JA Exception to Fair Opportunity_Signed.pdf

JUSTIFICATION FOR AN EXCEPTION TO FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Acquisition Title: Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) Demonstration Agency: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Acquisition Year: 2026 Author: Hamilton Johns

1. Description of Action:

A. Nature ☐ New Requirement ☒ Follow-On Order ☐ Modification of Existing Purchase Order / Contract Number

B. Order Against:

75FCMC19D0092 Multiple Award IDIQ Contract RMADA II

C. Contract Type

☐ Firm-Fixed Price ☐ Time and Materials ☒ Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)

☐ Term ☐ Completion

☐ Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) ☐ Other:

D. Projected Cost / Price of contract (Base & All Options):

Logical follow-on - $1,292,032

E. The total estimated value of the proposed sole source action (for modifications only):

N/A

F. Funding Source (s): BSCA (Bipartisan Safer Communities Act)

G. Basis for Approval (Far 6.303-1(d)) ☒ Individual Basis

☐ Class Basis

The initial task order was competed among the pool of RMADA II IDIQ Contractors. All RMADA II contractors were given a fair opportunity to compete.

The incumbent contractor, National Opinion Research Center (NORC), was awarded the current task order with a base year and two option years from August 1, 2023- July 31, 2026, for a total obligated amount of $3,703,379.46.

This Justification supports a logical follow-on task order with NORC for CCBHC technical support.

2. Description of Supplies or Services:

This current task order requires that the contractor provide Technical Assistance (TA) to states participating in the Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) Demonstration and ensure payments to CCBHCs behavioral health providers are economic and efficient and align with the statutory requirement as outlined under the authorizing section 223 (C) of the 2014 Protecting Access to Medicare Act (PAMA) as extended by section 11001 of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.

As part of the technical assistance (TA) on sustaining the CCBHC demonstration under Medicaid state plan, the contractor also hosts additional TA sessions in order to provide guidance to CCBHC demonstration states about the new state plan option that is available under the 2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act, provide additional TA for states that implement the demonstration in a managed care environment, and provide additional training for states to review cost reports that will help protect the demonstration against potential fraud and abuse.

The current task order also requires logistical project management support for up to 15 remote technical assistance (TA) sessions in the grantee planning phase of the Demonstration for the 15 Cohort-1 states.

The contractor is also required to assist CMS with content review of the revised CMS CCBHC PPS guidance to ensure documentation reflects the required policy refinements.

This Logical Follow-on task order will require an additional 12 months of technical support to CMS and to the states. During these months, NORC will continue to field questions from the states, engage in policy and programmatic discussions with CMS and be on hand to support CMS with any needs that arise. It will also allow NORC to review additional cost reports that will be submitted by states during this period. CMS expects 10 current demonstration states, representing approximately 55 clinics, to submit cost reports between the end of June 2026 and September 2026 and the logical follow on will allow NORC to review and track these cost report submissions on behalf of CMS. NORC will also review and track the cost reports of the additional 10 states that will be added to the demonstration in 2026.

3. Authority and Rationale:

The Contracting Officer shall give every awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for a delivery/task order exceeding $3,500 unless one of the following statutory exceptions applies. FAR 16.505(b)(2). Mark the applicable exception:

☐ The agency need for the supplies or services is so urgent that providing a fair opportunity would result in unacceptable delays [FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(A)];

☐ Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services are unique or highly specialized [FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B)];

☒ The order must be issued on a sole-source basis in the interest of economy and efficiency because it is a logical follow-on to an order already issued under the contract, provided that all awardees were given a fair opportunity to be considered for the original order [FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(C)]; or

The initial task order was competed among the pool of RMADA II IDIQ Contractors, and all RMADA II contractors who were given a fair opportunity to compete. The incumbent contractor, National Opinion Research Center (NORC), was awarded the current task order with a base year and two option years from August 1, 2023–July 31, 2026.

Issuing the order as a logical follow-on to the incumbent is in the interest of economy and efficiency because transitioning to a new contractor at this stage would require an extensive learning curve to gain the necessary understanding of the CCBHC cost reporting and state-specific context, would disrupt state timelines and TA support during critical planning and implementation activities, and would risk loss of institutional knowledge related to development and refinement of the demonstration CCBHC PPS cost report. NORC’s personnel include individuals who constructed the original demonstration CCBHC PPS cost report and have utilized it with states, providing unique cost reporting expertise and insight into cost report improvements needed due to the addition of PPS-3 and PPS-4 and to make the cost report more user friendly. Maintaining continuity supports timely TA delivery, accurate cost report review and tracking, and continuity of operations essential to mission/program objectives, while minimizing risks such as service disruptions and knowledge loss.

☐ It is necessary to place the order to satisfy a minimum guarantee [FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(D)].

☐ A statute expressly authorizes or requires that the purchase be made from a specified source. [FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(E)].

4. Provide a statement of the actions, if any, the agency may take to remove or overcome any barriers that led to the exception to fair opportunity before any subsequent acquisition for the supplies or services is made:

The one-year logical follow-on will support the CCBHC Demonstration to its conclusion by continuing to provide technical assistance (TA) to demonstration states and state planning grant recipients to promote state learning, facilitate state-to-state sharing, and support state planning. This support will help states adhere to required elements of the CCBHC model, including quality measures, crisis systems, and the

CMS prospective payment system (PPS). At the conclusion of this one-year period, the Demonstration will be complete, and no additional contractor support will be required.

5. State any other facts supporting the justification:

The unique strength of this contractor is the tremendous cost reporting expertise of their staff, specifically related to CCBHC cost reporting, which is of high benefit for the government. Their personnel include individuals who constructed the original demonstration CCBHC PPS cost report and have utilized it with states. This unique staffing of such well-versed personnel gives them unparalleled insight into the improvements that should be made due to the addition of PPS-3 and 4 and to make it more user friendly.

Under the HHS Contract Efficiency Initiative and in alignment with Executive Order 14222, this contract is “maintained” in compliance with Section 11001 of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act which appropriates funding for technical assistance to CCBHC states. The materials, guidance, and technical assistance delivered through the contract provided CCBHC states with support needed to ensure state readiness to apply at the end of the planning phase of the program to be considered as part of 10 states selected to participate in the CCBHC demonstration. This contract supports the CMS Agency goal to partner with CMS stakeholders to better align spending and value.

Approvals:

1. Program Office Certification. This is to certify that portions of this justification have been developed by the undersigned program office personnel, including supporting information and/or data verifying the Government’s minimum needs, schedule requirements and other rationale for Exceptions to Fair Opportunity, which form the basis for this justification.

Hamilton Johns/ 02/26/2026_______________________________________________ Contracting Officer Representative (COR) / Date

Program/Project Manager (P/PM) / Date

2. Contracting Officer Certification and Best Value Determination:

This is to certify that the justification for the proposed acquisition has been reviewed and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information and/or data provided to support the rationale and recommendation for approval, is accurate and complete.

By my signature below, after review of the relevant documents, I have determined that the order subject to this Justification represents the best value for the Government as set forth in FAR 16.505(b)(2)(ii)(B)(5), and constitutes a fair and reasonable price. The basis for my determination is as follows:

As the Contracting Officer, I hereby determine that awarding the anticipated logical follow-on to the incumbent contractor provides the best value to the Government due to their proven proficiency and capability in performing the specialized work required. Continuity of operations is essential to perform mission/program objectives, and transitioning to a new contractor would create unacceptable risks such as service disruptions and knowledge loss. The incumbent has proven their capability to deliver quality results and maintain performance standards. Therefore, awarding the logical follow-on to the incumbent contractor minimizes risk, ensures operational continuity, and provides the most cost-effective solution for meeting the Government's ongoing requirements.

Contracting Officer / Date

3. CMS Competition Advocate Approval I have reviewed this Exception to Fair Opportunity and find that it adequately supports other than full and open competition.

Name / Date

4. Head of Contracting Activity (HCA) Approval I hereby confirm that the circumstances described above apply and approve this Justification for Exception to Fair Opportunity.

____________________N/A_____________________________ HCA Name / Date

5. Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization

___________________N/A_____________________________

6. OGC Legal Review ___________________N/A_______________________________

7. HHS Competition Advocate Approval

___________________N/A_____________________________

8. Senior Procurement Executive (SPE) Approval Based on the foregoing justification, I hereby confirm the circumstances described above apply and approve the Justification for Exceptions to Fair Opportunity.

__________________ N/A_______________________________ SPE Name / Date

__________________ N/A_______________________________