RFP Question Set 2.doc

CLASS RFP

Question Set

Can you clarify that it is referring to 1 contract providing services in 3 different states? Or [can this] be 3 contracts in 3 states?

The relevancy determination will be applied to each “past performance record” (see Section M3.3.4).

The business relationships are created in paragraph 9 of L-5 for Prime and all Subcontractors who are submitting their own past performance information.

The instructions in paragraph 14 of L-5 under "Contract Dollar Value" ask for an "original" (ceiling) amount and a "current" amount.

Will the Internal Medicine physician be required to do inpatient/hospitalist duties?

(There is a large difference in pay/ bill rate between outpatient coverage and inpatient coverage - almost double).

If this question refers to Section J, Attachment 4, Approved Position Descriptions, then any unique inpatient or outpatient requirement will be annotated on an addendum to the position description as part of the Task Order Proposal Request. (See Section C, paragraph 1.4.2 for the definition of an addendum).

Please refer to Section C, paragraph 2.4.19.1 regarding the Criminal History Background Check.

Are there incumbent contractors currently under a contract that this contract will replace?

If yes, can the Government please provide the name of the incumbent or incumbent contractors?

Yes. Please refer to the bold text in Section L6.1.5.2 of the RFP.

The Government provided the names of the incumbent contractors in the representative task order.

The Government has requested that the Past Performance volume be submitted 7 days prior to the closing date. Should offerors consider that submission to be complete, or, does the Government require that offerors provide another set of copies of the volume IV with volumes I-III and V when they are submitted?

The offeror will submit only one past performance volume. The Government requested the offeror submit their past performance volume seven calendar days prior to the date set in the solicitation. However, the Government will still accept the past performance volume until the time and date set in the solicitation for receipt of proposals.

There is no page limit for Tab 3 in Volume III as identified in Table L-1, Proposal Organization.

As stated in Section 6.1.5.3, offerors shall provide “complete rationale for each assumption.”

Question: This can be an extensive amount of documentation. Does it count in the 50 page limit? Do you want a complete application packet for each type of provider including primary source verifications and MTF paperwork?

Page limitations are outlined in Table L-1, Proposal Organization and Section L3.4.7 The measure of merit is outlined in Section M3.1.1.3.2. The definition for preliminary Government minimum requirements is outlined in Section C, paragraph 1.4.42.

Question [a]: Do you want this information for every position listed on Attachment 8? If so, can it be provided in an attachment that does not count in the page count?

Question [b]: Providing salary (wage) information in this section appears to be in direct conflict with L.6.1.2 which states “ All information relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.” Please clarify.

a: The professional compensation plan is evaluated under the Technical Capability Factor (see M3.1.2.1.3) not the Price Factor where Attachment 8, Table B-1, Representative Task Order is located (see M3.2). The Government will review the overarching professional compensation plan. The plan, in general, shall apply to professional positions listed in Section J, Attachment 4, Available Position Descriptions. The measure of merit for the professional compensation plan is outlined in Section M3.1.2.1.3.

b: L6.1.2 refers to specific pricing on the Representative Task Order and should be based on elements of the offeror’s professional compensation plan. The Government does not expect to review specific prices in the professional compensation plan.

Question: Can we use this time information as our time sheets? Is it verified by an on-site supervisor?

DMHRSi is a Government system. Please refer to Section C, paragraph 2.3.1.

Question: Can this be submitted in the form of a resume or do you need copies of primary sourced licenses and certifications at this point?

The Government does not dictate the specific documents the offeror expects to submit as qualifying documentation to meet the preliminary Government minimum requirements. Please refer to the definition of preliminary Government minimum requirements in Section C, paragraph 1.4.42 and qualifying documentation in Section C, paragraph 1.4.46.

Question: How long does this process take?

The approval of qualifying documentation for subsequent Government minimum requirements varies across the Air Force Medical Service.

Question: Do both the government and the contractor complete full background checks on candidates?

Section C, paragraph 2.4.17.4.5.4 discusses qualifying documentation, including background checks, accomplished by the Contractor.

Section C, paragraph 2.4.19.1 references DODI 1402.5 for Criminal History Background Checks accomplished by the Government

The process used in the current contracts is irrelevant to the task order process outlined in this RFP, which must be addressed in the offeror’s proposal. Please review Section C, paragraph 1.1.4 regarding the candidate approval component and the task order award component of the 2-step task order process.

Please review Table C-1, Services Summary for the submission of the credentials package. The length of time for MTF approval varies across the Air Force.

Question [a]: At what point in this 30 and 60 day window do we receive approval by the MTF on the candidate’s completed packet? How long does it take the Government to process both non-credentialed and credentialed HCWs?

[b]: We also believe that employees should give notice to their current employer before starting a new job. Typical notice is between 2 and 4 weeks, depending upon the specialty. Candidates will not give notice until they are accepted and approved at the MTF. How is this factored into the time frame?

a: The length of time for MTF approval varies across the Air Force.

b: The Government does not dictate the external employment process.

The Contractor shall use the average hourly rates in Table H-4, HCW Average Hourly Rates when determining the unobligated dollars for credentialed and non-credentialed HCWs. The Contractor shall use the loss duty hours for each type of HCW times the associated average hourly rate for each type of HCW in Table H-4 to calculate the unobligated dollars for the obligation rate percentage on the Contractor Performance Status Report (CPSR). The Contracting Officer may update these rates during the life of the contract.

Question [a]: How were these average hourly rates calculated?

[b]: Why isn’t the actual contract rate used for this calculation to get the real picture?

a: The Government calculated average hourly rates for credentialed and non-credentialed HCWs using average rates from FY10.

b: As outlined in Section C, paragraph 2.4.17.4.2.7, the Government chose to set the lost duty hours due to “delays in initial, replacement, and substitution fills as sufficient to represent the obligation rate percentage since actual contract rates are not releasable.

Section b. states “…by issuing a Letter of Intent to Award (LOIA) to the Contractor identified by the Program Management Office as the most advantageous to the Government.”

Question: Can the Government provide more detail regarding what is considered to be most advantageous? It is understood that a software program will assist in making this analysis (M3.2.6.4), however how is it ensured to be most advantageous while still not overwhelming any one awarded contractor?

The offerors awarded contracts are determined to be the most advantageous to the Government because they represent the best value from the Performance-Price Tradeoff source selection.

The allocation of RTO requirements is a separate function which allocates RTO requirements among the awardees that were determined to be the most advantageous to the Government.

Section c.1.c) discusses the validation process.

Question [a]: If the order is revalidated and the LOIA rolls from the first to potentially a third contractor, will the timelines begin over in fairness to the final contractor attempting to fill it?

[b]: Additionally, what happens if a task order is not validated? Is the entire requirement then cancelled?

a: The “third contractor” will be given an LOIA, which is referenced in Table C-1, Services Summary and H.2c.1c).

b: Please refer to Section H.2.c.1.b).

Question: Was the last sentence of this section cut off?

The RFP should show a closing parenthesis. The reference should read, FAR 52.222-43(d)(1)

The RFP references substitutions and replacements, which is outlined in Sections H.16 and H.17, and defined in Section C, paragraphs 1.4.50 and 1.4.57.

Question: What are the steps for the process discussed in this section and what are the potential consequences?

Contractors are on the Watch List because they fail to meet one or more acceptable quality level, which could impact their ability to get future contract awards. Please refer to H.3c.3.a).

The Watch List requirements are outlined in Section H.19.

Question: Please confirm that the Government will continue to be liable for payments for services rendered regardless of their breach, termination, etc.

The Government does not understand this question.

Question: What does the TBD refer to in this clause?

The Government will remove this clause.

Yes, the Wage Determinations are current as of 21 Mar 11 as identified in Section J, page 82.

Question: While it is noted there is one cost type line item for travel, this clause indicates it does not apply to small businesses or foreign governments. Because this is a small business set aside RFP, can this clause be removed, please?

The Government will not remove this clause.

52.215-11 Price Reduction for Defective Cost or Pricing Data – Modifications (OCT 1997) and 52.215-13 Subcontractor Cost or Pricing Data – Modifications (OCT 1997) AND

Page 110, 52.215-20, Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information other than Cost or Pricing Data

Question: Page 46 indicates certified cost or pricing data is not required for the task orders. Please explain why these clauses are pertinent and if not, can they be deleted? Please confirm Certificates of Current Cost or Pricing Data are not required.

Although we anticipate adequate price competition for this acquisition, these clauses are necessary in the event that adequate price competition does not exist on the contract or associated task orders. If there is adequate price competition, Certificates of Current Cost or Pricing Data are not required.

When certified cost or pricing data are required, the contracting officer shall require the contractor to execute a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, FAR 15.406-2(a).

L.6.1.3 Pricing Information Requirements

Question: Can the Government clarify what circumstances an offeror shall be required to submit pricing data? Does the Government foresee the need for cost or pricing data when this solicitation is assumed to have adequate price competition?

See response to Question #248

Escalation Rates

Question: Can the Government clarify which index (or indices) are acceptable for escalation based on its independent analysis?

The Government will not dictate which index the offeror uses as outlined in Section L6.1.5.2.

Question [a]: In the instructions, it states “…we request that a client authorization letter (similar to the sample below) be completed by any commercial customers identified in your proposal.” Shouldn’t that state that the contractor shall complete the letter and submit it to the commercial client?

[b]: Please confirm that the Government wants a copy of this letter to the client in the proposal response.

a: Yes. The RFP will be amended to read “…we request that a client authorization letter (similar to sample below) be completed for any commercial customers…” b: Please review the note in Table L-1, Proposal Organization.

[b]: Is there a potential to submit accidentally before we are finished inputting necessary information into the system if we leave the system after viewing?

a: The past performance tool is not a web-based application but a Microsoft Access Database. Please refer to paragraph 4 in “Downloading the PPI Template” in Attachment L-5.

b: Please refer to the section, “Printing reports and Submitting PPI Tool” in Attachment L-5.

The Government has reviewed your suggestions and the provisions remain unchanged.

In accordance with FAR 52.222-41(n) the Government will turn over a certified list of the names of all service employees on the Contractor’s or subcontractor’s payroll during the last month of contract performance. Such list shall also contain anniversary dates of employment on the contract either with the current or predecessor Contractors of each such service employee.

It is our understanding that all of these requirements are filled by incumbents on the current Clinical Support Services Contracts. The contract companies are identified in Table B-1, Representative Task Order.

Section L instructions appear to be in direct opposition to each other and requires clarification. Use of a 12-point font in tables, charts, graphs, and figures limits offerors ability to display detailed information, particularly with regard to process flows and organization charts. Will the Government please revise the Section L instructions to allow graphics with fonts size no less than 9 point.

The Government will modify the language in L3.4.8 on text limits for tables, charts, graphs and figures as follows, “For tables, charts graphs and figures, the text shall be not smaller than 9 points using Microsoft Word, Times New Roman font."

The RFP states “..and that the softcopy will take precedence over the hard copy.” Offerors have limited control over pagination on different computers. MS Word pagination on two different computers is often varies. The requirement also states: “Submit portable document format (PDF) documents using Adobe Acrobat 9.0 only. DO NOT submit any documents in PDF format that are copied as ―images.” This indicates that offerors are permitted to submit documents in *.PDF format, thereby eliminating pagination issues.

Does the reference *.PDF format mean offerors may submit narrative files in *.PFF and ensure hard copy and electronic copies are identical? Please clarify.

[Note: The Government believes the correct reference in the question is L3.4.14 and the response is based on this reference. The word, "softcopy” is not in the RFP. The RFP actually states, “the electronic version shall take precedence and will be used for evaluation of the offeror’s proposal”.]

As stated in Section L3.4.14, offerors must submit portable document format (PDF) documents using Adobe Acrobat 9.0 only.

L5.1.2.3.2 (under Tab 2 and Tab 2A), page 119: The offeror shall also submit sample qualifying documentation in response to Table B-2, Sample Task Order Proposal Request and Letter of Intent to Award (Section J, Attachment 9).

L5.1.3 Subfactor 2: Human Resources Management Plan (Tab 3), page 120: This section does not mention Tab 3A or Section J, Attachment 9 at all.

Question: Which one is correct?

The tabulation for Table L-1, Proposal Organization for Section J, Attachment 9, Table B-2 should read Tab 2B.

Question: If we use FedEx to deliver our proposal, will they have a problem delivering the proposal?

The agency receives FedEx packages when delivered. As stated in L3.4.15, it is the offeror’s responsibility to “assure meeting proposal deadlines”.

Tab 2A is directly after Tab 2 and before L5.1.2.2, L5.1.2.3, & L5.1.2.4. This seems to show that everything in Tab 2 will actually fall under Tab 2A.

Question: Should all four subsections fall under Tab 2A, or should they be under Tab 2?

[Note: Tab 2 is the Business Plan, which consists of the following: Teaming/Organizational Structure (Tab 2A); Business Approach; Recruitment of Health Care Workers (L5.1.2.3); and, Limitations on Subcontracting (L5.1.2.4).] Attachment 9, Table B-2, STOPR should be provided under Tab 2B

Rating: Relevant; Definition: second bullet: Provides services for other DoD or Federal agencies in two (2) or more states…

Question: Does this mean that we have contracts that cover 2 or more states?

See response to Question #209

Rating: Relevant; Definition: second bullet: Provides services for other DoD or Federal agencies in two (2) or more states… Question: Does this mean that we have staff in 2 or more states?

See response to Question #209

Anesthesia Technician

Cardiac Catheterization Technician

Cardiopulmonary Lab Technician

Echocardiogram Technician

Mental Health Services Technician

Ophthalmology Technician

Orthopedic Technician

Polysomnographic Technician

Registered Vascular Technologist

Surgical Service Technician See response to Question #255.

[b]: Does this only apply to incumbents from the previous CLASS contract?

a: Refer to Section C, paragraph 2.3.2.1.1 for the purpose of Attachment 10 b: Attachment 10 is used for changes in Contractor Team Organization only. It is used after contract award and only in the event that the contractor team changes.

Attachment 10 is used after contract award and only in the event that the contractor team changes (see Section C, paragraph 2.3.2.1.1).

[a]: Can Bidders be assured that all tasks (i.e. physicals) and all tests (i.e. drug tests, TB tests) for subsequent qualifications listed will be performed on site at the MTFs at Government’s expense?

[b]: Are Fingerprints and subsequent background screening also done on site at government’s expense after the Task Order award?

a: Tests for subsequent Government minimum requirements are not performed at the Government MTFs and are not performed at the Government’s expense. Please refer to Section C, paragraph 2.4.3.1.5 for requirements on tests performed on site at the MTF.

b: Please refer to Section C, paragraph 2.4.10 for security requirements.

A price adjustment can only be requested as outlined in Section H.11.

See response to Question #266.

The CLASS contracts are indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts as stated in Section L3.1. The Government has considered this suggestion and declines to change the RFP.

QUESTION [a]: Will the Government please provide the missing Section G or change the L.8.1.3 instructions accordingly.

Section L paragraph L8.1.3 will be amended to read, “L8.1.3 Reserved (Tab 3)”. Offerors will not have to complete Section G of the contract document or provide any documentation for Tab 3 in Volume V of the proposal.

DISCUSSION: We understand that the TOs may or may not be issued to require a candidate resume for USAF consideration (acceptance/rejection) as a part of TO award. However, we assume that the TOs when issued would specify if resumes are required prior to award. Likewise, one would assume that the RTO (Section J, Attachment 9) should have said if resumes were a part of an offerors proposal response to RFP L5.1.2.3.2 response. Also because the RTO documentation is located inside the Technical Capability response a two-page ‘representative’ resume for two positions should clearly state that the RTO resumes are excluded from the total 50 page limit for Volume II – Technical Capability.

QUESTION [b]: Will the Government please clarify the RFP instructions on:

[i]: Attachment 9 response must include resumes not to exceed two (2) pages

[ii]: Resumes are excluded from the 50 page limit for Volume II – Technical Capability.

[Note on Reference: Figure C-1 shows when qualifying documentation are required, which is part of the candidate approval component of the 2-step task order process rather than the task order competition where the TOPR is provided.]

[Note on Discussion: This assumption is not correct. Please refer to section H.2c.1.a) for candidate approval requirements before task order award from the Representative Task Order and section H.3c.5a)1) for candidate approval requirements before task order award for requirements for subsequent task orders. Also, Section J, Attachment 9 refers to Table B-2, Sample Task Order Proposal Request and Letter of Intent to Award. It is not related to Table B-1, Representative Task Order (RTO). The requirements for Table B-1, RTO in L6.1.5.2 do not discuss qualifying documentation. Table B-2, Sample Task Order Proposal Request is excluded from the page count as outlined in L3.4.7.] Question b:

i: Attachment 9, Table B-2 is excluded from page limits as outlined in Section L3.4.7 ii: The instructions in L5.1.2.3.2 discuss sample qualifying documentation. Attachment 9, Table B-2 is excluded from page limits as outlined in Section L3.4.7.

DISCUSSION: The reference states that the Government “requests” but does not mandate the early submission nor does it clearly specify what constitutes the 7-day early submission as a complete package. The RFP is silent on the early submission being considered late IAW the FAR clause if not delivered on 12 May 2011. Paper copy and CD-Roms or just the paper copy only? It would make sense that the questionnaires should be returned concurrent with when the Government expects to begin Past Performance evaluations. However, the RFP indicates that they are due along with the proposal due date, currently set for 25 May 2011. Industry needs to understand what pieces of Volume IV Past Performance should be included in the early submission package.

QUESTION: Will the Government please clarify the missing elements associated with the early past performance submission:

a. Volume IV Past Performance due 12 May 2011 in 3 Hard copies (Original, 2 hard copies) and one CD-Rom (electronic copy)

b. Volume IV Past Performance submitted after 12 May is considered late IAW FAR Clause 52-214-7: Late Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals of Bids

c. Offerors should request contracting officers prepare and forward completed questionnaires (L-2, Past Performance Questionnaire) to arrive NLT 12 May 2011 to 773 ESS/PKJ – ESG Medical OL WAFB; Attn: Anita Bailey

The same documents outlined in L-1, Proposal Organization must be included in the past performance volume regardless of when it is submitted.

Central requirements on the RTO refer to centralized requirements, which cover "multiple MTF locations" as outlined in Section H.15b. As outlined in Section H.2(a), the central requirements on the RTO may be issued and administered at the individual base or through the Enterprise Sourcing Group.

The details of the background check are inherent in the process established by the offeror as outlined in Section M3.1.1.3.1.