The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
HHSM-500-2014-RFP-QIN-QIO
Amendment 0004 Responses to Solicitation Questions
| No. |
| Section |
| Section Number & Title |
| Question |
| Answer |
| 1 |
| General |
| General |
| If it is CMS' intent to have GTLs review proposals in regard to their assigned tasks, will the GTLs be required to read the full 30 pages and cost realism section to understand the task level information in context? |
| Yes |
| 2 |
| General |
| Volume IV, Business Proposal |
| Does CMS intend to fully fund the five (5) year contract period of performance at contract award? |
| Yes |
| 3 |
| General |
| Volume IV, Business Proposal |
| Does CMS intend to fund the five (5) year contract based on each contract year (Base Year and four (4) Option Years)? For example, Base Year funded at award, modification to fund Option Year 1, modification to fund Option Year 2, etc. |
| No, this will be a five year contract, without option years. |
| 4 |
| General |
| Volume IV, Business Proposal |
| If CMS intends to fund based on each contract year, are funds awarded in one contract year fungible to the following contract years? For example, if funds are unspent in the Base Year can they be carried forward and used in the Option Year 1 contract year? |
| This contract will not include option years. |
| 5 |
| Base Contract, Section H and L |
| Section L.18 of the RFP (instructions for the COI volume V), at Tab B.2, states: “Please provide the following information for PCI disclosures…” The section then lists all the types of disclosures that would be in a personal disclosure statement (e.g., employment or contracts with insurers or providers). At the end of this list, there is the following statement: “These PCI Certifications may be marked |
‘Confidential’ and ‘Proprietary Business Information.’” Section H.21 of the RFP, “Contractor Compliance Officer Responsibility,” expressly states that the QIO is not to submit to the government the personal disclosure statements for board members, organization executives and key personnel.
Section H.21a) states:
The review of individual conflict of interest certifications for Board of Director and Organization Executives will be performed by the QIO Compliance Officer, not by CMS. The COI should not be submitted to the Government with the Conflict of Interest Certificate.
| It is unclear from the QIN-QIO RFP whether a bidder must submit copies of personal COI statements or just documentation of the Compliance Officer’s analysis of these statements. Please clarify what must be submitted with the proposal related to personal COI. |
| Section L.18 is for pre-award concerns, CMS will be reviewing the documentation before contract award to make a responsibility determination before award. |
Section H.21 is for post-award concerns regarding the responsibilities of the Compliance Officer.
Question #: 85 Amendment 002 Page: 23 Section Number: Base Contract, Section C Section & Title: C.3.3.1.b (RFP page 20) Information Systems Security Compliance, FISMA Compliance
| Since CMS will no longer pay for FISMA compliance on a direct basis, will direct funding be provided for third party FISMA Audits for QIN-QIO contractors? Who will be responsible for the cost of future FISMA audits since CMS paid for them in the past? Who will perform them? Will they include QIN QIO subcontractors? |
| The contractor will be responsible for correcting any deficiencies related to FISMA. |
Question #: 98 Amendment 002 Page: 26 Section Number: Base Contract, Section C Section & Title: C.6.2.1.3 (RFP page 47) Successful Interventions: Effective Dissemination of Successful Interventions That Lead to System-Level Improvement and Sustainability of Efforts
| We understand that the contract would not pay for individuals to obtain CME or certifications. The RFP suggests that QIN-QIOs should award continuing education credits for participation in learning activities. The intent of the question was to ask if an organization’s cost and work effort (not individual) related to becoming a continuing education granting organization would be allowable as a direct cost. Please clarify whether organizational costs related to becoming a CME/CEU accredited provider is allowable as a direct cost. |
| Such costs would be considered a cost of doing business as a whole, and should be indirect. |
Question #99 Amendment 002 Page: 26
C.6.3.1 Designation of Key Personnel; HHSAR 352.242.70 Key Personnel; Key Personnel and other Recommended Staff
| The answer to Q# 99 changes the title of Project Manager to IDIQ Director responsible for managing the IDIQ multi-state level, which would be considered an indirect cost. The cost associated with management of the IDIQ multi-state level award can be identified with the IDIQ Task Order final cost objective, and, therefore, does not fit the definition of an indirect cost. Please clarify that this cost should be treated consistent with the organization’s policy for assigning costs for the same purpose on other awards. In most organizations, this cost would be allocated to each Task Order using a reasonable base such as direct labor. |
| In accordance with the FAR definition of an indirect cost, “indirect costs are costs to be allocated to two or more final cost objectives” (contracts). The contractor’s treatment of all costs should be in accordance with FAR. |
Question #: 182 Amendment 002 Page: 49 L.15.C Management Plan, Corporate Capacity, and Internal Oversight and Monitoring (RFP page 196)
| There are two references to a management plan in Task Order 001, one found at section A.1.2, and the other incorporated in the comprehensive strategic plan. Does the response to Q#182 mean that no management plan is requested to be submitted with the response to Task Order 001 at all? Or only that the management plan that is part of the strategic plan need not be submitted until after contract award? |
| CMS requires only one management plan, which is to be submitted as part of the overall Strategic plan due after the contract is awarded per the Schedule of Deliverables. |
Question #: 267 Amendment 002 Page: 70 M.4 Past Performance Evaluation
| As the answer is worded, Q#267 suggests that CMS expects offerors to include past performance of all state QIOs in the region, which is not reasonable if the offeror is not currently the QIO in one or more states. Should we interpret this to mean the past performance of all entities (prime and subcontractor) participating in the bid for a region? |
| Yes |
Question #: 280 Amendment 002 Page: 75 Section Number: Section J, Attachment J.1, Task Order 001 Section & Title: Section A.2.1, Designation of Key Personnel, p. 1
| The answer to Q#280 specifies 1 FTE state program director per state. In a very small state, it would significantly disadvantage ability to perform under the contract if the 1 FTE requirement meant full time effort on program management, which might be indirect labor. May we assume the response means that there must be a person who works full time for the state QIO contract who is designated program director even if only part of the person’s responsibility is overall management of the state level effort (i.e., a “working manager”)? |
| Yes, your interpretation is correct. |
Questions #: 285 & 287 Amendment 002 Page: 76 Section Number: Section J, Attachment J.15 Section & Title: Business Proposal Templates, QIO Staff Summaries & QIO Staffing tabs
| The Offeror understands that no input is required in the hidden rows, columns and/or cells. The question was to make CMS aware that upon testing and entering data in the templates, the Offeror found errors in the functionality and calculations in the spreadsheet. If the noted corrections are not made by CMS in the Business Proposal template, the Offeror’s business proposal templates will not calculate accurate costs. |
| Refer to amendment 0003 for revised business proposal forms. |
Question #: 314 Amendment 002 Page: 84 Section Number: Section J, Attachment J.15(a) Section & Title: Section 3, Business Proposal Instructions, Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) and Salaries
| Please clarify response to Q#226-227, which implies no categorization by task and year. Is there any place in the RFP response where offerors are expected to provide labor hours or costs per task? |
| No |
The Q&A released on Jan 17, 2014 appears to contain conflicting instructions regarding the submission of the business proposal. Please clarify CMS’ intent.
Section Number: Base Contract, Section L; Base Contract, Section M, Section J, Attachment J.15(a) Section & Title: L.17, M.2.B & General Instructions In Follow-Up to Amendment 2, Answers #: 210, 258 & 301" Can you please clarify how Volume IV Business Proposal should be submitted?
Amendment 2, Q# 210 indicates “Separate state budgets are required and will be submitted in one Volume IV Business Proposal”; however Q# 258 and 301 appear to reference a separate Volume IV per State. Q#258 references “Separate Volumes II and IV per state.” Q#301 states that “An organization proposing a Medicare contract in more than one QIO area must complete a separate business proposal for each QIO area” and the answer from CMS indicates that this means a separate business proposal for each state.
If CMS desires one Volume IV, can Sections A, B, & F be included once (vs. separately for each state) and Sections C, D, E, & G have separate subsections for each State?"
Volume IV should be one combined volume. Volume IV should have separate spreadsheets for each state but to all be included in one Business Volume.
Section B and F can be included once as they pertain to the IDIQ and Sections A, C, D, E, and G should be separate for each state.
Question Number: 258 and 301 versus 126, 154, 210, 213, and 215 Section & Title: Business Volume IV Instructions
| The answers to Q#258 and 301 seem to imply that there should be multiple (state-level) Volume IVs. However, the RFP instructions and answers to Q#126, 154, 210, 213, and 215 clearly state that there is one combined Volume IV that includes state-level budgets. Please clarify if Vol IV is to be one combined volume or separate volumes for each state. |
| Volume IV should be one combined volume. Volume IV should have separate spreadsheets for each state but to all be included in one Business Volume. |
Question Number: 182 and 184 Section & Title: Excellence in Operations and Quality Improvement Volume II Instructions
| Q#182 asked whether a management plan was to be included with the strategic plan in Vol II. The answer stated no, that the management plan requirement was removed. Q#184 asked how many pages of Vol II were to be dedicated to the strategic plan. The answer was none. Putting these two together it sounds like neither the strategic plan nor the management plan is required to be in Vol II. Is this correct as it is in conflict with proposal instructions? |
| Yes, that is correct. |
Question Number: 180 and 259 Section & Title: Multi-State Technical Proposal Volume I and Excellence in Operations and QI Volume II Instructions
| The answer to Q#180 stated that the required letters of commitment were only for key personnel. There is an IDIQ Program Director that is Key Personnel, but there is also the “State Program Director” for each state who are Key Personnel. Q#180 is about Vol. I Q# 259 is also about letters of commitment and the answer states that these are only required for Key Personnel. Q#259 is about Vol. II. Please clarify that the letter of commitment for Vol. I is only for the IDIQ Program Director and the letter of commitment for Vol. II is only State Program Directors. Are letters of commitment for both required of both volumes or separately, as indicated? |
| Letters of commitment are required in both volumes. |
| The J.16 HCQIS QIO Basic IT Procurement List |
| The J.16 HCQIS QIO Basic IT Procurement List has a number of items that were not previously available or known to current QIO contractors. Will the QIO be allowed to choose from the Data Circuits (T-1 & DS-3) and Routers presented on this list? Will the cost of these circuits/equipment be paid for by CMS, or will they now be billed back to the QIO? |
| If the selected infrastructure solution for all QIN-QIO’s require CMS to provide circuits, the size of the circuit will be review by ISG on a per QIN-QIO basis. The equipment listing in J.16 is not a static listing nor is it all inclusive of what’s available within HCQIS. |
| The J.16 HCQIS QIO Basic IT Procurement List |
| If more robust Data Circuits are available to the QIO-QIN, would it be reasonable to assume we could consolidate File and Print/Database Servers? |
| CMS will determine the infrastructure at each location as a part of the overall standard setup for each QIN-QIO. |
| Question 149 of the Amendment 0002 Responses to Solicitation Questions |
| Please clarify Q#149. Will each QIO’s Security Point of Contact route all deliverables through the Prime Contractors Security Official? Or will security deliverables still be routed through each Sub-QIO’s SPOC to the CMS Security Team? |
| They should be routed via the prime contract. |
| Strategic Plan C.6.1.1 |
| Is the Prime QIO-QIN required to submit (as part of the Strategic Plan C.6.1.1) addition overarching Information Security Plans, System Security Plan and Emergency Preparedness plans which include details regarding the sub-contractors Information Security and Emergency Preparedness Plans? |
| No, the prime QIO-QIN is not required to submit the subcontractors’ information security and emergency preparedness plans; it is the responsibility of the QIN-QIO to ensure these safeguards are in place. |
| H.6 CMS Information Security |
| Can you define FISMA Compliance 90 days after contract award? Does this mean that ALL deficiencies must be mitigated? Is the expectation to get the CAPS and POAMs (which require funding) approved and implemented in this timeframe? |
| Compliance means meeting the ARS requirement. This will be 90 days from the time the deficiency is reported to CMS to the time it is closed. 90 days can be at the time of award or after award if the deficiency is discovered at a later time. |
| Section C.6.1.1 of the Strategic Plan |
| Section C.6.1.1 of the Strategic Plan requires Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP). Is there a template available for this plan? It does not appear to be available in the CMS Information Security Library? |
| No template is available at this time. |
| Question 229 of the Amendment 0002 Responses to Solicitation Questions |
| Please clarify Q#229 which implies only the Offeror is to provide the Section K Certifications as compared to pg. 198, L.17. B which indicates the certifications are to be provided by the prime and subs. |
| The response to Question 229 of Amendment 0002 is correct. Please refer to amendment for removal of term subcontractors. |
| Question 1 and 2 of the Amendment 0002 Responses to Solicitation Questions |
| Please clarify the responses provided in Q#1 and 2 in Amendment 2. In the past QIO boards contained multiple healthcare representatives from all settings (hospitals, nursing homes, home care, physician offices) which in the aggregate exceeded 20% of the governing body composition – though these individuals did not represent any one single health care facility above the 20% threshold. Would the composition of such board now be in violation of the 20% aggregate interpretation? |
| Yes, such a composition would now be in violation. |
Question 154 and 155 of the Amendment 0002 Responses to Solicitation Questions
In reading the responses, is it the intent that the Prime would submit the state’s subcontractor J.15 with elements of the prime’s costs layered within each J.15 (Subcontractor Costs Detailed with Prime Costs layered into the J.15 as well), or is it CMS’ intent that the prime would submit a J.15 for each state with their costs indicated as direct labor and all associated subcontractor costs recorded under a single subcontractor line (Prime Costs Detailed with Subcontractor Costs summarized in the subcontracting section of the J.15)? If the second response is the correct one, would CMS consider a separate J.15 for each state subcontractor sufficient documentation for purposes of cost justification?
Is there another possibility not considered?
It is CMS’ intent that the prime would submit a J.15 for each state with their costs indicated as direct labor and all associated subcontractor costs recorded under a single subcontractor line. Subcontractors may submit a separate J.15 or similarly detailed justification for each state.
| Section H.6 CMS Information Security |
| CMS states that the Contractor must be compliant with all security requirements referenced in Section H.6 within 90 days of contract award. As a current CMS contractor, per guidance provided by CMS/OCSQ in 2013, QIOs were advised that regarding FISMA compliance, "CMS authority to operate" was approved. If there have been no technical or policy changes at the QIO does this approval remain in effect? |
| This is language based on the old contract and not the 11th SOW. An Authority to Operate is based on the General Support System which is supported by the Infrastructure Contractor. |
| Attachment J.1 Task Order 001, Task B. the specific sections are included below with questions. |
| Task B.12.1 Improving Cardiac Health and Reducing Cardiac Healthcare Disparities/Provider Recruitment – Home Health Agencies (HHAs): |
#1 What is CMS’ expectation of the number (or percentage of total) of HHAs to be recruited?
#2 What is CMS’ expectation of the number (or percentage of total) of offices/clinics to be recruited?
It is CMS expectation that the QIO propose the number of HHAs as well as offices/clinics to be recruited. See the recruitment expectations as described in the Task Order Task B.1.
| Attachment J.1 Task Order 001, Task B. the specific sections are included below with questions. |
| Task B.2 Reducing Disparities in Diabetes Care: Everyone with Diabetes Counts: |
#3 What is CMS’ expectation of the number (or percentage of total) of beneficiaries to be trained in the Everyone with Diabetes Counts task? Are the percentages shown in Table 1 of Section G, page 34, cumulative with 100% of targeted beneficiaries trained by January 31, 2019?
#4 What is CMS’ expectation of the number (or percentage of total) of providers to be recruited? Are the percentages shown in Table 1 of Section G, page 34, cumulative with 100% of targeted clinics to be recruited by year 3?"
Because health disparities are unique to each state and each community, the QIN/QIO is expected to provide the number of beneficiaries it expects to be trained (complete DSME) per state in its proposal to CMS. Task B. 2 Table 1 depicts the percentages per quarter of total number of beneficiaries the QIN/QIO proposes to CMS who must complete DSME classes. For example, if the QIO proposes they will have 6,000 beneficiaries in a given state complete DSME over the 5 year SOW, Table 1 is the percentage per quarter of the 6,000 who must complete DSME. Each quarter a new percentage of beneficiaries must complete DSME, no beneficiary is counted more than once during the entire SOW. Therefore, beneficiaries are counted independently, not on a cumulative basis. In Task B. 2, a slightly different concept applies to participating providers. The QIN-QIO is expected to provide in its proposal, the number of participating providers per state it intends to recruit over the course of the SOW. Providers can be physician offices, clinics, or FQHCs, as long as they meet the qualifying criteria mandated in the SOW. Table 1 is the percentage per quarter of the total number of PPs per state the QIO provides CMS in its proposal that they will recruit. For example, in Task B. 2, if the QIO proposes recruiting 600 PPs over the course of the 5 year SOW, Table 1 is the percentage per quarter of the 600 the QIO must recruit. Unlike the beneficiaries in Task B. 2, the PPs in Table 1 are cumulative. Once a PP is considered recruited, it is continually counted throughout the SOW. Yes, there is a cut-off point for recruitment of PPs, unlike the DSME classes for beneficiaries. The DSME classes for beneficiaries continue until the end of the SOW.
| C.3.2.1 Hardware/Software CMS, either directly or through a CMS contractor, shall provide each QIN-QIO with a file/print server, a domain controller, a database server, network/telecomm equipment, and a workstation and/or laptop for each 0.5 or greater full-time- equivalent (FTE) employee at award of contract to cover their base needs. The servers, workstations, and laptops shall be equipped with a standard operating system and a software suite following the approved CMS Federal Desktop Core Configuration (FDCC) standard which is also referred to as the United States Government Configuration Baseline (USGCB ). |
| Can CMS identify the specific items in attachment J.16 that are provided to cover their base needs? |
| The items were identified in the C.3.2.1. |
Amendment 0002, Response to Question #242 , Page 62 Section Number and Title: Base Contract, Section L
| The answer to Q#242 clarifies that the first page of the proposal refers to the cover letter and instructs that it should be included in all volumes. The answer also says “The cover letter shall also describe any assumptions made by the Offeror.” Should the cover letter submitted be the same for each volume and list all assumptions made in preparation of the proposal response, or should each volume’s cover letter address only the assumptions applicable to the specific volume? |
| Each volume’s cover letter should address the assumptions applicable to the specific volume, including any general assumptions that would be pertinent to evaluating that volume. |
| General |
| 1. In what month does CMS expects to transition occur from QIOs to subcontractors? |
2. If a QIO is not awarded a QIN QIO contract / subcontract and has to close its operation, what will happen with the audits if the organization does not exist?
1. Please refer to Section C.7.1 of the RFP.
2. It is the contractor’s responsibility to maintain personnel to support audit activities. If the audits cannot be performed readily, the gov’t will negotiate closeout procedures.
| 33 |
| Base Contract, Section G |
| G.17 Subcontracting Program for Small Disadvantaged Businesses |
| Based on the amount of teaming arrangements CMS is anticipating between QIOs that will result in subcontracts, is the percentage for Small Business (33%) still valid and does CMS believe this would be too high as a result and therefore be lowered? |
| The percentage goal for Small Business Subcontracting is established for the agency and remains valid. |
| 34 |
| Base Contract, Section G |
| G.17 Subcontracting Program for Small Disadvantaged Businesses |
| Will a prime contractor be able to rely on the Small Business Subcontracting Plan of an existing State QIO Organization that the Prime is Subcontracting with in order to meet the 33% Small Business Contracting goal of CMS? |
| The Small Business Contracting goals apply to the Prime contractor as a whole. |
| 35 |
| Base Contract, Section G |
| G.17 Subcontracting Program for Small Disadvantaged Businesses |
| Is the 33% Small Business Contracting goal of CMS to be met on an individual State basis or can it instead be met in the aggregate of all States bid upon? |
| The Small Business Contracting goals apply to the Prime contractor as a whole. |
| 36 |
| Attachment J-1, Task Order 0001 |
| Task D.2, QIN-QIO Proposed Project that Advance Efforts for Better Care at Lower Cost |
| The first sentence of this section says, “CMS reserves the right to request that QIN-QIOs submit Special Innovation Projects after contract award.” What are CMS’s expectations for the proposal writing connected to this section of the RFP? |
| We expect neither special innovation projects nor budgets for such projects in proposals. |
| Attachment J.3- List of Information Technology Systems |
| Will CMS continue to provide the WebEX conferencing software in a similar manner as it has been offered in the 10th SOW? |
| CMS will provide WebEx to be used to support the 11th SoW and sessions between CMS or other QIO’s. |
| L.14.b |
| The requirement in section L.14.b calls for “a listing of the names, positions, brief description of the area of expertise, license number (if applicable), and letter of commitment.” However, the evaluation criteria in section M.3 do not include this requirement and instead states the following: “Evidence of past experience and proven results within the last five years achieving better health, better care and lower healthcare cost, including establishing relationships with healthcare stakeholders, hospitals, practitioners, and other providers across multiple states.” Does CMS expect information to meet both L.14 and M.3 requirements? |
| Yes. |
| 39 |
| Base Contract, Section H |
| H.3. Conflict of Interest, G.d. Conflict of Interest (OCI) Evaluation, pg. 113 |
| Question: Will “independent auditor” costs be considered direct? |
| This should normally be charged as an indirect cost or be in accordance with your accounting system procedures. |
| L.18 Volume V – Conflict of Interest and Compliance Program Organization and Proposal Instructions, Tab A: Organizational Conflict of Interest – Summary List of Contracts, pg. 203 |
| Should mitigation plans be submitted as an appendix to Volume V? |
| Yes |
L.18 Volume V – Conflict of Interest and Compliance Program Organization and Proposal Instructions, Tab E: Governance Organization, pg. pg.
| Is Tab E required only for the prime contractor or for subcontractors as well? |
| Yes. All prime and subcontractor offeror’s are required to submit the information request in section L.18 Tab E with their Volume V, Conflict of Interest and Compliance Program Proposal. |
L.18 Volume V – Conflict of Interest and Compliance Program Organization and Proposal Instructions, Tab E: Governance Organization, pg. pg.
| Are subcontractors (e.g., QIO-like organizations) bound by the same governance requirements as QIN-QIOs? |
| The governance requirements set forth in 42 CFR CFR 475.101(a), CFR 475.103, and CFR 475.105 is only required for prime offerors, however subcontractors must meet the requirements as outlined in FAR 52.203-13 and FAR 52.203-14. |
| H.18 Definition of a QIN- QIO as a Large Business |
| Although CMS stated QIN-QIOs for the purpose of this proposal are large businesses, will any QIO-like organization with which a QIN-QIO chooses to subcontract also be deemed a large business, regardless of SBA criteria for such? |
| No. |
L.16.1. Volume III: Past Performance, pg. 197
| What is meant by “multi state criteria”? |
| The contractor shall include past performance information for work that was performed in a multi-state setting. |
| Task Order No. 001 Task C2 Appendix 2- calculation of nursing home recruitment |
| In the RFP it references recruiting 75% of 1 Star facilities to participate in the NNHQCC, however a majority of the 1 Star are rating are due to facilities and building not quality in our state. Has CMS considered restating this recruitment to 1 Star facilities rating in quality of care? |
| CMS is aware of the diverse reasons that nursing homes may be identified as a 1-Star facility. The QIN-QIO may identify the reasons that facilities may be 1-Star in their area and decide to focus their 1-Star recruitment strategy first on facilities that are identified as lower performing in the respective state Quality of Care component. The 75% requirement for the Star Category Target Number for 1-Star facilities remains unchanged. |
| Question 1 and 2 of the Amendment 0002 Responses to Solicitation Questions |
| Is it correct to assume that healthcare company employees as well as independent physicians who may have admitting privileges at a given healthcare facility, could serve on the prime contractor's governing board without automatically being counted as in the category of having "ownership and control"? For example, could a governing board of 10 directors include 3 representatives or employees of different hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, etc., assuming none of those individuals had a conflict or any significant financial interest or ownership of those entities? |
| Yes, as long as offerors can adhere to CFR 475.101(a), CFR 475.103, and CFR 475.105. |
| J.15(a) Business Proposal |
| The following Business Proposal Forms have headers referring to the 10th SOW: F718 BP Sum, QIO F719, QIO Staffing, QIO Staff Sum, & QIO Subconts 2. Should the offeror update the headers? |
| Offerors should update the following language in the headers form “Quality Improvement Organization 10th SOW Business Proposal” to read “Quality Improvement Networks 11th SOW Business Proposal” |
| J.15(a) Business Proposal |
| The QIO Staffing Form appears to have some formula errors. Cells in columns AC, AD, AE & AF are referring to cells in column "J" but should be referring to cells in column "D" and cells in columns AI, AJ, AK & AL are referring to cells in column "P" but should be referring to cells in column "D"...for example the formula in cell AI5 is: IF(P5="p",AH5,0) but should be: IF(D5="p",AH5,0) |
| Cells in hidden columns should not be used and formulas in they do not have any impact on the business proposal. Offerors should not unhide hidden rows, columns or cells. |
| J.15(a) Business Proposal |
| The travel detail form only allows for the current mileage reimbursement rate. If we feel the mileage reimbursement rate will increase in future years, can we change the formula to look-up a different cell? |
| Offerors are to only use the current mileage reimbursement rate. |
| 50 |
| Base Contract, Section K |
| Section K, Representations, |
Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors
| Revisions to Section K were included in Amendment 3, but an updated version of Section K was not included. Will one be provided or is the offeror expected to make the changes? |
| No, an updated version will not be provided. Offerors are expected to make changes based on Amendment 0003. |
| Attachment J.1(b)_QIN-QIO_Evaluation_Measures_Table document, worksheet Task B.4 |
| Are the timeframes listed for the Jan-19 evaluation time period correct? |
| Please refer to amendment for corrected dates for Task B.4. |
| 52 |
| Section J, Attachment J-1, Task Order 001 |
| B.2 Reducing Disparities in Diabetes Care: Everyone with Diabetes Counts – Table 1 |
| It appears that the calculation presented in this table for the % of New Beneficiaries Completing DSME (% of QIN-QIO Target) is not correct. The following example illustrates the discrepancy: |
QIO-QIN Target = 2000 2/1/15-4/30/15 – goal 3% = 60 5/1/15-7/31/15 – goal 4% = 80 8/1/15-7/31/19 – quarterly goal of 7% = 140 new benes each quarter times 16 quarters equals 2,240 new benes for the remainder of the contract
Adding the 140 from the first two quarters to the 2,240 from the remaining quarters equals 2,380 which exceeds the original goal of 2,000 by 380 beneficiaries.
Are we interpreting this table incorrectly?
Please refer to amendment for revised Table 1 for New Beneficiaries Completing DSME, which does not exceed 100%.
| L.17.B., page 198 |
| We are to execute the SF 33, including acknowledging amendments, and include in the Volume 4, Business Proposal. Please clarify if we are to sign and include: |
| a) | the SF 33 only |
| b) | the SF 33 and all SF 30 documents being issues with each amendment. |
| Offerors are to sign the SF33 and all SF30 documents issued with amendments. |
| 54 |
| Section J, Attachment J-1, Task Order 001, Task C.3 |
| C.3.2.b.1 Personnel Requirements |
| The original and the new amendment both list a pharmacist as “other recommended personnel” which are not listed as “key personnel”. The Q&As with Amendment 003, questions 1105, 1106, 1199 and 1200 all state that the pharmacist is required as key personnel. Question 1105 states that the pharmacist cannot be a consultant, but is required as personnel for this task while question 1200 states that they can be a consultant. Can you please clarify there 2 points. |
| A pharmacist is recommended personnel, not key personnel. |
