Q A_Ninth_Set_Answers.pdf

SOLICITATION HT9402-13-R-0001

TRICARE PHARMACY PROGRAM, FOURTH GENERATION (TPHARM4)

QUESTION AND ANSWER (Q&A) SET #9

HT9402-13-R-0001

ID: Question: Answer:

Is there a current contract? If so, what is the contract award amount? Base and any option years. What is the name of the contractor?

Please visit the web site, http://www.tricare.mil/tma/privacy/foia.aspx for a public copy of the current contract (H94002-08-C- 0003) and information on the process on how to request additional contract information.

Amendment #4 does not include Section B and the pages representing the CLINs. If no changes are to be made to the CLIN Claim volumes let it be known that CLIN claim volumes do not agree with the Amendment #3 Table L-1 Retail Claim Volumes. For example, Option Period 1 CLIN claim volume for Retail Network and Mail claim volume is 73,700,000 while Amendment #3 Option Period 1 Table L-1 Retail claim volume is now 69,647,200 a reduction of 4,052,800 claims for Table L-1 pricing. The 7 year net difference is an increase of over 9 million claims between the CLINs and Table L-1. Before issue of Amendment #3 the all Option Period CLINs and Table L-1 claim counts were equal.

See forthcoming amendment to revise quantities; but please note that there should not be an expectation for section B and table L-1 to have the exact same quantities. Table L-1 is for evaluation purposes only and the section B quantities are estimated, rounded, and do not represent a commitment on the part of the Government that these quantities will actually occur over the course of the contract. See Section L.10.1.3.

Offerors should use their best business judgment and experience in formulating figures in table L-1 and pricing the Section B requirements.

Paragraph L.6.3 on page 139 says that the proposal has to be double-spaced. Was it TMA’s intent that the whole technical proposal should fit into 70 double-spaced pages? I have the same question about the 15-page past performance narrative. I’m concerned that isn’t a lot of room to fully cover the technical approach and past performance, so I want to confirm I’m interpreting the requirements consistent with TMA’s intent. Please advise. Thank you.

The page limits listed in section L of the RFP are absolute. The requirements are the same for all offerors. The intent is to have proposals that are concise with the most important information, so offerors should prioritize the content of the proposal, using their best business judgment, considering the competitive environment.

Section L.6.3. requires the proposal to be printed double-spaced. There is an exception to the font size for "areas of the proposal that will not easily accommodate 12 point font" allowing fonts as small as 8 point font.

Must double-spacing be applied to these exception areas (e.g., illustrations, organization charts, supporting data exhibits, report listing, or labels on process flow charts)?

L.6.3. states “however, the use of smaller fonts in areas of the proposal that will not easily accommodate 12 point font and are limited to illustrations, organization charts, supporting data exhibits, report listings or labels on process flow charts may permitted to be as small as 8 point font. “ For those limited areas stated in section L.6.3. that do not accommodate 12 point font, obviously would not accommodate double-spacing; therefore, double-spacing is not required.

http://www.tricare.mil/tma/privacy/foia.aspx

SOLICITATION HT9402-13-R-0001

TRICARE PHARMACY PROGRAM, FOURTH GENERATION (TPHARM4)

QUESTION AND ANSWER (Q&A) SET #9

HT9402-13-R-0001

After reviewing the changes made in Amendment 3, it was noted that a significant increase was made to the volumes in Table L-1. The volumes in Table L-1 and Schedule B were in greater alignment in the original RFP.

In Amendment 3, there is a discrepancy of 10M in the volumes between Table L-1 and Schedule B. Could you please explain why the volumes changed in Table L-1 but remained the same in Schedule B.

See forthcoming amendment to revise quantities; but please note that there should not be an expectation for section B and table L-1 to have the exact same quantities. Table L-1 is for evaluation purposes only and the section B quantities are estimated, rounded, and do not represent a commitment on the part of the Government that these quantities will actually occur over the course of the contract. See Section L.10.1.3.

Offerors should use their best business judgment and experience in formulating figures in table L-1 and pricing the Section B requirements.

The table in RFP Section L.6.4. establishes page limitations for various components of the proposal. In addition, RFP Section L.6.3. states that the proposal should be printed double-spaced. Is it the Government's true intent that the proposal be both page limited and printed double-spaced? If so, this significantly reduces the amount of space that offerors have to explain their technical approach and respond to the full requirements of Section L.8 (to the equivalent of 35 pages of single-spaced text). We pose a similar question as it relates to the 15-page past performance narrative (the double-spaced equivalent is 7 pages) and the 3-page major client descriptions (the double-spaced equivalent is approximately 1.5 pages). It is our assumption that each double-sided piece of paper is one page of 70 for the Technical Proposal, that each double sided piece of paper is one page of 15 for the Past Performance narrative, and that each double-sided piece of paper is one page for each of the 3-page client narratives. Is this a correct assumption?

Your assumption that each double-sided piece of paper is one page of 70 for the Technical Proposal, that each double sided piece of paper is one page of 15 for the Past Performance narrative, and that each double-sided piece of paper is one page for each of the 3-page client narratives is not correct. Section L.6.3. states “Proposals shall be printed double-spaced, double-sided only with non-duplicative, sequential page numbers at the bottom of each printed page identified with the solicitation number;

however, pages may be printed single-sided for Volumes I and IV only.” Each sequential page number required at the bottom of each page shall count as 1 page, thus the opposite side of the first piece of paper labeled as page 2 is the second page.

The page limits listed in section L of the RFP are absolute. The requirements are the same for all offerors. The intent is to have proposals that are concise with the most important information, so offerors should prioritize the content of the proposal, using their best business judgment, considering the competitive environment.

Should offerors include sales tax with ingredient cost in determining guaranteed price adjustments?

Offerors should not include sales tax in its offered guarantee under Exhibit L-1.