Attachment_J.6_-_Ammendment_1_RFP_Questions.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 31 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Workers Compensation Review Contractor Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- RFP-CMS-2016-8A-0008
About this file
Attachment J.6 Amendment 1 RFP Questions and Answers
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Workers Compensation Review Contractor has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
RFP Sections A-M ID Document Section Page number Comment
Attachment J.1 SOW
| ID | Document | Section | Page number | Comment | CMS ANSWER | RFP Amended? | |
| 1 | RFP | B.3 | 5 | What forms the basis of the “Optional WCMSA Recommendations Additional Quantity”? Does the contractor have the option to elect to review these, or is the contractor required to review these if received? Are these the same type of WCMSA proposals as the "WCMSA Recommendations"? | Exercise of optional CLINs/SLINs is the unilateral right of the Government, provided the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend the services within the time period specified in FAR 52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT (MAR 2000) - See Solicitation Section I.5. Yes, Optional CLINs/SLINs for WCMSA Recommendations will be for the same type of WCMSA proposals requiring the same type of recommendation as the initial work. | No | |
| 2 | RFP | B.3 | 5 through 7 | Does CMS expect to see a single unit price per case for each SLIN, or may proposed pricing be in increments depending on exceeding certain volume levels? For example, would unit pricing for the first 5,000 cases in a SLIN, then a different unit price for cases over 5,000 in the same SLIN be acceptable? | The Government will evaluate the proposed prices. Should an offeror propose discount pricing based upon volumes, this will be factored into the price analysis. | No | |
| 3 | RFP | F.2 | 11 | On F.2 Period of Performance, the contract PoP is listed as TBD. In the table below, the period of performance is listed as 5 years. Please confirm that we should assume 5 years for pricing purposes | Yes. The resulting contract will include a 1-year base period and 4 1-year optional periods. If all options are exercised, the contract will run for a total of 5 years. | No | |
| 4 | RFP | K.3 | 63 | In what city is the work to be performed specifically? (e.g.- Place of Performance) | The place of performance is not specified by the Government. The solicitation is amended to incorporate Section K.10, Provision FAR 52.215-6 Place of Performance (OCT 1997). Offerors shall indicate whether performance of the resultant contract from this solicitation will include the use of one or more plants or facilities located at a different address from the address of the Offeror as indicated in this proposal. | Yes, K.10 is added. | |
| 5 | RFP | L.6 | 81 | In regards to the HHS Section 508 Product Assessment Template (PAT), which Contractor Electronic and Information Technology (EIT) products/deliverables does CMS anticipate requiring submission. | The requirement for the submission of a HHS 508 Product Assessment Template (PAT) is based upon the Department of Health and Human Services Acquisition Regulation (HHSAR) Provision 352.239-73 Electronic Information and Technology Accessibility Notice (DEC 2015), See Solicitation Section L.6. The purpose of the template is to assist HHS acquisition and program officials in determining whether proposed EIT supplies conform to applicable Section 508 accessibility standards The accessibility standards for this solicitation are found in Section I..11 HHSAR 352.239-74 (c). | No | |
| 6 | RFP | L.11; Tab C; b | 87 | Is there a set limit as to how many contracts we are to submit for CMS contracts/ Task Orders? Is there a limit to the number of contracts to be submitted for all relevant agencies? Please clarify as to the number of past performances needed from the Prime and subcontractor? | Please refer to Solicitation Section L.11. There is no set limit; however, the narrative includes guidance to assist offerors in determining the past performance information that should be submitted. For example, past performance information shall be limited to that with a period performance end date within the last 3 years of the date of this solicitation for all CMS contracts and task order greater than the simplified acquisition threshold along with all relevant contracts/task order entered into with other Federal, State, Local Agencies, or Commercial customers. | No | |
| 7 | RFP | L. 11, Tab C | 88 | Will CMS permit minor formatting changes to the Past Performance table provided, in order to improve Past Performance response real-estate on the page & overall readability? | As indicated Solicitation Section L.11 pertaining to Instructions for Tab C of the technical proposal, the table should be used when providing a summary of the past performance information. Minor formatting changes are acceptable so long as the substance of the table, including the order in which the criteria appear, remains unchanged. | No | |
| 8 | RFP | L; Tab F | 90 | Shall a subcontractor submit Attachment J.2 Cost Template? | There is no requirement for the submission of separate cost template(s) for subcontractors. The proposed firm fixed price reflected in the Attachment J.2 Cost Template submitted by a prime contractor shall be inclusive of subcontractor costs/prices. | No | |
| 9 | RFP | L; Tab G | 90 | Will CMS clarify the value of the responsibility determination made in Tab G and its factor value for Section M? | Responsibility determination is a requirement. In accordance with FAR 9.103(b), no purchase or award shall be made unless the contacting officer makes an affirmative determination of responsibility. In correlation with the response above Section L.12 is amended to remove TAB G requirements and Section M.2 is amended to clarify that the contract will be awarded to the Offeror deemed to be best value provided the Offeror is deemed responsible. | Yes, Section L.12 and M.2 | |
| 10 | RFP | L; Tab G | 91 | For Sections a-f, are these figures ONLY for the Prime Contractor or are these values inclusive of Subcontractor counts / values as well? | Solicitation Section L.12, is amended to remove the Tab G requirements | Yes, Section L.12 | |
| 11 | RFP | L.11 | 91 | Can you please clarify if it is acceptable and/or desired to include relevant corporate experience of significant subcontractors within Tab E Corporate Experience? | Yes, Solicitation Section L.11, Tab E is amended to reflect the following: The Government will evaluate the Corporate Experience of the Offeror and proposed significant subcontractors as deemed appropriate. If applicable any evaluation of subcontractor corporate experience will focus on the relevance of the Corporate Experience to the role the subcontractor is proposed to perform. As a result of the answer above Section M.3, Tab E is also amended. | Yes, L.11 and M.3 | |
| 12 | RFP | H and L | H (p 29), L (pp 84 and 91) | In the RFP, Section H.1.d.2.b. (page 29), there is language that says Attachment J.4 (Contractor Personal Conflict of Interest Disclosure) should be obtained from each Manager or Key personnel who will be involved with the performance of the contract, Governing Body Members (e.g., Board of Directors, Trustees, etc.); and Principals of the organization. This section goes on to state (as do the instructions on Attachment J.4) that “Personal COI information obtained from the above individuals shall not be submitted to the Government”. However, in RFP Section L.10(a)(3) (page 84) and L.13 (page 91), it indicates that Completed Attachment J.4 Contractor Personal Conflict of Interest forms are to be included behind Tab C of Volume III – Business Ethics, Conflicts of Interest and Compliance. L.13 also states, “… Attachment J.4 Contactor Personal Conflicts of Interest Financial Disclosure Template contain[s] the proposal submission requirements for Volume III”. In the instructions contained at the top of Attachment J.4, it states “Personal Conflict of Interest Financial Disclosure information shall NOT BE submitted to CMS.” Could CMS please provide clarification on whether submitters should include completed Attachment J.4 Contactor Personal Conflicts of Interest Financial Disclosures in Volume III or include a statement that confirms completed forms have been received and reviewed by the submitter’s Compliance Officer to identify potential conflicts of interest? | Offerors are not required to submit Contractor Personal Conflict of Interest Financial Disclosures. Solicitation Sections L.10, L.13 and M.5 are amended to remove the requirement of the submission of Contractor Personal Conflict of Interest Financial Disclosures. However, should any personal conflict of interests be identified, a mitigation strategy shall be disclosed within the required COI Mitigation Plan. See Solicitation Section H.1.d..2(a) and Section C.1.2 of Attachment J.5 Contractor Business Ethics COI and Compliance Program Requirements. | Remove all J.4 except in H.1 | |
| 13 | RFP | L.13; Tab C | 92 | ||||
| (Ref. page 29) | It states that Volume III is to include Tab C - Personal COI, Completed Attachment J.4. - However on page 29, it clearly states that 'Attachment J.4, Contractor Personal Conflict of Interest Financial Disclosure Template is provided as a “sample” for the Offeror/Contractor to follow when identifying, analyzing and mitigating actual, potential, or apparent Personal COIs for this contract. Not withstanding, Personal COI information obtained from the above individuals shall not be submitted to the Government'. Are we to go with the instructions on page 29 and simply retain the PCIO, 'in-house' until the Gov't makes a request or are we to submit them with our proposal? | Yes the contractor is required to retain the personal conflict of interest financial disclosure statements in house. | No | ||||
| 14 | RFP | L.15 | 94 | What defines the "competitive range" and "efficient competition" in the process of selecting contractors for oral presentations? | FAR 15.306(c)(1) explains that a competitive range is a subset of offerors 'comprised of all of the most highly rated proposals.' See also FAR 15.306(c)(2) and L.15. | No | |
| 15 | RFP | M.5 | 99 | Does CMS plan to award separate Prime contractors the work for WCRC and Solicitation # HHSM-500-2017-RFP-0001, Medicare Secondary Payer Integration Contractor? | Yes. CMS is conducting two separate acquisitions with intentions of awarding two separate contracts. | No | |
| 16 | SOW | C.4.2 | 32 | Are Contractor's Key Personnel required to work onsite at a designated client location (CMS Specific location), or can they work remotely from Contractor location in another state within the Continental United States (CONUS)? | The place of performance is not specified by the Government. The solicitation is amended to incorporate Section K.10, Provision FAR 52.215-6 Place of Performance (OCT 1997). Offerors shall indicate whether performance of resultant contract from this solicitation will include the use of one or more plants or facilities located at a different address from the address of the Offeror as indicated in this proposal. | Yes, K.10 is added. | |
| 17 | RFP | SF33, L.9 | 1, 82 | Will CMS consider extending the due date of proposals to allow for additional time after answers to questions are received? | Yes, the due date for proposals is extended from 10:00 AM EST on January 30, 2017 to 10:00 AM EST on February 8, 2017. | Yes, the SF33 and Section L.9 are amended | |
| 18 | RFP | H; H.1; c | 27 | Does current or past work as a Prime or Subcontractors on the Medicare Secondary Payer Integration Contract (MSPIC) or any of its component contracts outside WCRC (BCRC, CRC, MSPSC) constitute a potential or actual conflict of interest with work on WCRC? | RFP Section H.1.c.1.e is amended to remove the word current to clarify a potential or actual impaired objectivity conflict of interest will occur if the same entity serves as both the WCRC and MSPIC. | Yes, H.1 is amended | |
| 19 | RFP | I.1 | 51 | Is it appropriate for FAR clause 52.215-15 Pension Adjustments and Asset Reversions (OCT 2010) to be included in the solicitation? | No, this clause was included by accident. CMS has removed it from the revised RFP. | Yes, I.1 is amended | |
| 20 | RFP | L.3 | 79 | Please confirm that CMS intends to award this contract after conducting discussions. | CMS has determined that the appropriate clause is not FAR 52.215-1 ALT 1 but instead the standard FAR 52.215-1 clause. The non-alternate clause states that "The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offerors initial proposal should contain the Offerors best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary." | Yes L.3 is amended |
Attachment J.2 Cost Template ID Document Section Page number Comment
Attachment J.3 PPQ ID Document Section Page number Comment
Attachment J.4 PCOI ID Document Section Page number Comment
Attachment J.5 BCOI ID Document Section Page number Comment
Attachment J.7 508 ID Document Section Page number Comment
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .