Questions_ _Answers_for_PFDC.pdf

Questions received for the RFP-HHSM-500-2015-RFP-0110 PFDC

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) QUESTIONS:

Question: #1 Section/Page: B.2 / page 5 Question: The RFP, Exhibit E-1 Summary & Summary rollup by CLIN reflect only a fixed fee whereas the individual tabs for CLINs’ 0001-0005 show an award and fixed fee. Which is correct?

CMS Answer: This is a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee award. Nothing needs to be entered in the Award fee field in Exhibit E-1.

Question: #2 Section/Page: C.1 / page 7 Question: Should this statement read, “Independently and not as an agent of the

Government?”

CMS Answer: Yes this should read “Independently and not as an agent of the Government”

Question: #3 Section/Page: RFP Pages 10, 68 & 79 Question: Article F.2 of RFP delineates the Period of Performance for the initial year as

August 10, 2015 – August 9, 2016. Article L.1 indicates that award of contract is to occur no later than August 9, 2015. Article L.11 Tab B Implementation Approach indicates that offeror must present an Implementation Plan to perform the requirements of the SOW within a 90 day timeframe. Please advise how CMS is going to award NLT August 9th and, assuming a non-incumbent PFDC is selected, how performance can begin on August 10th?

CMS Answer: The transition phase is 90 days beginning on August 10, 2015

Question: #4 Section/Page: RFP Page 10 and SOW Appendix A Page 13 Question: Article F.3 of RFP delineates a deliverable schedule for a multitude of reports. Is there a prescribed CMS format or is contractor format acceptable so long as that format meets the SOW requirement?

CMS Answer: CMS shall work with the contractor to establish the report formats.

Question: #5 Section/Page: G.6, G.7.B, I.6 / pages 18 & 55 Question: Section G.6 refers to “Program Director,” section G.7 refers to a “Project

Manager,” and section I.6 refers to them as one. Can you confirm the Project Manager is the same as the Program Director?

CMS Answer: All references to a “Program Director” are hereby removed in their entirety and replaced with “Project Manager”; the Project Manager is key personnel

Question: #6 Section/Page: G.6 and G.7/Page 18 Question: Paragraph G.6 requires the name of the Program Director; however, Paragraph

G.7 (B) states, "CMS considers the following positions to be Key Personnel and are governed by the requirements of HHSAR 352.242-70 Key Personnel contract requirements", and provides the Labor Category, Project Manager. In addition, the SOW under II (D), Personnel Requirements, states, "The Project Manager requires senior/expert level project management experience on projects and/or programs."

Can the government please confirm that they are looking for the names of both the program director and project manager, but only the project manager will be considered key personnel?

CMS Answer: All references to the “Program Director” have been removed in their entirety.

Question: #7 Section/Page: G.7.B / page 18 Question: RFP indicates the Project Manager is a key position. It does not mention if the

Project Manager needs to be fully devoted to the contract. Can CMS confirm if the Project Manager should be fully devoted to the HITECH PFDC contract?

CMS Answer: The Project Manager does not need to be fully devoted to the contract.

Question: #8 Section/Page: H.1.c. Post Award Business Ethics, Conflict Of Interest And Compliance

Disclosures, page 30 Question: Can CMS please confirm that it only expects Attachment J.2, Business Ethics, Conflict of Interest and Compliance Submission by Offeror/Contractor and Attachment J.3, Personal Conflict of Interest (PCI) Financial Disclosure to be submitted post-award by the successful Offeror and not by all Offerors with proposal submission as indicated within Section H.1.c? This appears to be in conflict with Section L.13Volume III - Business Ethics, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of Interest(OCI/PCI) and Compliance Submission Instructions as this section states to refer to Attachment J.2 and J.3 if an OCI/PCI must be disclosed.

CMS Answer: No conflict is present, Section L.13 directs all offerors to refer to Attachment J.2 and J.3 for guidance in their disclosure if an OCI/PCI is identified that requires disclosure.

Question: #9 Section/Page: Attachment J.3 Personal Conflicts of Interest Financial Disclosure

Question: Can offerors submit Attachment J-3 after the contract is awarded in case any additional key personnel are approved?

CMS Answer: Attachment’s J-2 and J-3 are only to be submitted by the successful offeror after the contract is awarded

Question: #10 Section/Page: J, page 59 Question: (1) Please confirm that the solicitation is administratively or otherwise exempt from the requirements of the Service Contract Act. (2) If not, and a wage determination is applicable, can CMS please provide the specific wage determination as an attachment to the RFP so that all Offerors may include it when developing their pricing? (3) If a wage determination is applicable, can CMS also provide what wage determination labor category(s) are applicable?

Typically, that information would be included within Section I.6 FAR 52.222-42 Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires (MAY 2014) but the only Employee Class listed is Project Manager/Program Director as a GS 15 or above, which typically would mean a professional exemption to SCA would be applicable.

CMS Answer: The Service Contract Act is applicable, place of performance is currently unknown, the applicable Wage Determination will be incorporated at such time when the place of performance is identified in the offerors proposal.

Question: #11 Section/Page: L.7, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, page 74 Question: Please confirm submission of the Attachment J.5 is not required if an Offeror does not intend to use any subcontractors and a letter stating that fact can be submitted instead?

CMS Answer: Yes, a subcontracting Plan is required as described in attachment J.5, “A

Subcontracting Plan is required for any contract if the estimated cost of the contract may exceed $650,000($1,500,000 for construction) small businesses are excluded.”

Question: #12 Section/Page: L.9 (b)/Page 75 Question: Section L.9 (b) states “One (1) original hard copy of the combined proposal, signed by an official authorized to bind your organization, plus four (4) hard copies of the combined proposal and one (1) electronic CD copy of the combined proposal…”

Is the Government’s intention to have all three volumes combined into a single binder or may Offeror’s submit separate binders for each of the three volumes so that there will be one (1) original and four (4) copies of each of the three volumes?

CMS Answer: Offeror’s may submit separate binders for each volume of the proposal.

Question: #13 Section/Page: L.9 General Instructions, page 75 Question: Would CMS consider an extension to the proposal due date?

CMS Answer: CMS does not anticipate extending the proposal due date.

Question: #14 Section/Page: L.10.b.1 / page 77 Question: The RFP states that 3-ring binders “shall not exceed height – 11.5”, width –

10.25”.” This limits the binder size to a maximum of 1-inch binders, as binder width increases with depth. Does CMS require multiple 1-inch binders for larger volumes, or may the width requirement be waived to accommodate larger binders?

CMS Answer: The width requirements may be waived to accommodate larger binders.

Question: #15 Section/Page: L.10 (b)(2)/Page 77 Question: The RFP states TAB indexing shall be used to identify all required proposal sections identified herein. Since TABs are used only to identify and separate proposal sections, will the Government eliminate TABs from the page count?

CMS Answer: Tabs DO NOT count towards the page count.

Question: #16 Section/Page: L.10 (c)/Page 77, L.11/Page 78 Question: In L.10 (c) under the Paper Size, Type, Spacing, and Page Numbering requirement, it states “The number of pages for the proposal is limited to 30 pages, except for resumes of personnel, which are limited to three (3) pages each, and any other section specifically noted. In L.11 Volume I Technical Proposal Instructions, it states, Please note that the 30-page total limit only applies to these Two Technical Volume Sections as further specified below: TAB A, TAB B.

Will the Government please confirm that the 30 page limit only applies to TAB A and TAB B, thus TABS C, D and E are not-page counted?

CMS Answer: The government confirms the 30 page limit applies only to TAB A and TAB B.

TABs C and D do not have page limits and Tab E’s key personnel resume’s fall under the 3 page per resume limit.

Question: #17

Section/Page: L.10.c / page 78 Question: The RFP requires “a space and a half between lines.” Does this mean 1.5 line spacing or does the requirement mean 18 points of space between each 12-point font line?

CMS Answer: This section of the solicitation has been amended to allow for single-spacing.

Question: #18 Section/Page: L.10.c / page 78 Question: Do the 12-point font and line spacing requirements apply to tables and graphics?

CMS Answer: Graphics can be single spaced with 8 point font size.

Question: #19 Section/Page: L.10.c / page 78 Question: Given the 30-page limit for Tabs A and B, the font and line-spacing and the 39 requirements to be addressed in Tabs A and B (Introduction, 28 SOW tasks, 10 Implementation tasks), this leaves only 21 lines of text per requirement. Does CMS believe that this amount of narrative will be sufficient to adequately evaluate offerors’ proposals?

CMS Answer: CMS believes the 30 page limit is adequate.

Question: #20 Section/Page: L.10(b)(1) Question: States: Binding: Offeror’s shall submit proposals in locking 3-ring binders only.

Dimensions shall not exceed height – 11.5”, width – 10.25”. Depth – no limit.

Since the only standard binder size that meets the width requirement of 10.25” is a 1” depth binder, would CMS consider accepting binders widths up to 11.25 to allow up to a 2 ½ depth binder? This would be especially helpful for Volume 2— Business Volume.

CMS Answer: Yes, CMS will accept binders up to 11.25” wide to allow for a 2.5” depth.

Question: #21 Section/Page: L.10 Proposal Organization, (a)(3) ,Page 77 Question: This section, reads - “Volume 3 – Conflict of Interest Response – The Conflict of

Interest response shall consist of the following the elements specified in L.14 below.” Should this section reference L.13 and not L.14? Please clarify.

CMS Answer: Yes the Conflict of Interest elements referenced are found in section L.13.

Question: #22 Section/Page: L.11(78)

Question: States: The Table of Contents and Cross Reference Matrix (if provided) are not included in the 30 page limit.

We feel that an acronym list would assist the Government’s evaluation; can an acronym list be included in the exclusions?

CMS Answer: A two (2) page acronym list may be included and can be excluded from the 30 page limit

Question: #23 Section/Page: RFP Page 79 Question: Article L.11 Tab A – Technical Understanding indicates that, “The offeror shall provide a description of their policies, procedures and operational methodology to accomplish each of the requirements /tasks in the SOW.” Is it CMS’ expectations that offerors shall make available or incorporate aspects of their, “policies, procedures and operational methodology” as part of this RFP response?

CMS Answer: The offeror shall clearly detail the proposed policies/procedures/methods for accomplishing all the tasks in the SOW.

Question: #24 Section/Page: L.11 (81) & L.10 (c ) Question: L.11 states that key personnel resumes shall not exceed two pages each. However, L.10 (C ) states that resumes are limited to three pages. Will resumes be limited to 3 pages?

CMS Answer: Key personnel resumes shall not exceed three (3) pages.

Question: #25 Section/Page: L.11, Tab C. Past Performance, page 80 Question: May Offerors submit a past performance questionnaire for a contract even if that contract’s past performance is available in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (www.ppirs.gov)?

CMS Answer: No

Question: #26 Section/Page: L.11, Tab C. Past Performance, page 80 Question: Please clarify if the Past Performance of an Offeror's parent, subsidiary, or affiliate, which would contribute to the performance of the awarded contract, can be used as a Past Performance citation? Recent GAO rulings that define the Offeror to include parent, subsidiaries, and affiliates, allow the use of their relevant experience as long as they are proposed to perform work under the awarded contract.

CMS Answer: There are no items referenced in this question that the solicitation instructions have precluded offerors from submitting.

Question: #27 Section/ Page: L.11, Vol 1, Tab B Implementation Approach; page 80 and M.3 Technical

Evaluation Criteria, page 88 Question: Both above sections indicate that CMS will be evaluating the offeror’s implementation plan to ensure that, “it is administratively feasible.” Can/will CMS provide offerors with its definition of administratively feasible?

CMS Answer: The proposed approach shall work within the existing structure of the HITECH program.

Question: #28 Section/Page: L.12, Volume II Section 1, page 81 Question: The RFP states to include: “Completed Sections A, B, G (if applicable), H (if applicable), and K.”

(a) Please clarify what is considered Section A?

(b) Can CMS please confirm that B.2 Schedule of Services is the only section that requires completion in Section B as the RFP states that B.3 Fixed-Fee Schedule is be filled out at time of award?

(c) Please confirm that G.6 Program Director and the tables located at G.15 Indirect Cost Rates, (a)(1)(ii).Interim Billing Rates and G.15 Indirect Cost Rates, (a)(2). Indirect Cost Ceiling Rate(s) are what need to be completed?

(d) Please clarify what from Section H needs to be completed?

CMS Answer: (a) Section A is the “Solicitation/Contract Form” as defined in the Uniform

Contract Format, which is the SF-33 for this solicitation.

(b) Yes, B.3 will be filled out at time of award as indicated in the solicitation.

(c) & (d) If the referenced items require responses as instructed in the solicitation then they should be completed.

Question: #29 Section/Page: L.12 Volume II - Business Proposal Instructions, page 82 Question: If an Offeror indicates that as a Large Business they have the necessary financial capability, working capital, and other resources to perform the contract without assistance from any outside source, is an Attachment J.7, Bank Notification Letter still required? If the answer is yes and all Offerors, regardless of size and financial capability are to submit Attachment J.7, Bank Notification Letter, what exact bank reference information or “information pertaining to your institution” is required in Volume II - Business proposal as implied in Attachment J.7, Bank Notification Letter?

CMS Answer: Yes, all offerors are to submit Attachment J.7 and send it to your financial institution. CMS should be provided with a copy of the letter and “information pertaining to your institution” being the point of contact information (Name, Phone Number, Email) of the bank representative that can speak to the offeror’s financial standing.

Question: #30 Section/Page: Section L.12 Volume II - Business Proposal Instructions, page 81 and 83 Question: Volume II - Business Proposal instructions state to include any assumptions within Volume II, Section 1, (pg. 81) but instructions also state to include all proposal assumptions within Volume II, Section 2, (pg. 83). Can CMS clarify if assumptions should be included in both sections or if just one, which section?

CMS Answer: Assumptions should be included in both sections. Please pay particular attention to what each section is asking an offeror to provide. Assumption details are provided in both of the above-referenced sections.

Question: #31 Section/Page: L.12 Volume II - Business Proposal Instructions, page 84 Question: If a subcontractor chooses to submit their business proposal spreadsheet showing the breakdown of costs to CMS in a separately sealed package, is there a requirement for the subcontractor to provide a “sanitized” version of that same spreadsheet for submission with the Prime Offeror’s proposal?

CMS Answer: Yes, the subcontractors should submit a “sanitized” version for submission with the Prime Offeror’s proposal

Question: #32 Section/Page: L.13 Volume III – Business Ethics, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of

Interest (OCI/PCI) and Compliance Submission Instructions (JAN 2015), Page 85 Question: We believe the number of pages for the Conflict of Interest response is unlimited.

Will CMS please confirm?

CMS Answer: Yes the number of pages for the Conflict of Interest is unlimited.

Question: #33 Section/Page: L.13 Volume III – Business Ethics, Organizational and Personal Conflicts of

Interest (OCI/PCI) and Compliance Submission Instructions (JAN 2015) ,Page 85 Question: This section, Paragraph 2, reads - “If the Offeror believes that and OCI/PCI must be disclosed, it shall refer to Attachment J.2 and J.3, for guidance, as identified in Section H.1” POST AWARD BUSINESS ETHICS, ORGANIZATIONAL AND

PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (OCI/PCI) AND COMPLIANCE

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS (MAR 2015)

We believe Offeror needs to complete Attachment J.2 and J.3, regardless if an OCI/PCI must be disclosed. Yet the instructions do not include if no OCI/PCI is disclosed what is required in the response. Will CMS please clarify the instructions for Volume III Conflict of Interest response?

CMS Answer: If there is nothing that needs to be disclosed then nothing would need to be submitted prior to contract award.

Question: #34 Section/ Page: M.3 Past Performance, Pages 88 & 89 Question: The section noted above contains evaluation criteria that CMS will be using to evaluate an offeror’s past performance. Key to that is our demonstrated experience with a multitude of requirements including but not limited to, “…preparing and disbursing up to 100,000 EFT and paper checks,” and “…up to 100,000 1099s.” Can CMS provide any specific workload data so offerors know what their past performance will be quantitatively measured against?

CMS Answer: The offeror shall provide past performance evidence that clearly demonstrates the ability to manage the workload volumes and accomplish all requirements in the

SOW.

MISCELLANEOUS:

Question: #1.

Section/Page: Exhibit E-1 / Summary Tab Question: Item #9 stipulates, “All FTE columns are to be calculated using 1,880 in the denominator, for both the prime and subcontractors even if the subcontractors use a different basis for their workyear.” If an offeror’s accounting system is based on a different basis, the FTE calculation will not be correct using 1,880 as the denominator. Please clarify.

CMS Answer: FTEs may be calculated per the offeror’s normal practice. If this varies from using 1880 as the denominator, please specify in your business proposal how the FTEs were calculated.

Question: #2 Section/Page: Labor (Exhibit E.1)/Page 84 Question: The pricing templates provided by the Government require pricing detail by Cost

Element and SOW task level. Would the Government consider removing this requirement to allow contractors to provide pricing at the CLIN and Cost Element level only?

CMS Answer: Providing pricing at the CLIN and Cost Element level will be acceptable

Question: #3

Section/Page: N/A Question: Will training be provided by the outgoing PFDC of the current process?

CMS Answer: The current PFDC contractor will remain on contract for 90 days during the transition period to assist as needed; no formal training is planned.

Question: #4 Section/Page: N/A Question: Can CMS provide technical information on PFDC system components: COTs products; software languages utilized, module types and numbers.

CMS Answer: CMS Answer: The contractor shall have the capability of exchanging D7 and D8

XML files with the NLR in the format required by the NLR system; the contractor shall have the capability of exchanging files with the Treasury to conduct FPLP;

the contractor shall have the capability of exchanging communications through Remedy; the contractor shall comply with CMS software requirements for all other communication and file exchanges.

STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) QUESTIONS:

Question: #1 Section/Page: I.A. ¶ 3 / page 1 Question: The SOW states “the NLR is hosted at a CMS Enterprise Data Center (EDC).”

Please provide the name of the EDC hosting the NLR.

CMS Answer: The NLR database is currently hosted at an EDC with Companion Data Services

(CDS) while the front end is currently with the Baltimore Data Center (BDC).

Question: #2 Section/Page: I.A. ¶ 3 / page 1 Question: The SOW states “the NLR is hosted at a CMS Enterprise Data Center (EDC).”

Please provide details of the NLR hardware and software platform.

CMS Answer 1) System Components:

• IBM WebSphere Application Server (WAS) Series

• IBM Message Queue (MQ)

• IBM Message Broker

• Spring Batch Framework

• DB2 Database on z/OS

• MicroStrategy Portlet and Web Services

For the D7 and D8 interface, it is in XML format.

Question: #3 Section/Page: 1. Scope, page 1 Question: Have any audits been performed on the PFDC? What are the most significant findings? What is the error rate?

CMS Answer: The annual CFO Audit includes payments made by the PFDC; there is no separate error rate for the PFDC.

Question: #4 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements A.1, page 2 Question: Bullet 2 states, “. . . NLR checks for duplicate payments and bullet 5 states, “the

PFDC shall include reviewing each D7 file for potential duplicates.” Are these activities redundant? If not can CMS clarify the effort required of the PFDC.

CMS Answer: CMS requires that the PFDC run a separate check for duplicates prior to disbursing payments; the NLR and PFDC duplicate file checks use different filters and are not redundant.

Question: #5 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, Section A.1. Payment Process Overview, Page 2 Question: The PFDC is to apply Federal Payment Levy Program withholding for tax and non-tax to the HITECH payments. Is this information provided to the PFDC when the summary payment file is provided to CMS or is a separate file provided to the PFDC?

CMS Answer: The FPLP file transfer process is outlined in II.A.21; the payee debt information is provided to the PFDC by the Treasury.

Question: #6 Section/Page: I.A / page 2 Question: Can you please clarify the statement, “CMS is reserving the right to require the

PFDC to issue paper check payments to providers that do not receive their HITECH payments through EFT deposits.”? Based on the estimates provided, there appears to already be a provision for issuing paper check payments.

CMS Answer: Issuance of paper checks shall be required as necessary for providers without current EFT banking information.

Question: #7 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.1 bullet 3, page 2 Question: Bullet 3, states “PFDC receives the D7 payment information file from the NLR monthly/ daily.” On page 6, A.2 states, “Receive the monthly/weekly XML D7 payment information file from the NLR.” Can CMS please clarify the frequency of the D7 payment information file?

CMS Answer: The PFDC shall receive a monthly D7 payment information file; interim D7 files may be necessary under specific circumstances with prior notification.

Question: #8

Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.1, page 3 Question: What is the frequency for uploading the D8 payment history file into the NLR?

CMS Answer: The D8 is a daily file transmission from the PFDC to the NLR.

Question: #9 Section/Page: Section A.1. Payment Process Overview, Page 3 Question: Will the current bank account transition from the incumbent PFDC to new PFDC upon award or will the new PFDC be required to establish a new bank account?

CMS Answer: The current PFDC bank account will not transition to the new contractor; the new PFDC will be required to establish a bank account at a designated Medicare bank.

Question: #10 Section/Page: Section A.1. Payment Process Overview, Page 3 Question: Assuming a mid-year transition, will the incumbent issue 1099s for payments they issued or will these 1099s be issued by the new PFDC at the end of the year?

CMS Answer: This will be addressed during transition phase of the contract.

Question: #11 Section/Page: I.C and D, Technical Considerations Workload Estimates, pages 4 & 5 Question: The sections noted above contain workload information that is vital to an offeror’s ability to accurately bid and be competitive in cost and technical aspects of this acquisition. The 2 noted sections contain workload statements such as , “…over 500 checks per month,” and, “…at least 13,000 payments per month,” and “at least 600…” and, “…range from 50 to 500 per month.” It is critical that offerors have accurate workloads, otherwise those non-incumbent offerors are dis-advantaged. Can CMS provide more accurate workloads so offerors are bidding to the same understanding?

CMS Answer: The workload ranges estimate the potential high/low volumes for each function;

the actual amounts may be more or less than the estimates. Averages are not reliable because of the total size of the participant population and the substantial monthly variability in the workload over the course of the program year.

Question: #12 Section/Page: I.D / page 4 Question: Workload Estimates reference payments and demand letters associated with appeals; however, there do not appear to be any business requirements associated with processing appeals. Can you please clarify appeals requirements?

CMS Answer: PFDC suspends all collection activity during appeal; HITECH appeals are processed by a separate component; the PFDC is notified through D7 of the appeal outcome and then either pays or collects from the provider.

Question: #13 Section/Page: I.D / page 4 Question: Are HITECH accounts receivable subject to Limitation of Recoupment (935) requirements?

CMS Answer: The HITECH ARs are not subject to the Limitation or Recoupment (935) requirements.

Question: #14 Section/Page: I.D / page 4 Question: Are we to assume that all workload estimates will reduce proportionately from Yr

2 to Yr 3 based on the conclusion of payments to EP’s at the end of Yr 2?

CMS Answer: There will be no more EP incentive payments beginning in 2017; workload estimates thereafter should be based on EH payments and appeals.

Question: #15 Section/Page: II. D. Workload Estimates, page 4 Question: What is the estimated volume of undeliverable paper checks and EFT rejected payments?

CMS Answer: The HITECH payee banking and address information is provided to the NLR through the shared systems which are routinely updated and managed by the MACs; payment information errors are rare but when they occur corrected banking information is provided to the PFDC by the NLR.

Question: #16 Section/Page: I.D / pages 4-5 Question: While workload estimates are listed for both EH and EP participation and manual payment adjustments, can you please provide an estimated monthly payment transaction volume as well as an estimated split of hard copy check payments versus EFT payments?

CMS Answer: The proportion of paper checks to EFTs has declined substantially over the course of the program; we estimate paper checks to currently be about 3 percent of the monthly HITECH payments.

Question: #17 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements A.1, page 5 Question: What is the current volume of exception handling changes with the NLR?

CMS Answer: Unknown, the PFDC is only responsible for processing/paying what is presented successfully on D7; if a file fails or is partially delivered CMS will provide guidance to the PFDC.

Question: #18 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements A.1, page 5 Question: What is the current volume of “missing payment information” within the payment information file received from NLR?

CMS Answer: The D7 file is reviewed by CMS prior delivery to the PFDC; if a file fails or is partially delivered CMS will provide guidance to the PFDC.

Question: #19 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements A.1, page 5 Question: What is the frequency of NLR releases? What is the current/planned maintenance schedule for the NLR?

CMS Answer: The NLR has a quarterly release schedule; future update to implement Phase III may be required by CMS.

Question: #20 Section/Page: Section II Business Requirements, A. 1), Page 5 Question: The requirements indicate to provide support for all future NLR system releases related to the PFDC. How often are these releases issued?

CMS Answer: NLR system changes are on a quarterly release schedule.

Question: #21 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.2, page 5 Question: Can CMS provide the required format/layout of the D7 file?

CMS Answer: CMS will provide the D7 file layout after award; Section I. C. Technical

Consideration states a general format layout.

Question: #22 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.6, page 6 Question: Can CMS provide the required format/layout of the D8 file?

CMS Answer: CMS will provide the D8 file format after award; Section I. C. Technical

Consideration states a general format layout

Question: #23 Section/Page: II.A.1-27 / pages 5-9

Question: We are assuming the Task columns on Exhibit E-1 correspond to the SOW, Part II, Section A, 1-27. Please confirm.

CMS Answer: As mentioned above, offerors may complete Exhibit E-1 at the CLIN and Cost

Element level.

Question: #24 Section/Page: II.A.12-13 / page 7 Question: For current MAC contracts, CMS has the participating Medicare bank bill CMS directly for any bank services charges with the exception of lockbox services.

Does that same practice apply for this workload?

CMS Answer: CMS pays the bank services charges for the HITECH program separately; they are not part of the PFDC contract.

Question: #25 Section/Page: II.A.12-13 / page 7 Question: Does CMS have any specific requirements on the type of banking services used by this contract or is that left to the discretion of the contractor with CMS approval?

CMS Answer: The two Medicare banks provide the range of commercial bank services to the

Medicare contractors; the PFDC can select preferred banking services with the approval of CMS.

Question: #26 Section/Page: II.A.14 / page 7 Question: The SOW does not appear to address requirements related to accruing interest for aged accounts receivable. Are we to assume interest will accrue in accordance with 42 C.F.R. §405.378?

CMS Answer: Correct

Question: #27 Section/Page: II.A.14 / page 7 Question: Regarding the HITECH phone line for incoming calls, please clarify CMS’ expectation for the types of calls that will be fielded by the PFDC. Since the PFDC will only have access to payment/accounts receivable summary data, the PFDC will not be expected to respond to calls related to detail claims questions and/or calculations (e.g., meaningful use criteria).

CMS Answer: The PFDC is responsible for responding to provider questions about payments, collections, 1099s, extended repayment plans and other tasks as detailed in the SOW; the PFDC should refer any questions outside the scope of the SOW to

CMS.

Question: #28 Section/Page: Business Requirements/Page 7 Question: Please confirm that CMS will provide Remedy system reports which provide

Remedy ticket timeliness tracking in order to comply with Business Requirement 10 which states “The contractor shall respond to all Remedy tickets designated as high priority in one business day; all medium priority Remedy tickets in three business days; and all low priority Remedy tickets in five business days.”

CMS Answer: Remedy ticket report response metrics are available.

Question: #29 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements A.10, page 7 Question: What is the expected volume of inquiries the PFDC will receive from the

HITECH Customer Service Help Desk (HBOSC) related to monthly payments?

CMS Answer: Average of 150-250 per month

Question: #30 Section/Page: Section II Business Requirements, A. 12), Page 7 Question: Will bank charges be paid by CMS with the contractor required to submit the JL

Monthly Schedule of Itemized Bank Services Report and Recap of Daily Available Balances or will the bank charges be directly paid by the contractor?

CMS Answer: CMS will pay the bank charges.

Question: #31 Section/Page: II. D. Workload Estimates, page5 and A.14, page 7 Question: How is the PFDC notified of incoming appeals and status of existing appeals?

CMS Answer: Appeals are reported to the PFDC by CMS; payment actions or collections after the appeal taken by the PFDC are reported to the NLR on D8.

Question: #32 Section/Page: II. D. Workload Estimates, page 5 and A.14, page 7 Question: Can an alternative solution be suggested to replace the outgoing calls required for overpayment collection?

CMS Answer: Modifications to AR collections processes can be discussed after award; offerors shall address the requirements as currently established in the SOW.

Question: #33 Section/ Page: Section II Business Requirements, A. 14), Page 7 Question: The SOW indicates the contractor shall maintain a HITECH phone line. Is this phone line expected to be a toll-free number?

CMS Answer: Toll free number is required.

Question: #34 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.18, page 8 Question: What is current volume of voluntary returns from providers?

CMS Answer: 0-100 per month

Question: #35 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.20, page 8 Question: What is current volume of HITECH overpayments by age? How many are on extended repayment plans? What is the current volume of Treasury disputes and proof of debt inquiries?

CMS Answer: For all overpayments greater than 60 days, 91 EH debts and 806 EP debts have been referred to Treasury; 62 ERPs have been developed for Eps and 6 ERPs have been developed for EHs. Treasury disputes are dealt with by Treasury and PFDC is only involved with inquiries and information gathering.

Question: #36 Section/Page: II.A.18 / page 8 Question: Please describe the requirements related to processing voluntary returns. Since no claims information is available and a record from NLR would be necessary in order to establish the accounts receivable, please clarify CMS’ requirements for processing voluntary returns.

CMS Answer: Voluntary refund requests are sent to the bank lockbox and deposited; the PFDC then sends a VR code back to the NLR on D8.

Question: #37 Section/Page: II.A.18 / page 8 Question: We understand CMS is in the process of reviewing ERS default requirements, potentially changing the default criteria from two missed payments to one missed payment. Will the requirement for HITECH ERS management be updated to reflect this change, or will default rules remain as currently defined?

CMS Answer: The contractor is responsible for abiding by CMS policy.

Question: #38 Section/Page: II.A.18 / page 8 Question: Is it CMS’ expectation that ERS requests requiring CMS’ approval will be coordinated with the RO in which the provider resides or with an RO dedicated to HITECH activity?

Question: #39

Section/Page: II.A.20 / page 8 Question: Is it CMS’ expectation that bankruptcy processing requiring CMS’ guidance will be coordinated with the RO in which the provider resides or with an RO dedicated to HITECH activity?

Question: #40 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.20, page 8 Question: Can CMS verify that monthly 1521, 1522, and quarterly 750 and 751 reports are to be submitted through CAFM?

CMS Answer: The PFDC shall submit the quarterly 750/751 reports into CAFM; the monthly

1521/1522 reports shall not be submitted into CAFM by the PFDC; the 1521/1522 reports shall be sent by the PFDC to the CMS COR.

Question: #41 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.21, page 8 Question: Are all the FPLP processes (i.e., extract file, match file, offset file, acknowledgement file) automated?

CMS Answer: There are multiple separate FPLP file exchanges between the PFDC and the

Treasury; the PFDC has to build the extract file from the D7 and send to the Treasury. This process is not fully automated at the PFDC; manual oversight is required.

Question: #42 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.21, page 8 Question: Can CMS provide all the current file formats/layouts for the FPLP process with the Treasury (i.e., extract file, match file, offset file, acknowledgement file)?

CMS Answer: Treasury will provide the FPLP file formats and instructions to the PFDC after contract award.

Question: #43 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.24, page 9 Question: Is the verification of TINs through the IRS currently automated? Does this process require connectivity between the IRS and the PFDC? If so can CMS provide documentation on the existing process?

CMS Answer: The verification of TINs is required only with incomplete data and is rarely necessary; TIN/payee information mismatches sent to the IRS on the 1099s must be corrected by the PFDC within 60 days or future payments are subject to backup withholding; corrections to the TINs are usually obtained through the

NLR after the MAC has updated the shared system with current/corrected information.

Question: #44 Section/Page: II.A.21 / pages 8-9 Question: Are FPLP withholdings to be reported on the CMS 750 report?

CMS Answer: Withholdings are returned to the Treasury, they are not reported on the 750.

Question: #45 Section/Page: II. Business Requirements, A.26, page 9 Question: Is the D7 supplemental format/layout identical to the D7 format/layout? If not can

CMS provide the D7 Supplemental file format/layout?

CMS Answer: The supplemental D7 file layout is the same as the monthly D7.

Question: #46 Section/Page: Business Requirements/Page 9 Question: Please elaborate on Business Requirement 24 which states “verify payee TINs through the IRS prior to issuing 1099s as instructed by CMS.”

CMS Answer: The PFDC is responsible for assisting CMS to validate EIN/TINs as necessary when there is missing/incomplete data.

Question: #47 Section/Page: Section II Business Requirements, B, Page 9 Question: What is the required format that the CMS 1521/1522 reports and the CMS

750/751 reports expected to be submitted to CMS? Is the expectation that reports are submitted as Microsoft Excel spreadsheets with a PDF version of the spreadsheet?

CMS Answer: The format for the CAFM reports is available in the system; CMS has templates for these forms that can be provided.

Question: #48 Section/Page: III. Quality Assurance, page 11 and II. Business Requirements A.22, page 9 Question: Since the NLR is operational, please confirm there is a requirement for a

Contingency Payment Plan no later than 30 days from contract award.

CMS Answer: The Contingency Plan is required no later than 30 days from date of award.

Question: #49 Section/Page: Section II Business Requirements, C, page 10 Question: CMS indicates that Government Furnished Property is not applicable for the

SOW. Will the system applications and databases developed by the incumbent contractor be transitioned to the incoming contractor for continued use in facilitating the program activity?

CMS Answer: The contractor shall be expected to provide the hardware/software/technical expertise to assume all responsibilities 90 days after contract award; the data/information sharing between the incumbent and the new contractor shall be arranged during the transition.

Question: #50 Section/Page: E / page 10 Question: The SOW refers to a 90 day transition period; however, the cost spreadsheets do not contain an implementation column. Should transition cost be included in the base period or how should we segregate transition cost?

CMS Answer: Transition costs should be included in the base period of the contract; they should be separately identified where possible

Question: #51 Section/ Page: II.D, Personnel Requirements, page 10 Question: This section indicates in the last bullet that the PM, “must have thorough training, experience and other development activities and demonstrated capabilities in the following areas: Expert ability to manage and evaluate the use of earned value management as it relates to acquisition investments.” Please note that HHSAR EVMS contract clauses required by the Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulation in sections 354.234-2 for Full EVMS and 352.234-4 for Partial EVMS only are not contained in the RFP. Was this an omission? If this is an omission and EVM is required and HHSAR provision(s) amended into the RFP, we would respectfully request that CMS share the risk analysis conducted by the Program Manager/Project Officer to include EVM as well as the prior approval of the cognizant HCA.

CMS Answer: See updated SOW for this requirement.

Question: #52 Section/Page: III. Quality Assurance, page 11 Question: Can CMS confirm that Earned Value Management is a requirement for this program.

CMS Answer: Earned Value Management (EVM) was required of all contractors in the early IT development stages of the HITECH program; because the PFDC is currently in the Operations and Maintenance stage it is no longer required, however, it is strongly recommended during the transition stage of the new PFDC contract until the processes are proven and established.

Question: #53 Section/Page: VI / page 12 Question: Reference to CR 7143. As far as we can determine, this change request was only issued in draft form. Was it ever or are there plans for it to be issued in a final format?

CMS Answer: Reference to CR 7143 has been removed in its entirety.

Question: #54 Section/Page: VI / page 12 Question: DCR 7143 references establishing overpayments for recoupment in HIGLAS. The

SOW does not reference any activities being performed in HIGLAS. Can you please clarify?

CMS Answer: Reference to CR 7143 has been removed in its entirety; overpayments are recouped by the PFDC directly or through Treasury, the PFDC does not report to

HIGLAS.

Question: #55 Section/Page: Section 508 Compliance for Communication, page 15 Question: Is the reference to National Government Services (NGS) accurate?

CMS Answer: The reference to National Government Services is hereby deleted and removed in its entirety

Question: #56 Section/Page: N/A Question: Can CMS provide technical information on PFDC system components: COTs products; software languages utilized, module types and numbers.

CMS Answer: This information is adequately addressed in the SOW.