered if background is unfavorable?

Answer: Yes, is possible, but unlikely as CAC not provided until background process completed.

28) PWS para 5.25. Duty Hours…If a contractor employee is in the middle of patient care at the end of their duty day, the employee shall continue to perform services on that patient until patient care is completed, at no additional cost to the Government. Please clarify. If a patient codes moments before the end of the healthcare worker’s shift and the healthcare worker participates in the resuscitation effort (45 minutes), that time will not be billable OR the time will not be billable as overtime?

Answer: That time would not be billable.

29) PWS para 5.29.1. Medical Group Closures. Please describe the MDG’s policy on COVID exposure to include:

a) May a contractor bill for MDG directed COVID quarantine healthcare workers?

Answer: Current policy is based on a case by case basis. If employee is exposed while on the job then typically those lost hours will be billable. However, as the COVID pandemic continues to evolve this policy may change.

b) What are the MDG’s exposure policy to include length of quarantine for exposure or positive test?

Answer: Current guidance has been posted on beta.sam for contractor review. However, as the COVID pandemic continues to evolve this policy may change.

30) Position Descriptions. Non‐Personal Services.

a) Will the Government consider making all positions personal services?

Answer: No

b) Would the Government allow telework for PEBLO; LVN Referral Management; Medical Appointment Clerk; Medical Coder?

Answer: Not at this time

31) PWS para 1.2.5. Contractor Orientation. Will all contractor orientation be conducted during regularly scheduled working hours and be billable?

Answer: Yes, for any Government required orientation.

32) 52.212‐1 Instructions to Offeror para 8.5. Price Organization. Price Organization lists Table of Contents, Position Description Pricing Worksheet and Professional Compensation Plan. The Position Description Pricing Worksheet was included as Attachment 5. The Government also included Attachment 6 Baseline Order Pricing Sheet. What is the purpose of Attachment 6 since it contains much of the same information as Attachment 5? Where is it included in the Pricing Volume?

Answer: Attachment 6 is to provide an example of a typical annual baseline task order. See 3.2.3 Completeness and 3.2.4 Total Evaluated Price of Addendum to 52.212‐2 Evaluation Commercial Items found in Attachment 10. It should be located in Part III Price, Tab 3 for Attachment 6, 52.212‐1 has been updated to reflect this.

33) What is the current incumbent contract number? Are all of the positions currently filled? If not all filled how many vacancies exist?

Answer: See question #3.

34) Electronic Proposals. Proposals submitted electronically ONLY will not be considered. A Compact Disc with an unredacted electronic version of the proposal shall accompany the four (4) hardcopy proposals. Is USB drive acceptable instead of CD?

Answer: Due to network security issues the government will only accept electronic proposals on a CD.

35) Does the government want all the clauses included in Part IV?

Answer: No, the government does not require all of the clauses to be included with the contractor’s signature page.

36) It is not clear whether the Government only wants the Position Description Pricing Worksheet copied into Part III‐ Price at Tab 2 as a pdf or does the Government also want us to return the completed Position Description Pricing Worksheet in native excel form as well? Could we provide Pricing as an attachment to pricing Volume? (Pricing Excel printout converted to PDF)

Answer: A copy in excel is not needed by the government.

37) It is not clear whether the Government only wants the Baseline Order Pricing Sheet copied into Part III‐ Price at Tab 3 as a pdf or does the Government also want us to return the completed Baseline Order Pricing Sheet in native excel form as well?

Answer: A copy in excel is not needed by the government.

38) Can you please clarify what the Government is looking for under 7.3.1 Past Performance Factors under (Tab 2)? As we have to address how each Past Performance Narrative addresses the 5 factors (7.3.1.1. Management Effectiveness, 7.3.1.2. Quality of Service and Workmanship, 7.3.1.3. Manpower Efficiencies, 7.3.1.4. Quality Control, and 7.3.1.5. Customer Satisfaction), under Tab 2a, is this section for our overall approach to these factors or just the definition so we can address them under 2a?

Answer: These are definitions of what the government would like to see in the past performance narratives required under para 7.3.2. of Addendum to 52.212‐1.

39) Can multiple awarded Task Orders under an IDIQ contract, count as a past performance for up‐to five allowed past performances? i.e., a large IDIQ award (such as DHA MQS) with multiple awarded task orders with at‐least 25 FTEs and 6 months of period of performance, would each Task Order contract be acceptable as Unique and Relative past performance?

Answer: Yes individual task orders under the same IDIQ can be utilized as individual contracts as long as them meet the recent and relevant criteria.

40) Is commercial past performance acceptable and evaluated equally to federal government past performance for the same or similar labor categories and scope supporting a commercial or state government healthcare, or healthcare related customer?

Answer: Yes, commercial past performance will hold the same weight as past performance for the government.

41) Is past performance (contract performed as a prime), from a Subcontractor on Team allowed and rated equally to past performance of the prime offeror or non‐managing JV member?

Answer: No. Performance from the Prime Contractor (offeror) will hold more weight than those of subcontractors or teaming partners.

42) Could government further elaborate on evaluation factors of Significant Confidence rating?

Answer: Please review Addendum to 52.212‐2 para 3.1.1. through 3.1.1.5. for the definitions and what each factor entails. The government will use these factors to evaluate the past performance narratives and questionnaires to come to a rating of each based on table 2 of Addendum to 52.212‐2. Taking into account each individual rating and other past performance information found by the government (CPARS, etc) an overall past performance rating will be established.

43) Given the large size of the solicitation, is there any Bank Line of Credit requirements to submit as an evaluation or go‐no‐go factor or non‐price tradeoff factor?

Answer: At this time there is not requirement to submit a bank line of credit for this solicitation.

44) Does JCAHO certification held by prime offeror provide higher rating on offer’s evaluation criteria towards non‐price trade‐off factor?

45) Would past performance having labor categories matching significantly similar to the solicitation provide higher evaluation rating to the offeror towards non‐price trade‐off factor?

Answer: Past performance meeting or exceeding the recency and relevancy determination with highly successful performance will affect the confidence rating.

46) Since this is an 8a set side and the NAICS code size standard is small, would the government consider lowering the multi‐disciplinary count to 15 or above as somewhat relevant which may contribute to the overall confidence of the past performance rating?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

47) Does the amount (number) of past performances submitted enhance the confidence level (substantial) for the past performance price/trade off? i.e., If a company only has 1 past performance, are they competitive?

Answer: Confidence level will be determined by a mix of quantity and quality of past performance. An offeror with one (1) example of past performance that is considered very relevant and recent and outstanding performance may still achieve a substantial confidence rating.

48) Is it correct to assume that to get to the at least 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel on a past performance that we can count any of the labor categories listed in the Position Description Pricing Worksheet?

Answer: Please see answer to question 46. Additionally, any medical discipline that is not listed may also be utilized. There are many specialties that 355 MDG may not need and therefore are not on the position description pricing worksheet.

49) 52.212‐1 para 7.35 and 52.212‐2 para 3.14. Relevant Definition. The definitions for relevant are significantly different in these two attachments. Would the Government please clarify and provide a consistent definition of relevant within these documents?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with the questions and answers which altered the definition of relevant in 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2. Please see the amendment.

50) 52.212‐1 para 7. Paragraph 7 states “Past performance information is required on the offeror and all teaming partners, subcontractors, and on joint venture partners who are proposed to perform on this requirement.” Also, Para 7.3.5 states “Any past performance information submitted that does not meet relevancy will not be evaluated.” Does the offeror have to provide a past performance reference for each team member even if a member does not have a reference that meets the relevancy definitions contained in 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2? Can the offeror provide a reference narrative for team members that do not have a “relevant” reference to meet the Para 7 statement?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which clarifies this issue.

51) 52.212‐1 para 7.3.2. The first sentence states that the narrative references must be recent and relevant contracts. But the second sentence states “Only references for relevant contracts are desired.”

a) Please clarify if relevancy is required or desired for the reference narrative.

Answer: Relevancy is required. Please see amendment to the solicitation that changes the definition of relevant.

b) Do the reference narratives have to correlate to the Past Performance Questionnaires?

Answer: No. However the criteria that the government is looking to evaluate are outlined in Addendum to 52.212‐2 para 3.1.1. through 3.1.1.5. It is highly recommended to ensure those factors are addressed.

52) 52.212‐1 para 7.3.5. “The offeror’s proposing past performance as the Prime Contractor will be weighted more heavily than past performance as a subcontractor.” Request the Government please clarify the above statement. Is the Government stating that work performed on a reference contract as the Prime contractor will be weighed more heavily than work performed as a subcontractor regardless of their role on the Offeror’s team (Prime, JV member, subcontractor)?

Answer. No. The government is stating that performance by the Prime contractor (offeror) on this solicitation will be weighted more heavily than there subcontractors or teaming partners in this source selection.

53) 52.212‐2 para 3.1.1.3. “Capability to manage large workforce at one location (over 25 employees)”.

If a contract reference has more than 25 personnel, but they are at multiple locations will that not be considered relevant even if the work is on the same task order?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

54) 52.212‐2 para 3.1.1.2. “Capability to manage large workforce at one location (over 25 employees)”.

Will the Government please define “one location”? Does this include multiple MTFs on the same Task Order within the same general area (e.g., National Capitol Region MTFs, Pensacola Naval Base MTFs, Jacksonville Naval Base MTFs, Portsmouth Naval Base MTFs)?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed this requirement. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐2.

55) 52.212‐1 para 7.3.3.2. Will the Government please confirm for Part II, Tab 2b that offerors are only to provide the “list of references requested by the offeror to provide a past performance questionnaire”?

Answer: That is correct. This will assist government in tracking expected past performance questionnaires.

56) 52.212‐1 para 7.3.2. “Note: ‐ If the information is available through CPARS the offeror can advise of contract number. If a CPARS report is available for a past performance reference, are offerors still required to request a PPQ be completed for that reference?

Answer: No. However, it should be noted that the PPQ may provide information that is not readily available on the CPARS.

57) 52.212‐2 para 3.2. and 4. “The Government will only evaluate proposals that receive a past performance confidence rating of Substantial or Satisfactory confidence for price.” and Paragraph 4 “The proposal with the lowest TEP will then be evaluated for completeness. If the proposal is complete, the Government will review the proposal’s past performance information.” Will the Government please reconcile these two statements/sections of the RFP? One appears to indicate the PP will be evaluated before Price whereas the other appears to indicate that Price will be evaluated before PP.

Answer: To clarify the government will not do a full price evaluation until the past performance evaluation in completed. However, the government will review the submitted pricing sheet from the lowest TEP for completeness only prior to evaluation of past performance. Completeness is ensuring that all pricing has been filled out in the correct manner.

58) 52.212‐1 para 8. “The offeror’s name, logo, or any other identifiable reference to the offeror shall be provided ONLY on the cover page (6.1.).” Will the Government please clarify if this instruction applies to the unredacted versions of Part III of an offeror’s proposal?

Answer: This applies only to the redacted versions of the proposal.

59) 52.212‐1 para 7.1. Subcontractor Consent. “Provide with the proposal a letter from all teaming partners or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.” Since this instructions falls under Part II of the RFP, should Offeror’s provide evidence of subcontractor consent in Part II?

Answer: No, subcontractor consent should be added under Part IV Tab 5.

60) Q&A question 15. Will the Government please clarify how an IDIQ contract will be evaluated for past performance and relevance since an IDIQ contract is only an ordering vehicle with no actual work requirements or performance?

Since an IDIQ is considered a contract vendors can establish relevancy by utilizing multiple concurrent task orders. This could be utilized in the narrative or in a past performance questionnaire. Additionally, any CPARS reviewed by the government will be on the IDIQ level.

61) PWS 1.2.1 States that the Contractor is to have an on‐site Contract Manager and at least one alternate CM. Can this individual be someone who is also provides services on the contract or is this a separate individual? If separate, are they afforded workspace at the MTF or alternative location on the Base?

Answer: The primary CM must be a separate individual and will be afforded the amenities detailed in question 21. These amenities will be at the clinic. The alternate CM may be someone working from a remote location or an employee on staff at the clinic.

62) In Volume III‐Price, is the Professional Compensation Plan a chart and/or a narrative?

Answer: The government does not have a preferred method. We only require an adequate and coherent professional compensation plan.

63) 52.212‐1 Para 7. States that “Past performance information is required on the offeror and all teaming partners, subcontractors, and on joint venture partners who are proposed to perform on this requirement.” Please confirm that if a single JV partner does not have recent and relevant past performance, that the offeror can still achieve a rating of substantial confidence. In other words, will the fact that one of the JV partners does not have recent and relevant past performance be counted against the offeror?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which clarifies this issue.

64) Attachment 1 Performance Work Statement, page 1, Section 1.2.1 requires an on‐site Contract Manager, however, this position is not included on Attachment 5 Position Description Pricing Worksheet or Attachment 6 Baseline Order Pricing Sheet. If this is not a separate billable position, which clinical staff historically have served in this position?

Answer: Required on‐site Contract Manager is not a separate billable position. The function of the contract manager is to serve as the companies focal point for all on‐site contract employees as well as on on‐site liaison between the contracted employees and the government.

65) Attachment 1 Performance Work Statement, pages 22, Section 5.30.1 requires the contractor to provide uniforms and allows scrub uniforms as authorized by the MTF Commander. Does the current contract include the same requirement? Which labor categories are authorized to wear scrub uniforms and which require overcoat or lab coats?

Answer: No position at 355 MDG requires any specific medical garments. However, certain professions may be authorized to wear specific medical garments if they so choose. These garments would be personally procured and maintained. Policy is subject to change.

66) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 5.3 Table 1 – does the Part 2 Past Performance page limit of 30 pages include the consent letters, and any letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys provided (as specified on page 8, Section 7.3.2)? Or will these attachments be exempt from the maximum limit?

Answer: Consent letters (subcontractor, teaming partner, etc) shall be filed in Part IV, Tab 5 – Additional Offeror Information. All other documents listed will count against the page limit.

67) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 5.8 – please clarify if the Government requires a separate binder for each of the 4 hard copies, or if each part should be in a separate binder for each of the 4 hard copies (4 binders vs. 16 binders).

Answer: The government prefers each hard copy to be in its own binder. However, if the contractor chooses to send each part separately the government will still evaluate the proposal.

68) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 7.1 – does the Government have a required format for the subcontractor consent and the commercial customer authorization letter?

Answer: No.

69) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 7.3.3 – If the offeror has completed Past Performance Questionnaires from other efforts, can these be submitted?

Answer: No. Past performance questionnaires will not be accepted directly from an offeror.

70) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 8.3 – does the Government require a specified format for the Professional Compensation Plan?

Answer: No

71) Addendum to 52.212‐1, Section 8.3 – is a separate Professional Compensation Plan required for all labor categories, or only exempt, non‐SCA covered labor categories?

Answer: Only exempt, non SCA covered labor

72) General. Are resumes requested / allowed with our proposal as an attachment?

Answer: Resumes are not requested or allowed with the proposal.

73) Addendum to 52.212‐1 ‐ Section 9.3 Representations and Certifications (Tab 3). Complete Representation and Certification in SAM at beta.SAM.gov or complete the necessary fill‐ins and certification as required by the solicitation. If the Representation and certification are completed in SAM please provide a brief statement to that fact. If offeror is filling in the Representation and Certification required in the solicitation please provide the filled in versions in this section. If the offeror has completed the annual representations and certifications electronically in the System for Award Management (SAM). Does the offeror still need complete and submit the representations and certifications as part of the proposal?

Answer: If the reps and certs are completed and available for government review on SAM then the government only requires a brief statement acknowledging they are completed in SAM. It is worth noting that provide 52.204‐24 is new and may not have been completed in SAM but is required to be submitted.

74) Business Associate Agreement. Does the offer need to submit the Business Associate Agreement as part of the RFP or will it be completed at the time of award?

Answer: Completed at time of the award.

75) Addendum to 52.212‐1– Section 7.3.2. Past Performance Narrative (Tab 2a). Please advise on the number of past performances that are needed to be submitted with the proposal. Would the agency be willing to accept past performance from the offeror's subcontractors and would they count of equal value as the Prime?

Answer: A minimum of one (1) past performance is required to be submitted with a maximum of five (5). Teaming partners or subcontractor past performance can be utilized, however past performance submitted from the Prime will be weighted more heavily.

76) Addendum to 52.212‐1 ‐ Section 8.3. Professional Compensation Plan. The offeror shall submit a professional compensation plan IAW FAR 52.222‐46 that ensures uninterrupted services of incumbent healthcare workers from prior contracts. If we are bidding as a JV will we need to provide 2 professional employee compensation plans? (One for each member of the JV?)

Answer: Only one plan from the prime contractor is required.

77) Addendum to 52.212‐1 ‐ 7.3.3. Past Performance Questionnaires (Tab 2b). Most POCs for Past Performance reference contracts are reluctant to complete the Questionnaires if they have already issued CPARs for the contracts. Can offerors submit CPARs in lieu of Questionnaires?

Answer: Offerors may submit CPARs as part of the past performance narratives but not in lieu of questionnaires. The Questionnaires capture information that is not typically included in a CPARS report.

78) Performance Work Statement. Does the Contract Manager need to be onsite 100% or can this be a remote position?

Answer: Yes the contract manager is required to be on‐site 100% of the time.

79) General. Does the Government want a copy of the JV agreement or Teaming agreement included in Part IV?

Answer: Yes. That documentation should be included in part IV tab 5.

80) Addendum to 52.212‐1 Table 1 – Proposal Order and Organization. Does the Government want the Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost Additional information/Notes included in the Part IV after the 1449?

Answer: No. The offeror may just sign the first page of the SF 1449.

81) Position Description Pricing Worksheet. If the Government required the Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost Additional information/ Notes, for Item 0001, it references Attachment 5 which is the list of all PDs at 1920 each. Is it the Government’s intent that we include the price for all the labor categories for all 5 years, which would be the maximum value if all were exercised?

Answer: The government requires the Position Description Pricing Worksheet to be completed in its entirety. However, this would not represent the maximum value of the contract as on position description could be ordered multiple times in one ordering period. For example, the government may require seven (7) LPN’s on one task order. Under this scenario the contractor would receive a task order for 13,440 hours of LPN services for a year. In the description of that CLIN the government would state that seven (7) LPN’s are needed.

82) Supplies or Services and Price/Cost. On the calculation for 0001 of the Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost Additional information/ Notes, should we also include the overtime?

Answer: Only the Position Description Pricing Worksheet and Baseline Order Pricing Sheet shall be filled out for pricing. They must be filled out in their entirety. The Position Description Pricing Worksheet includes positions that may require overtime.

83) Supplies or Services and Price/Cost. On the Supplies or Services and Prices/Cost Additional information/ Notes, is the Government going to provide a dollar value for the travel or should we estimate it? If estimating, what are the requirements for travel?

Answer: No pricing is required for travel. The government intends to negotiate each instance of travel with the contractor prior to each instance.

84) If there is an amendment, where would you like it in the proposal response?

Answer: Only the signed first page of the SF 1449 is required by submitting a proposal without any exceptions indicated the offeror is agreeing to the terms and conditions set forth in the solicitation. This would include all amendments.

85) Addendum to 52.212‐1 Section 5.3 Format for proposal Part I‐IV Table 1 – Proposal Order and Organization. Do you want the JV or Partner(s) consent letter of past performance in Part II or Part IV?

Answer: Part IV Tab 5.

86) Addendum to 52.212‐1 – Section 7 Part II Past Performance. Can offeror combine their multiple awarded task orders under one IDIQ, to reach or exceed the 25 FTE personnel threshold as a Relative Past performance?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant and the requirement for 25 FTEs. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

87) What is the government’s definition of multi‐discipline?

Answer: For this solicitation multi‐discipline refers to each discipline within the medical career field.

Each position on the Position Description Pricing List would be considered its own discipline.

88) Addendum to 52.212‐1 – Section 5.11. Proposal Submission. Based on COVID‐19 and the likely possibility of the mail being delayed, would the Government consider changing the delivery method to electronic via email? If not, would the Government accept the submission of an electronic version of both the original and sanitized versions as a backup should the hard copies get delayed by the delivery company (FedEx or UPS)?

Answer: No. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure an offer arrives at 355 CONS prior to the submission deadline.

89) Addendum to 52.212‐2. Does the Government want the offeror to include the fully contents of Addendum to 52.212‐2, Evaluation‐Commercial Items or should the offeror just state that the Addendum to 52.212‐2, Evaluation‐Commercial Items is included by reference?

Answer: The offeror does not need to do either. By submitting a proposal the offeror is accepting all terms and conditions of the solicitation unless including an exception to the solicitation in Part IV

90) Addendum to 52.212‐1 – Section 7 Part II Past Performance. Does medical logistics work qualify as a relevant past performance?

Answer: Yes. However, I would encourage the offerors to review the amendment to the solicitation that was posted with these questions and answers as the definition of relevant has changed.

91) GS Equivalent Rates Hourly and Attachment 2 Position Descriptions. There is a missing Position Description for Health Information Systems Technician in Attachment 2, however the position can be found listed under Attachment 4. Would the government be able to provide a Position Description for the Health Information Systems Technician?

Health Information System Technician was added in error and has been removed via the amendment posted with the questions and answers.

92. Can offerors use IDIQs for past performance references?

Answer: Yes as a contract an IDIQ can be used to establish past performance.

93. Is the prime offeror required to demonstrate past performance for at least 25 FTEs? Can the prime and subcontractor demonstrate combined past performance for the 25 FTEs?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant and the requirement for 25 FTEs. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

94. Are there any other levels of past performance such as “Somewhat Relevant” for contracts or task orders with less than 25 FTEs?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant and the requirement for 25 FTEs. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

95. Does the government plan to Mod the language in the SOL/contract to include COVID‐19 Vaccinations mandated for contractor employees? The current language only includes Flu: 1.2.16.3. Flu Vaccinations. Contractor employees are required to receive the flu vaccination every year on their own time and at their own expense, unless a contractor employee presents a valid medical waiver (e.g.

adverse effects) to CM. The CM will track and forward the certificate to the MTF Occupational Health Office.

Answer: Currently the COVID vaccine is not a mandatory vaccine. However, many factors may change the status of the vaccine. If 355 MDG policy changes to make this mandatory then the contractors will be expected to comply. At that time a modification to the contract will be made to include the COVID vaccine as a mandatory vaccine.

96) Is any state license acceptable for clinical staff or is an Arizona license required?

Answer: Any state license

97) 52.212‐1 para 7.3.2. States that offerors should provide a narrative of recent and relevant contracts “performed for Federal, State, Local Government and private industry.” Will references for Federal, State or Local Government references be given the same relevancy weight as private industry references as long as it meets the 25 FTE requirement?

Answer: Yes past performance regardless of who it is performed for will be weighted the same.

Additionally, an amendment to the solicitation has been posted with these questions and answers revising the definition of relevant and removing the 25 FTE requirement. Please review the amendment.

98) Section 5.4 of Attachment 9 states that “Cover page, Table of Contents, Tabs, Glossaries, Dividers, Blank pages, and Past Performance Questionnaires” are excluded from the page count. Given these exclusions, our assumption is that the page limitation for the Narrative Summary in Volume I is the only item in that volume that counts towards the page limitation. Can the Government confirm this assumption is correct?

Answer: Yes that assumption is correct.

99) In Section 7.3.3.1 of Attachment 9, it states that offerors are “encouraged to have the past performance questionnaires submitted five (5) calendar days prior to the established offer due date in Block 8 on the Standard Form 1449.” Please confirm that questionnaires returned after this deadline, but before the established offer due date will receive the same consideration as those arriving five calendar days prior.

Answer: Yes, all past performance questionnaires received prior to the offer due date will receive the same consideration.

100) Regarding the Government’s response to Question 5 in the previously released Questions/Answers, if an offeror choose to use multiple task orders under an IDIQ contract, will those task orders all individually count towards the five reference limit or will they be considered a single reference as they are under a single IDIQ contract?

Answer: Please see the amendment posted to beta.sam with these questions and answers. This amendment revises the definition of relevant past performance.

101) Would the Government allow offerors to submit a Contractor Performance Assessment Report in place of a Past Performance Questionnaire to satisfy the requirements of Section 7.3.3 of Attachment 9?

Answer: No, CPARs may not contain all the information required on a past performance questionnaire and will not capture all the information the government wishes to review.

102) Addendum to 52.212‐1, para 7.3.5, the Relevant Past performance states “To be considered relevant the past performance must show that the performance was for at least 25 multi‐disciplined medical personnel.” Is this requirement to be met under one contract or is in totality across multiple contracts acceptable?

Answer: A solicitation amendment was posted with these questions and answers which changed the definition of relevant and the requirement for 25 FTEs. Please review changes in Addendum to 52.212‐1 and 52.212‐2.

103) On the current contract what has been the average level of FTE/Hourly consumption over the life of the contract?

Answer: See Attachment 6 Baseline Order Pricing Sheet.

104) Will base housing be provided? Will Travel Per Diem costs be reimbursed if billed in accordance with the FTR/JTR?

Answer: No base housing will be provided. Travel will be negotiated between the government and contractor before travel occurs.

105) Will the client provide COVID‐19 related items/requirements (e.g. PPE, N‐95 Fit Testing, etc.)?

Answer: All CDC recommended guidelines for PPE…